Deathbed Salvation

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by Le Penseur

Amen! And thank you!

His expression of faith and trust in Christ led to his salvation, and it's the same for us. I'm in agreement with your statements in the first paragraph - it's not fair - at least not according to our human sense of justice - that the latecomers receive the same reward. But God's sense of justice is so much more righteous than ours we cannot even comprehend it. But our salvation is dependent upon our trusting acceptance of the work that Jesus did for us (because we could not). Any time you add anything to faith (for by grace are ye saved through faith) it becomes works/legalism.

The problem is confounded by dispensationalism, IMO. Nobody was EVER saved under the law. NOBODY! The only way that anyone in all the history of time has ever been saved was through faith in Christ. That's how Abraham was saved - because he had faith concerning God's promises (which all pointed to His promise to provide a Messiah) - and he was counted righteous because of it. When you start breaking up the story into different "dispensations" wherein God saves people in different ways, you end up with the mess we have today. Dispensationalism, IMO, is what props up the OP hermeneutic. But if one can understand that everything before Christ points to Christ, and the new covenant exalts Christ, the scripture record becomes less disjointed and more unified.

Blessings!

Great post.mlove the thoughts on dispensationalism

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by trialedbyfire

There is not one recorded count of someone converting without being baptized IMMEDIATELY.

Acts 4:4 Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand. NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 11:21
And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 13:12 Then the deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 14:1 And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 16:1 Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek:
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 17:4 And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 17:12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 17:34 Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed: among the which was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


This is a common misconception about Acts and what actually happened in the NT church. The pattern in Acts 2:38 is mentioned ONCE in the entire book explicitly. Acts 8 has the Samaritans believing and being baptized, receiving the HG later, but never mentioning tongues. Acts 10 has the house of Cornelius believing and being filled with the HG, speaking in tongues and THEN getting baptized. Acts 19 has the disciples of John being rebaptized and being filled with the HG, speaking in tongues. You can throw in the conversion of Saul on Acts 9 although it's not as specific about speaking in tongues when he received the HG (we know he later says he speaks in tongues in I Cor.).

There's a total of 19 conversions recorded in Acts. Out of 19, only 5 show any form or fashion of A238, while 100% of all 19 conversions include believing/faith/repentance.

So what are we to deduce from this? Two options:

1.) That A238 was absolutely the message that was always preached as the gospel and everyone ever converted in the Bible obeyed that pattern. In the 14 other cases where conversion takes place and either the HG and tongues is absent or both HG/tongues and baptism are absent, we ASSUME, SPECULATE, and GUESS that it took place in all the other times.

OR

2.) That faith/repentance/belief was the emphasis of the gospel and every time someone converted they did exercise faith, repented of their sins, believed the message of Christ's death, burial and resurrection---AND IT'S ACTUALLY RECORDED 100% OF THE TIME IN THE BIBLE IN THE BOOK OF ACTS THAT THEY DID!!!!! Sometimes they were baptized in addition to and/or received the gift of the HG where they either spoke in tongues with cloven tongues like as of fire sitting upon each of them, spoke in tongues and magnified God, spoke in tongues and prophesied, or they were simply "filled" with no mention of tongues.

Logic would say you would embrace what happened 100% of the time rather than 1/4 of the time. I'd rather build my doctrine on what is absolutely consistent, not only in the book of Acts but the ENTIRE BIBLE: faith/repentance/belief. This has ALWAYS been God's plan of salvation!

And if A238 was "always" preached, as you say, why did Paul say "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved?" in Acts 16?

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by trialedbyfire

When are you all going to stop using the thief on the cross? Even if you totally disregard the dispensation in which the thief lived, we are talking about an EXTREME set of circumstances, that NOT ONE human being on the face of the Earth besides the thief himself can say that they themselves can say they have experienced. Scripture is clear that Jesus himself had the power to forgive sin on Earth. We have not had our sins pardoned face to face with Christ. Our pardonship comes directly from the New Birth.

