Why Baptism Doesn't Wash Away Sins, Acts 10:43

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by Dordrecht

Right....lol...that's a good one.
I guess 99.9% of scholars believe that to be correct as well.
I can't stop laughing.

Oh, please.

[mfblume]

Originally Posted by seekerman

They're not hypothetical. See my story above.



Contradictory scripture. Either baptism saves or it does't.

Baptism SAVES. Peter said flatly.

But the overall context of all scripture shows IT IS PART OF SALVATION, not salvation in baptism alone.

You have to say Peter was not complete when you say Baptism DOES NOT SAVE since Peter flatly stated it does save.

1Pe 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

Does baptism now save us? No, it doesn't, it's baptism plus something else in another scripture....

Obviously, BUT IT IS PART OF SALVATION. You cannot read Peter and see him say "baptism doth also now even save us," and say baptism is not part of SALVATION WITHOUT PURPOSELY DISTORTING HIS WORDS AND NOT WANTING TO BELIEVE BAPTISM IS PART OF SALVATION.

Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

That passage is at odds with 1 Peter 3:21. Or at the very least, 1 Peter 3:21 is lacking, is incomplete. One cannot take 1 Peter 3:21 at face value.

Yes one can. Baptism saves and belief and baptism saves. The picture is obvious.

So a person says, ok I believe and I'm baptized. I'm saved and some would say, hold on, not so fast. Have you received the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues? You may have believed, been baptized (and it must be an acceptable baptism) but you still aren't saved. Even though 1 Peter says you are saved when you're baptized, Jesus Himself said that you must believe and be baptized. Paul was lacking in his discourse. He didn't even mention Spirit baptism.

The entirety of the picture shows baptism is PART of salvation. Period.

So, we pick and choose which scriptures to use in order to support our theology and argue and quote and argue and quote and accomplish little, if anything, for the Kingdom of God.

No, you are twisting the picture. Saying baptism saves does not mean it alone saves. it has salvation involved with it. It saves. the idea that baptism is not part of salvation is more far out than what you are trying to make Peter say.

[Dordrecht]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Oh, please.

Laughing is healthy...specially here. Lol.

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Baptism SAVES. Peter said flatly.

But the overall context of all scripture shows IT IS PART OF SALVATION, not salvation in baptism alone.

You have to say Peter was not complete when you say Baptism DOES NOT SAVE since Peter flatly stated it does save.

Contradictory. Either baptism saves or it doesn't. Peter said baptism saves, others say it's baptism plus something else saves. It can't be both.

Obviously, BUT IT IS PART OF SALVATION. You cannot read Peter and see him say "baptism doth also now even save us," and say baptism is not part of SALVATION WITHOUT PURPOSELY DISTORTING HIS WORDS AND NOT WANTING TO BELIEVE BAPTISM IS PART OF SALVATION.

Ok, baptism is a PART of salvation therefore baptism doesn't save, in spite of scripture plainly saying it does.

Yes one can. Baptism saves and belief and baptism saves. The picture is obvious.

Which saves you baptism or belief? One? The other? Scripture indicates that baptism saves, other times baptism plus belief saves, other times something else. Jesus Himself said that eternal life was attained by eating His body and drinking His blood. Other scripture says that if you take communion you eat the body, drink the blood of Jesus. Yet other scriptures indicate that one must be born of the Spirit to see the kingdom of God.

It's a pick and choose salvation in scripture. One should pick something and have faith in it.

The entirety of the picture shows baptism is PART of salvation. Period.

Then baptism doesn't save. Period.

No, you are twisting the picture. Saying baptism saves does not mean it alone saves. it has salvation involved with it. It saves. the idea that baptism is not part of salvation is more far out than what you are trying to make Peter say.

No, I'm not twisting the scripture at all. Peter doesn't say that baptism is a PART of salvation, that's your personal belief. Peter said simply that baptism does now save us. Reject it and go on to your favorite salvation scriptures if you wish, there are plenty to choose from if that passage isn't palatable in your salvation theology.

[Abiding Now]

Amazing. WHY do folks pick out one thing and say THIS IS SALVATION, when the Bible plainly lets us know that salvation is a walk, a journey and a continuation. The Baptist/Methodist teach that salvation is "faith alone". That would indicate no repentance is needed or anything else. Anything else and one is "adding to God's plan". IF I'm reading correctly, this is what some here are advocating here.

