Romans 10:9

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by Adino

Anyone, when the serpent was placed on the pole in the wilderness.... did the children of Israel need to be baptized and speak in tongues in order to be healed?

The answer to this is pertinent to John 3:14-18 and to the point of this thread.

For your convenience:

Numbers 21:8-9

And the LORD said unto Moses, Make thee a fiery serpent, and set it upon a pole: and it shall come to pass, that every one that is bitten, when he looketh upon it, shall live. 9And Moses made a serpent of brass, and put it upon a pole, and it came to pass, that if a serpent had bitten any man, when he beheld the serpent of brass, he lived.

John 3:14-18

And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: 15 That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. 16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. 17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved. 18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

I believe this is one of the most potent scripture for salvation by faith alone thru grace. This does not negate repentance, baptism or spirit infilling at all, simply that one is secure just as those that believed Moses and looked in faith upon the brazen serpent, were immediately healed.

Well done, Adino!!

[Adino]

Originally Posted by crakjak

....secure just as those that believed Moses and looked in faith upon the brazen serpent, were immediately healed.

Absolutely! And, as you mentioned, this point was being made as further explanation for someone being born from above. Connect this passage with the multiple times John says the believer is passed from death unto life and/or that the believer HAS eternal life, and it seems nonsensical to force anything apart from faith alone into the salvation experience.

Seems straightforward enough for me.

[RevDWW]

Originally Posted by crakjak

I believe this is one of the most potent scripture for salvation by faith alone thru grace. This does not negate repentance, baptism or spirit infilling at all, simply that one is secure just as those that believed Moses and looked in faith upon the brazen serpent, were immediately healed.

Well done, Adino!!

Does one really believe if they don't act on the belief? What about not just being a hearer of the Word but a doer also?

Folks that believed John where dunked in the river by him. If not then they did not believe. Folks that believed Jesus and His disciples where dunked also.


(Joh 3:22) After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
(Joh 3:23) And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.

(Joh 3:26) And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.
(Joh 4:1) When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
(Joh 4:2) (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

(Act 2:38) Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
(Act 2:41) Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

(Act 8:12) But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

Or what about these folks who beleived and where baptized in the Spirit?
(Act 10:47) Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
(Act 10:48) And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days

[SDG]

Originally Posted by RevDWW

Does one really believe if they don't act on the belief? What about not just being a hearer of the Word but a doer also?

Folks that believed John where dunked in the river by him. If not then they did not believe. Folks that believed Jesus and His disciples where dunked also.


(Joh 3:22) After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
(Joh 3:23) And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.

(Joh 3:26) And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.
(Joh 4:1) When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
(Joh 4:2) (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

(Act 2:38) Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
(Act 2:41) Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

(Act 8:12) But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

Or what about these folks who beleived and where baptized in the Spirit?
(Act 10:47) Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
(Act 10:48) And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days

How long will this intellectual dishonesty persist? I am yet to meet a poster on this forum that believes baptism is optional ...

We have debated it's significance in the life of the believer ...

at it pertains to causing salvation or done because of initial salvation ...

whether it washes away sin or is part of a confession of faith ... symbolizing and identifying w/ an inward work ...

but to quote scriptures to prove that believers get dunked is at best needless ... at worst ... insulting.

[Joseph Miller]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

I am yet to meet a poster on this forum that believes baptism is optional ...

If you don't believe someone MUST be baptized to be saved then you believe it is optional. If you believe that someone can be saved by JUST repenting then you beleive it is optional.

[J-Roc]

Originally Posted by Joseph Miller

If you don't believe someone MUST be baptized to be saved then you believe it is optional. If you believe that someone can be saved by JUST repenting then you beleive it is optional.

Your reasoning here is clearly off.

You are instructed to love your brother. This is not optional, it is a command from God.

If I asked you what constitutes salvation, would you turn to me and say "Love your brother. Goodbye" No, you know you would not. And yet this is a command from God to love your brother...would it be intellectually honest of me to think that you believe loving your brother is optional?

[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by J-Roc

Your reasoning here is clearly off.

You are instructed to love your brother. This is not optional, it is a command from God.

If I asked you what constitutes salvation, would you turn to me and say "Love your brother. Goodbye" No, you know you would not. And yet this is a command from God to love your brother...would it be intellectually honest of me to think that you believe loving your brother is optional?

Jroc,

If someone in your church repented and they were commanded to be baptized in Jesus name but refused.....saying something like they had been baptized already in the titles, what would you say or do? And would they be lost if they refused to be baptized in Jesus name? Would you tell them they are risking their salvation and would be lost if they do not obey the command to be baptized in Jesus name?

[RevDWW]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Jroc,

If someone in your church repented and they were commanded to be baptized in Jesus name but refused.....saying something like they had been baptized already in the titles, what would you say or do? And would they be lost if they refused to be baptized in Jesus name? Would you tell them they are risking their salvation and would be lost if they do not obey the command to be baptized in Jesus name?

If they are saved at repentance then why bother them with baptismal details like that?






[The previous statement was totally tongue in cheek and a pointed stick for poking my brethren who see the necessity of baptism, but seem to be afraid of the water.....]

[Brother Price]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Jroc,

If someone in your church repented and they were commanded to be baptized in Jesus name but refused.....saying something like they had been baptized already in the titles, what would you say or do? And would they be lost if they refused to be baptized in Jesus name? Would you tell them they are risking their salvation and would be lost if they do not obey the command to be baptized in Jesus name?

Mizpeh, I think I will take a stab at this question.

I would teach them that obedience to baptism is part of who we are, and that refusal to take His name in baptism would be disobedience. It would cause them to lose their salvation, something they had received at repentance. If they still refused, all one can do is simply put them in the hands of the Lord.

[J-Roc]

Originally Posted by mizpeh

Jroc,

If someone in your church repented and they were commanded to be baptized in Jesus name but refused.....saying something like they had been baptized already in the titles, what would you say or do? And would they be lost if they refused to be baptized in Jesus name? Would you tell them they are risking their salvation and would be lost if they do not obey the command to be baptized in Jesus name?

There is precedent for how one could approach such situations. I would simply take the approach of Priscilla and Aquila when they dealt with Apollos. Now, in your scenario, you are using a word there that raises some red flags, you said they "refused". Now maybe you wrote this out in haste, but I'd be suspicious about anyone coming across so aggressively as to "refuse". It gives a picture of stubborn rebelliousness and someone that may not be teachable. I'd feel the same way toward someone who refused to love their brother.

Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately. (Acts 18)