When are you going to stop dodging the thief on the cross? It's in the Bible right? I mean the guy got saved and it's worth considering. The fact is the man doesn't fulfill OT standards, he's not offering a sacrifice (you can't say he was offering Jesus), he can't get baptized (which both John the Baptist and Jesus were doing), he's not speaking in tongues (I realize the HG hasn't been poured out), yet expresses words that indicate faith in Jesus and Jesus tells him he will be with Him in paradise. It is a unique story, yes. But so is Abraham. So Is Ruth. So is David. So is Esther. So is Peter, John, Zaccheus, the Samaritan woman, the woman caught in adultery. But do you know the ONE THING that makes all of their stories and all of our stories common? FAITH. We are justified by faith. Declared right before God by faith. Accepted by faith. It's there from Genesis to Revelation. It's there in every dispensation (although I don't subscribe to dispensationalism-I know how it is taught and I know that faith is found in every one of them).

So the thief on the cross is relevant. Otherwise it wouldn't be recorded in Scripture.

[Aquila]

If one refuses to be baptized... they are in rebellion and may certainly loose their soul.

If one doesn't experience the baptism of the Holy Ghost with the speaking in other tongues, they certainly don't have all that God intended for the church.

Mark 16:15-17
15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;

Yes, faith is FOUNDATIONAL. Faith brings a repentant heart. A repentant heart full of faith brings obedience. I believe any able bodied person is expected to respond to the Gospel in it's fullness. The sick and dying cannot.

[trialedbyfire]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

Acts 4:4 Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand. NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 11:21
And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 13:12 Then the deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 14:1 And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 16:1 Then came he to Derbe and Lystra: and, behold, a certain disciple was there, named Timotheus, the son of a certain woman, which was a Jewess, and believed; but his father was a Greek:
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 17:4 And some of them believed, and consorted with Paul and Silas; and of the devout Greeks a great multitude, and of the chief women not a few.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 17:12 Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


Acts 17:34 Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed: among the which was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them.
NO MENTION OF BAPTISM IMMEDIATELY OR OTHERWISE


This is a common misconception about Acts and what actually happened in the NT church. The pattern in Acts 2:38 is mentioned ONCE in the entire book explicitly. Acts 8 has the Samaritans believing and being baptized, receiving the HG later, but never mentioning tongues. Acts 10 has the house of Cornelius believing and being filled with the HG, speaking in tongues and THEN getting baptized. Acts 19 has the disciples of John being rebaptized and being filled with the HG, speaking in tongues. You can throw in the conversion of Saul on Acts 9 although it's not as specific about speaking in tongues when he received the HG (we know he later says he speaks in tongues in I Cor.).

There's a total of 19 conversions recorded in Acts. Out of 19, only 5 show any form or fashion of A238, while 100% of all 19 conversions include believing/faith/repentance.

So what are we to deduce from this? Two options:

1.) That A238 was absolutely the message that was always preached as the gospel and everyone ever converted in the Bible obeyed that pattern. In the 14 other cases where conversion takes place and either the HG and tongues is absent or both HG/tongues and baptism are absent, we ASSUME, SPECULATE, and GUESS that it took place in all the other times.

OR

2.) That faith/repentance/belief was the emphasis of the gospel and every time someone converted they did exercise faith, repented of their sins, believed the message of Christ's death, burial and resurrection---AND IT'S ACTUALLY RECORDED 100% OF THE TIME IN THE BIBLE IN THE BOOK OF ACTS THAT THEY DID!!!!! Sometimes they were baptized in addition to and/or received the gift of the HG where they either spoke in tongues with cloven tongues like as of fire sitting upon each of them, spoke in tongues and magnified God, spoke in tongues and prophesied, or they were simply "filled" with no mention of tongues.

Logic would say you would embrace what happened 100% of the time rather than 1/4 of the time. I'd rather build my doctrine on what is absolutely consistent, not only in the book of Acts but the ENTIRE BIBLE: faith/repentance/belief. This has ALWAYS been God's plan of salvation!

And if A238 was "always" preached, as you say, why did Paul say "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved?" in Acts 16?

