The Cross of Christ Alone Can Save

[*AQuietPlace*]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

That's right.

What always confused me in the past was if we believe "all three are one", then when you repent and ask Jesus in your heart (as my SS teacher would say), didn't the HG move in too?

So, in a way, I can see how this "second blessing" is taught without being taught. The real HG doesn't reside until you speak in tongues.

But according to our teaching, Jesus doesn't necessarily come in when you ask him to. He doesn't come in until you've spoken in tongues.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by Sam

and some holiness folks believe in a third blessing

They testify of being
saved
sanctified
and baptized in the Holy Ghost

Yes, I've heard that as well. I think terminology can be problematic in many ways. I think many times it does the Word of God a major disservice. One-Stepper and Three-Stepper is more terminology that shouldn't be used, IMO.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Because it's the power of God unto salvation? (Romans 1:16-18).

Inapplicable. When debates occur like this, both sides simply do not change. But there is a benefit. Unbiased readers (there are always SOME, if few) will get a good taste of both sides to make their decision.

So, I'll chime in. Salvation is a free gift. You can't work for it because you didn't even deserve the chance to earn it in the first place.

Yes, but when you say water baptism is not part of salvation as well as Spirit baptism with speaking in tongues, then you must, by the same token, claim repentance is not required. You are using the principle that WE DO NOTHING and BAPTISM is doing something. So is repentance!

The one step argument that claims the cross alone saves, and since baptism is a work then
baptism is not salvational is contradicted by its insistence on repentance.

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Inapplicable. When debates occur like this, both sides simply do not change. But there is a benefit. Unbiased readers (there are always SOME, if few) will get a good taste of both sides to make their decision.

Yes, but when you say water baptism is not part of salvation as well as Spirit baptism with speaking in tongues, then you must, by the same token, claim repentance is not required. You are using the principle that WE DO NOTHING and BAPTISM is doing something. So is repentance!

The one step argument that claims the cross alone saves, and since baptism is a work then
baptism is not salvational is contradicted by its insistence on repentance.

YEP! Basically you get a salvation sucker put in your mouth without cost or commitment of change.

Oh and God forbid it would be a salvation by works...... Baptism... oh my... why would you say such and make the cross meaningless. (sarcasm)

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

YEP! Basically you get a salvation sucker put in your mouth without cost or commitment of change.

Oh and God forbid it would be a salvation by works...... Baptism... oh my... why would you say such and make the cross meaningless. (sarcasm)

Amen.

REPENTANCE IS AS MUCH A WORK AS BAPTISM! So when we see that, and insist we must repent to be saved, then it makes sense that baptism is part of salvation as well, as Peter said in his epistle, anyway.

People know repentance is not something we do as though we make ourselves righteous. Making ourselves righteous is what is so vile about works that the bible claims do not save us. So repentance is therefore not considered as salvation by works, so one steppers accept repentance as required for salvation. But baptism and Spirit infilling are the same sort of works that repentance is. They do not make us righteous, so one steppers need to stop saying demand for baptism and Spirit infilling are salvation by works. Again, REPENTANCE IS AS MUCH A WORK AS BAPTISM!

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by rgcraig

That's right.

What always confused me in the past was if we believe "all three are one", then when you repent and ask Jesus in your heart (as my SS teacher would say), didn't the HG move in too?

So, in a way, I can see how this "second blessing" is taught without being taught. The real HG doesn't reside until you speak in tongues.

THe whole point of Acts 19 and 8 clearly show a certain expectancy that was expected when it came to the Spirit. Pauls comment clearly shows that reception of the Spirit is NOT AUTOMATICALY on belief.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Of course there's "action" after getting saved... that's the point of salvation. "The life I now live..." Galatians 2:20-21.

But how did we get that life? That's the point of this thread. We didn't earn it, we didn't deserve it, we didn't work really, really hard to get it... It was a free gift!

I wanted to go back to this post, Pel. Although, I am getting ready to shoot out of here again. LOL!

