born of water

[shazeep]

well wadr, you have just assumed that last part--Scripture just calls them "them that believe."
But to be fair, i doubt Christian exorcism, and am much more impressed with devils being cast out by means that are mostly unfamiliar to us; ie the way "mom" does it.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

Good post. If I my interject...

"Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are His workmanship..."
We are the work of God through the very work He performed in the body of
the Lamb of God.

"And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my NAME shall they cast out devils,
they shall speak with new tongues..." And just WHO are they that will cast out devils
and speak with new tongues, etc.? They are the very ones who believed
and were baptized and received the promise of salvation!

"In my name" is the same as saying "by my authority".

How does one speak in tongues in his name otherwise? Did you have to command yourself in the name of Jesus to speak in tongues? No. By the authority of Jesus himself you did so. He authorized you to do so!

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Originalist

A post full of misrepresentation and straw man arguments. In particular the comment below....





I will now repost what I actually said.....



By repeating the name over and over, no more supernatural power will be released by God to aid me against the demon than if I only said his name once. Either I have the authority to cast him out or I don't. If the demon tries to resist , I will begin to worship the Lord creating an atmosphere he simply will not be able to abide in.

If something is said in mistake it's not the same as a strawman. I thought you implied the name not be said at all for the devil to be cast out. But if that is not the case, then thanks for the correction.

At any rate, there is the demand for the name to be invoked in baptism to see God move.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by thephnxman

Good post. If I my interject...

"Not of works, lest any man should boast. For we are His workmanship..."
We are the work of God through the very work He performed in the body of
the Lamb of God.

"And these signs shall follow them that believe: In my NAME shall they cast out devils,
they shall speak with new tongues..." And just WHO are they that will cast out devils
and speak with new tongues, etc.? They are the very ones who believed
and were baptized and received the promise of salvation!

Amen!

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Here Paul used the authority he possessed by virtue of the fact he was a Spirit filled child of God. It wasn't that anything supernatural had to be released by invoking the name of Jesus. When the demon realized by what authority Paul commanded him to leave, he knew he had no choice but to go. He knew that greater was he that was already IN Paul! Paul did not have to repeat the name of Jesus over and over like we think we have to.

Now certainly there is a necessity of using the name in order to demonstrate to unregenerate witnesses the authority that Jesus Christ possesses. This is why the Lord "confirmed the word with signs following".

I find the story of the sons of Sceva to be interesting, in particular the reaction this incident brought to the witnesses and others in that region that received word of it....



This incident made them realize that it was not the name of Jesus itself that held power, but the one who bore that precious name, and that the apostles were endowed with authority by the one who bears that name (Jesus himself) because they were his followers!

I think the name being spoken does move God to act. But like I said, the utterance of the name without faith is useless.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by mfblume

If something is said in mistake it's not the same as a strawman. I thought you implied the name not be said at all for the devil to be cast out. But if that is not the case, then thanks for the correction.

At any rate, there is the demand for the name to be invoked in baptism to see God move.

Invoking of the name AKA "calling on the name", as in, calling out to the Lord in repentance confessing that he has indeed been exalted and is Lord.

If you mean that unless the baptizer says "in the name of Jesus" while baptizing the person, that "God does not move", as in, God does not forgive the person being baptized of their sins, in spite of their faith, repentance and submission, and in spite of the fact that they go on to receive the Holy Ghost......then that is error (if that is what you mean).

Either way, I esteem you as a brother and do respect you.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Invoking of the name AKA "calling on the name", as in, calling out to the Lord in repentance confessing that he has indeed been exalted and is Lord.

If you mean that unless the baptizer says "in the name of Jesus" while baptizing the person, that "God does not move", as in, God does not forgive the person being baptized of their sins, in spite of their faith, repentance and submission, and in spite of the fact that they go on to receive the Holy Ghost......then that is error (if that is what you mean).

Either way, I esteem you as a brother and do respect you.

Let me get this straight. You believe that the baptizee is meant to call on the name of the Lord as per Acts 22:16? And does that imply the person doing the baptism does not need to call on the name in invocation? If so, then the person is baptizing him/herself, and that does not work.

The minister must invoke the name for God to act and move to do the washing away or remission of sins, otherwise the person doing the baptizing did not obey the Lords command to baptize people in Jesus' name. When devils are cast out to move the Lord into action the person being delivered does not call out the name of the Lord. That damsel did not call out in Jesus' name. So when Jesus told people to baptize in His name He did not mean for the candidate to call out His name.

When a person is baptized in the name of Jesus, that person is not the one calling out the name. They are BEING BAPTIZED BY SOMEONE in the name of Jesus. This puts the onus on the baptizer to speak the name.

[thephnxman]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Invoking of the name AKA " calling on the name", as in, calling out to the Lord in repentance confessing that he has indeed been exalted and is Lord.
If you mean that unless the baptizer says "in the name of Jesus" while baptizing the person, that "God does not move", as in, God does not forgive the person being baptized of their sins, in spite of their faith, repentance and submission, and in spite of the fact that they go on to receive the Holy Ghost......then that is error (if that is what you mean).
Either way, I esteem you as a brother and do respect you.