Question... what is the difference between Faith, Belief, and Repentance? Is there a difference? Can someone believe and not have faith? Can someone have faith and not repent? Can someone believe and not repent?

The issue of repentance is a whole different issue. You've made it sound as if belief and repentance are the same thing which would be convenient when interpreting the scriptures you posted.

They're not. You know it and I know it.

Repentance is an action. It is a turn away from ones sins and a changing of ones mind. You can indeed believe and not repent and my question to you as a "one stepper" is: which one is it? Is repentance what saves or belief what saves?

Do you really have to repent to be saved or just believe?

I know plenty of people that openly believe, and that haven't repented and the scriptures are clear that repentance is required (2 Peter 3:9; 2 Cor 7:10). Are these none repentent "believers" saved?

Acts 4:4 "Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand."

Were they saved SIMPLY because they believed? Did their belief save them? Or did they also have to repent? And if so, should we assume that these individuals here REPENTED because they believed and are therefore saved? Or just assume they just believed and maybe some repented maybe some didn't but they're saved because they believed? Where does it say also that they converted because of their belief?

The assumption here, with this verse by itself, SHOULDN'T be anything. They believed. That's all the passages say, not that they were saved, heaven bound, or that they did or did not follow the plan of salvation.

You say that logic says that we should embrace what happened 100% of the time. I say that logic says we should preach the entire process of conversion rather than the part that shows up the most or the part we like to preach and hope the rest doesn't matter.

Belief and faith is the basis for repentance, baptism, and the Holy Ghost. You must have faith to repent (John 14:17), baptism is based upon your confession of faith (Acts 8:37), and the Holy Ghost is received by faith (Matthew 7:11).

Our assumption should be that one who has faith does follows through with the new birth experience and lives according to the word of God afterwards. THAT should be the overall asumption.

Using your first verse as a prime example (and the same is true about similar verses):

Acts 4:4 "Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand."

It uses the word believed. Are we to assume that because they believed they repented? That seems to be the assumption you're making?

Moving on to the second verse which says this:
Acts 11:21 "And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord."

Here's where the problem with one steppers come in. We have an issue here. Acts 4:4 says that those who heard the word believed. Acts 11:21 says that those who heard the word believed and turned unto the Lord. So do we "assume" that those in Acts 4:4 BOTH believed AND turned to the Lord (the word "turn" here according to my concordance refers to conversion)? The believed and were converted. So if we are to assume that the people who believed in Acts 4:4 also converted, what else can we assume? Can we assume that all those who converted, converted in the same fasion as the first people who converted under the preaching of Peter in Acts 2:38.

Yes, I think that's the safest assumption. It's either that or we assume nothing and take it for what it says. The people in Acts 4:4 believed and may or may not have converted. The people in Acts 11:21 believed, and converted, and may or may not have converted the same way the people converted in Acts 2 under Peter's preaching. That's a pretty uncertain bet. I don't like being uncertain with peoples souls.

The safer assumption is the first and most obvious. The people in Acts 4:4 believed, were converted, and converted in the same fasion as the believers in Acts 2. Otherwise there's no consistency in scripture.

[trialedbyfire]

Originally Posted by deacon blues

When are you going to stop dodging the thief on the cross?

Nobody dodged or is dodging the thief. He shows the importance of faith, compassion, and gives us an example of a man who because of his faith received eternity. Our faith leads us to obedience and through our obedience we receive our same gift of eternal life.

Originally Posted by deacon blues

It's in the Bible right? I mean the guy got saved and it's worth considering. The fact is the man doesn't fulfill OT standards, he's not offering a sacrifice (you can't say he was offering Jesus), he can't get baptized (which both John the Baptist and Jesus were doing), he's not speaking in tongues (I realize the HG hasn't been poured out), yet expresses words that indicate faith in Jesus and Jesus tells him he will be with Him in paradise.

The fact is while Jesus was on Earth you DIDN'T EVEN HAVE TO EXPRESS WORDS OF FAITH to be saved.