[Dordrecht]

IF I'm reading correctly, this is what some here are advocating here.

Abiding Now, you are reading that incorrectly.
Nobody on this thread said that repentance is not needed.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by seekerman

Contradictory. Either baptism saves or it doesn't. Peter said baptism saves, others say it's baptism plus something else saves. It can't be both.



Ok, baptism is a PART of salvation therefore baptism doesn't save, in spite of scripture plainly saying it does.



Which saves you baptism or belief? One? The other? Scripture indicates that baptism saves, other times baptism plus belief saves, other times something else. Jesus Himself said that eternal life was attained by eating His body and drinking His blood. Other scripture says that if you take communion you eat the body, drink the blood of Jesus. Yet other scriptures indicate that one must be born of the Spirit to see the kingdom of God.

It's a pick and choose salvation in scripture. One should pick something and have faith in it.



Then baptism doesn't save. Period.



No, I'm not twisting the scripture at all. Peter doesn't say that baptism is a PART of salvation, that's your personal belief. Peter said simply that baptism does now save us. Reject it and go on to your favorite salvation scriptures if you wish, there are plenty to choose from if that passage isn't palatable in your salvation theology.

I like the thought. The only problem is that you make the bible into a liar. If saying belief saves contradicts baptism saves how can you believe anything the bible says?

I think that the solution is in realizing that just because the bible says something saves you does not mean the bible is mandating you're going to hell without doing that.

The blood of christ saves us in a different way than faith in that blood which saves us in a different way than repantance which saves us in a different way than baptism.

I think the only requirement for going to heaven is making God happy. If what we are doing makes God happy then we are in good shape. If what we are doing doesn't make God happy then I'd say heaven is out of the question...

[Dordrecht]

If what we are doing doesn't make God happy then I'd say heaven is out of the question...

Wow. That includes all of us.
We'r all at one time or another doing things that doesn't make God happy.

Amazing how some of you folks think. ;-)

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Abiding Now

Amazing. WHY do folks pick out one thing and say THIS IS SALVATION, when the Bible plainly lets us know that salvation is a walk, a journey and a continuation. The Baptist/Methodist teach that salvation is "faith alone". That would indicate no repentance is needed or anything else. Anything else and one is "adding to God's plan". IF I'm reading correctly, this is what some here are advocating here.

Probably some of the misunderstanding does come from what one thinks when the word "salvation" is used. I agree that salvation is an ongoing process consisting of many parts such as repentence, baptism, Spirit infilling, prayer, obedience, relationship....just to name a few.

When I use the words "saved" or "salvation" in discussions such as this, I mean the view that if one died, that person would be 'saved', or miss hell, go to heaven, not be lost. In other words, what action by a person is needed for that person to go to heaven and not hell.

Is the scripture that plainly states that baptism saves us speaking of that one thing, that one action by a person...baptism...is what would set our destination as heaven instead of hell. If so, then one misses hell because they're baptized. If not, then what is the passage speaking of?

What action(s) will determine the eternal destination of the individual? Baptism? Something else?

[deacon blues]

Originally Posted by seekerman

Contradictory. Either baptism saves or it doesn't. Peter said baptism saves, others say it's baptism plus something else saves. It can't be both.



Ok, baptism is a PART of salvation therefore baptism doesn't save, in spite of scripture plainly saying it does.



Which saves you baptism or belief? One? The other? Scripture indicates that baptism saves, other times baptism plus belief saves, other times something else. Jesus Himself said that eternal life was attained by eating His body and drinking His blood. Other scripture says that if you take communion you eat the body, drink the blood of Jesus. Yet other scriptures indicate that one must be born of the Spirit to see the kingdom of God.

It's a pick and choose salvation in scripture. One should pick something and have faith in it.



Then baptism doesn't save. Period.



No, I'm not twisting the scripture at all. Peter doesn't say that baptism is a PART of salvation, that's your personal belief. Peter said simply that baptism does now save us. Reject it and go on to your favorite salvation scriptures if you wish, there are plenty to choose from if that passage isn't palatable in your salvation theology.

Excellent. Good stuff here.