I see you know scripture, and I must also assume you believe that Peter was full of the
Holy Spirit on the Day of Pentecost, and spoke by the Holy Spirit when he stood before
rulers, elders, and scribes saying, "...for there is none other NAME...in which we
must be saved". Or when the Lord said, "...that repentance and remission of sins should
be preached in his NAME..." Do you believe the apostles were silent when it came to the
preaching of the NAME: or are we to be ashamed to "...shout it from the housetop"? Or
should we conform to the morés of the world and give them their moment of silence? Don't you
know that that (moment of silence) is asking the christian to shut up? I believe that.

[obriencp]

Originally Posted by mfblume

The name does not have to be said over and over, but it does have to be said in faith, for God to step in and work through you. He just demands it.

Originally Posted by mfblume

At any rate, there is the demand for the name to be invoked in baptism to see God move.

Originally Posted by mfblume

I think the name being spoken does move God to act. But like I said, the utterance of the name without faith is useless.

I've bolded the areas in MFBlumes recent posts are troubling to me. It seems he's implying that God will do something if we literally speak His name, but won't if we don't. If God's will isn't for something to happen and we "invoke" his name because we believe we're in his will, do you really believe He will do what we want because we used His name? I believe Originalist took issue too and replied below.

Originally Posted by Originalist

Invoking of the name AKA "calling on the name", as in, calling out to the Lord in repentance confessing that he has indeed been exalted and is Lord.

If you mean that unless the baptizer says "in the name of Jesus" while baptizing the person, that "God does not move", as in, God does not forgive the person being baptized of their sins, in spite of their faith, repentance and submission, and in spite of the fact that they go on to receive the Holy Ghost......then that is error (if that is what you mean).

Either way, I esteem you as a brother and do respect you.

Originally Posted by mfblume

Let me get this straight. You believe that the baptizee is meant to call on the name of the Lord as per Acts 22:16? And does that imply the person doing the baptism does not need to call on the name in invocation? If so, then the person is baptizing him/herself, and that does not work.

The minister must invoke the name for God to act and move to do the washing away or remission of sins, otherwise the person doing the baptizing did not obey the Lords command to baptize people in Jesus' name. When devils are cast out to move the Lord into action the person being delivered does not call out the name of the Lord. That damsel did not call out in Jesus' name. So when Jesus told people to baptize in His name He did not mean for the candidate to call out His name.

When a person is baptized in the name of Jesus, that person is not the one calling out the name. They are BEING BAPTIZED BY SOMEONE in the name of Jesus. This puts the onus on the baptizer to speak the name.

Here again, if the repentant person is being baptized and placing their faith in Jesus Christ and what he did on the cross for them, but the baptizer doesn't physically say "in the name of Jesus," their sins are unforgiven?

You can't have it both ways MFBlume. In some instances you place the emphasis on the intent and faith of the person acting according to God's will even if they don't invoke the name, but in other posts you seem to over emphasize the importance of physically invoking the name.

If we are in tune with God's will and functioning in the authority of His name, what we pray "in Jesus' name" (either authoritative or literally speaking) will come to pass. If we're not in tune with His will, physically praying for something in the "name of Jesus" will not force God to honor our prayer and alter His will for that situation.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by obriencp

I've bolded the areas in MFBlumes recent posts are troubling to me. It seems he's implying that God will do something if we literally speak His name, but won't if we don't. If God's will isn't for something to happen and we "invoke" his name because we believe we're in his will, do you really believe He will do what we want because we used His name?

How on earth can it not be God's will to do his work when we baptize someone in his name for you to say it may not be his will? I am talking about doing things in his name that he commanded us to do. Baptism in this case. You're taking this way out there.

I believe Originalist took issue too and replied below.

Here again, if the repentant person is being baptized and placing their faith in Jesus Christ and what he did on the cross for them, but the baptizer doesn't physically say "in the name of Jesus," their sins are unforgiven?

Show me where you get the authority to say otherwise.

You can't have it both ways MFBlume. In some instances you place the emphasis on the intent and faith of the person acting according to God's will even if they don't invoke the name, but in other posts you seem to over emphasize the importance of physically invoking the name.

It's both that are required.

If we are in tune with God's will and functioning in the authority of His name, what we pray "in Jesus' name" (either authoritative or literally speaking) will come to pass. If we're not in tune with His will, physically praying for something in the "name of Jesus" will not force God to honor our prayer and alter His will for that situation.

That is moot when it comes to baptism in his name.

It's always his will to do the work he does in baptism when everyone involved is there for salvation. How can you even apply this reasoning to baptism? We're talking about baptism.

Of course a thing had to be God's will before he works. That's a given. He won't work just because we invoke his name. But he also demands it in baptism.