This is what I am not understanding from you, Pel. You say that there is action, which is also works, AFTER getting saved? The Bible says, "Repent AND be baptized FOR the "remission/forgiveness" of your sins...."

How can you be saved if you are not forgiven? And if you are already forgiven because He died on the cross, then what is the point of repenting, being baptized and being filled with His Spirit?

It appears to me that Israel cannot be forgiven if they do not repent - "Him hath God exalted with his right hand to be a Prince and a Saviour, for to give repentance to Israel, and forgiveness of sins." Acts 5:31

It is interesting that John is referenced as preaching the "baptism of repentance" to all of Israel. (Acts 13:24) In verse 38 he speaks of "forgiveness of sin", but he had already mentioned baptism in verse 24. More pointedly, "John did baptize in the wilderness, and preached the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.." (Mark 1:4) " And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins; (Luke 3:3)

Ephesians 1:7 does indeed say that we have the forgiveness of our sins through the redemption of His blood. But, further in verse 12 and 13, he speaks of their trusting in Christ after they heard the word of truth and identifying that as the Gospel of our salvation and saying that AFTER they believed, they were sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise. Here, again, we have another connection to what is being preached in Acts 2:38. That is what I mean by spiraling back to the actions and events in the Book of Acts, which is the beginning of the NT Church Age.

In an earlier post, I posed this question to you:

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I must believe and have faith, but there are things that I must obey and do. Are you suggesting that you are saved by belief alone?

Your response was:

Originally Posted by pelathais

Suggesting? Sister, I'm shouting it.

Salvation is, indeed, free to those that believe. But, the Word says, "Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness." (Romans 6:18) How are we made free from our sins? - repentance and baptism. That is when it becomes free. It is not "free" just by believing that Jesus died on the cross. I could stand there and stare at that cross all day long, believing He died for my sins, but if I don't respond to the Gospel it would be to no avail.

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Amen.

REPENTANCE IS AS MUCH A WORK AS BAPTISM! So when we see that, and insist we must repent to be saved, then it makes sense that baptism is part of salvation as well, as Peter said in his epistle, anyway.

Pauls whole point anyway is about works is...

1) works that are outside of CHrist that are good that you can claim you deserve eternal life by will not succeed in doing so.
2) he was against one must have precovenant works of goodness stored up to be considered for entrance into covenant and considered judged right to enter before God.
3) belief that works by some form of special righeousing act, by or like circumcision when Pauls' point is that nothing in circumcision itself has a righteousing aspect.

and others...

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

Pauls whole point anyway is about works is...

1) works that are outside of CHrist that are good that you can claim you deserve eternal life by will not succeed in doing so.
2) he was against one must have precovenant works of goodness stored up to be considered for entrance into covenant and considered judged right to enter before God.
3) works by some form of special righeousing act by or like circumcision when Pauls' point is that nothing in circumcision itself has a righteousing aspect.

and others...

Amen. And that is precisely why statements are severely wrong in saying that demands for baptism propose a salvation by works doctrine. Neither water baptism, Spirit infilling with tongues NOR repentance are efforts we perform that sidestep the cross. They are integrally linked to the cross, and without the cross are unavailable.

[Pressing-On]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Amen.

REPENTANCE IS AS MUCH A WORK AS BAPTISM! So when we see that, and insist we must repent to be saved, then it makes sense that baptism is part of salvation as well, as Peter said in his epistle, anyway.

People know repentance is not something we do as though we make ourselves righteous. Making ourselves righteous is what is so vile about works that the bible claims do not save us. So repentance is therefore not considered as salvation by works, so one steppers accept repentance as required for salvation. But baptism and Spirit infilling are the same sort of works that repentance is. They do not make us righteous, so one steppers need to stop saying demand for baptism and Spirit infilling are salvation by works. Again, REPENTANCE IS AS MUCH A WORK AS BAPTISM!

Preach!!!!!