View Single Post
  #51  
Old 02-06-2017, 11:49 PM
Jason B Jason B is offline
Saved by Grace


 
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Decatur, TX
Posts: 5,247
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amanah View Post
Jason

as you said, we can agree on repentance.

Scripture says, He who believes and is baptized shall be saved. so we need baptism. The Biblical method is to baptize in Jesus name, why wouldn't you do that?
True, and I'm not denying baptism, my position is not that baptism is unnecessary, only that justification precludes baptism in the order of salvation. And to be more specific that within that "order" that at the time we are justified we are actually "saved", which would be in my view repentance. This doesn't mean that baptism is unnecessary, or something the repentant believer just does if they feel like it. It is very much a commandment of the Lord, and part of a normative Christian experience. I only assert that justification precludes baptism, and I assert that is the proper scriptural view. Even in an instance like Acts 2:41-people who immediately repent and then are baptized. Were they justified when they were baptized or when they repented of their sins and believed in Christ? I would say immediately when they believed in Christ. This is consistent with all of scripture, and it is why there's no problem if the order ins't always the same (such as in Acts 10:45-48), because as long as justification has taken place, the sinner is now cleansed form their sins and in a new relationship with God. *IF* baptism is what cleanses the sinner/takes away their sins/applies the blood of Christ--then water baptism MUST always proceed the baptism of the Spirit. This is the problem I keep raising, because it is huge.

As for baptizing in Jesus name, I agree it is the Biblical method. I am baptized that way, and have ONLY baptized others that way. That said since I believe justification happens BEFORE water baptism, I do not see water baptism as saving someone in the literal sense, thus nor do I see the specific formula of words as effecting forgiveness, but rather the faith of the repentant sinner in the person and work of Jesus Christ, as being the much more important element of baptism.

That said, and while I agree baptism should invoke the name of Jesus, the fact is there are various "formulas" in Acts, and the "formula" of Matthew 28:19 is legit unless someone says Christ didn't speak those words. I do believe that Acts 2:38 gives us the way the earliest church did it, but still quite early on the church adopted Matthew 28:19, and for what its worth (which is really nothing, since it is only a mans opinion, and only God can judge), I don't think Christ is going to send someone to hell for quoting his words in a baptismal ceremony.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Amanah View Post
Scripture also says that the HG is the earnest of our inheritance, and without the down payment we are not going to heaven, so we need the Holy Ghost.
Absolutely! Without the Spirit we are none of His.

But when does the scripture you quoted (Eph 1:13-14) say this happens? When we BELIEVED. If one truly believes, they receive the Spirit. You cannot separate believing from he baptism of the Spirit. Romans clearly shows that to be justified is also to be regenerate (born again) to be adopted into God's family, to have peace with God, and to stand before Him righteous. Paul further declares that those who God justifies, He also sanctifies, and will glorify (or rather has already glorified). So IMO we make a grave soteriological mistake when we separate legitimate belief/repentance from the Spirit baptism, leading to a Weslyan, later Pentecostal, second work of grace type doctrine.
(I know Acts 8 & Acts 19 and we can carry this thought out to include those passages, to discuss whether those are normative to the Christian experience in all ages and in all places or not, but for now I won't go there).
Quote:
Originally Posted by Amanah View Post
When you receive the Holy Ghost, out of your belly flows rivers of living water. Without the release of the Spirit in the lives of believers you won't have the gifts of the Spirit in operation. A group of people who don't have the Spirit in operation when they meet can hardly be called the body of Christ.

Why would anyone not want to follow the teachings of the Apostles and why would they not want the operation of the spirit when they meet?
Agreed, but the New Testament lists many gifts, and I have seen these in operations in the lives of numerous Christians, even cessationists. I think Pentecostals/charismatics have a inclination to the more spectacular gifts, but in many cases (NOT ALL) , the exercise of the "gifts" falls far short of the New Testament pattern and into the same error and chaos that Paul rebuked the Cornthians for.

How many times have you seen many people speaking in tongues all at once? People acting without self control and blaming it on the Spirit? A "prophecy" go forth and then the same one interpret it? "Prophecies" so generic you can't tell what they're supposed to be anyway, and failed prophecies? Claimed healings and miracles that simply don't check out. These are not the NT spiritual gifts, just cheap counterfeits. That's not to say there isn't a real, but one big knock against the so called pentecostal revival is that these type things are more normative than the genuine gifts.
__________________
"Resolved: That all men should live to the glory of God. Resolved, secondly: That whether or not anyone else does, I will." ~Jonathan Edwards

"The only man who has the right to say he is justified by grace alone is the man who has left all to follow Christ." ~Dietrich Bonheoffer, The Cost of Discipleship

"Preachers who should be fishing for men are now too often fishing for compliments from men." ~Leonard Ravenhill
Reply With Quote