Jesus forgave people for showing faith, and forgave people simply for the purpose of showing his own mercy. He forgave the woman accused of adultery. She never said a sinners prayer, or even repented (John 8:1-30).

Originally Posted by deacon blues

It is a unique story, yes. But so is Abraham. So Is Ruth. So is David. So is Esther. So is Peter, John, Zaccheus, the Samaritan woman, the woman caught in adultery. But do you know the ONE THING that makes all of their stories and all of our stories common? FAITH. We are justified by faith. Declared right before God by faith. Accepted by faith. It's there from Genesis to Revelation. It's there in every dispensation (although I don't subscribe to dispensationalism-I know how it is taught and I know that faith is found in every one of them).

So the thief on the cross is relevant. Otherwise it wouldn't be recorded in Scripture.

Not one Oneness Pentecostal denies justification by faith. To assert otherwise is intellectually dishonest.

Faith absolutely is the total and complete basis of salvation. Without faith repentance means nothing, baptism means nothing, the indwelling of the Holy Ghost means nothing, as I explained in my last post.

Without faith Abraham would not have left his homeland in search for his promise land. Without doing so and FOLLOWING God's will Abraham would be lost. It is our faith the produces work. It is our faith that causes us to be doers and not just hearers of the word of God. It is faith that caused EVERY SINGLE person you mentioned in scripture to do what God had called them to do, and because they did so their faith saved their souls.

I agree, one hundred percent that faith is the common factor in every dispensation. Faith caused Noah to build the Ark. If he hadn't built the ark and got on it though, he would have drowned like everyone else. However his faith saved him because it caused him to do what God told him. There was ONE way out of destruction in Noah's day, have enough FAITH to get your tale in the ark. There's one way today have enough faith to submit yourself to God's plan of salvation.

[Sabby]

Originally Posted by Aquila

God never breaks His promises. He will raise the person up. Be it out of their deathbed... or in the resurrection. One way or another... they will be raised up. A promise is a promise.

This is amazingly GOOD!
Mt 7:28
And it came to pass, when Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine:
Mt 7:29
For he taught them as one having authority, and not as the scribes

Mr 12:26
And as touching the dead, that they rise: have ye not read in the book of Moses, how in the bush God spake unto him, saying, I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob?
Mr 12:27
He is not the God of the dead, but the God of the living: ye therefore do greatly err.

Of COURSE people can be saved on their deathbeds! Is Jesus God OR NOT?

Why else go to visit the elderly and infirm, unless you knew you were TAKING JESUS WITH YOU? Why else pray for those with Alzheimer's unless you were TAKING JESUS WITH YOU?
I personally believe the biggest reason you don't see apostolics going to nursing homes, etc, is because they know they can't as easily fulfil their Acts 2:38 "commission" in those venues. Unfortunately, they shortchange the gospel by not ministering to these folks because they LIMIT God's grace and mercy as well as their own Apostolic authority. When we lay hands on the sick it doesn't mean they will always immediately hope to shout, jump from their beds and beg for water baptism, but they WILL be saved...
"A promise is a promise" indeed!

We need to "let" God be God and stop limiting His (and OUR) potential in Him.

[Sabby]

It's Jesus and His gospel, which is much more than the verse, Acts 2:38 ('though it's part of the gospel)

[Sabby]

It is faith that causes a woman dieing of cancer to look through clouded moist eyes and say, please pray for me. That I will always be willing to do, and not afterwards say, "AND MAY GOD HAVE MERCY ON HER SOUL"...

God help OPs to expose their hearts and souls to the depth of the mercy and love of God, who will have all men to be saved; iow, it's time we started looking at the ark from the mercy seat vantage point instead of the tablets and writings inside.

[Sabby]

I believe this so strongly that once a week I visit the Alzheimer's Unit at the Veteran's Home. There I play some music and interperse the songs with sermonettes and prayers for all in attendance.
Apostolics more than any other people understand the power - or at least should - of the name of Jesus. And this is Who I take to these precious people...