Is baptism essential unto salvation?

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Adino

Steve, is man condemned by God for the sins you have agreed were remitted prior to the resurrection at Calvary?

If you believe man remains condemned for those sins, then you do not believe Christ accomplished sin remission on the Cross.

Sounds like you have another gospel which calls the work of the Cross inadequate.

Good grief!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

YOU are in the same boat YOU require faith and repentance does that make the work on the cross inadequate?

You stop too soon!

[*AQuietPlace*]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

The end result is universalism. Jesus died for ALL. 2Cor. 5:14
He is the propitiation for the sins of the WHOLE world. 1Jn.2:2
Jesus was the Lamb that taketh away the sin of the world. Jn. 1:29

So ALL men's sins were forgiven at Calvary, yet ALL men will NOT be saved.

Man has to recieve forgiveness and remission of sins.

A pardon is NOT a pardon unless recieved as a pardon.

I don't think so. I can see his point without it turning into universalism.

Our sins were remitted, but we have to accept that for ourselves to be saved.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

I don't think so. I can see his point without it turning into universalism.

Our sins were remitted, but we have to accept that for ourselves to be saved.

True!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You ACCEPT that by obeying the gospel.

[Adino]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

True!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You ACCEPT that by obeying the gospel.

Steve, you've redefined the Gospel. Good News of sin remission is a matter of history accepted with a heart of faith. Good News IS NOT a plan for sin remission to be performed by mankind. The Gospel report is 'obeyed' by 'acceptance,' there is no additional plan to follow. The Gospel is the Good News that God's plan WORKED!

You said that if your PLAN makes the work of the Cross inadequate so does the idea of repentance and faith. NO! There is a huge difference! Simply returning to God by resting your heart in the Good News of Christ's finished work indicates an acceptance that the work of the Cross was indeed adequate and that sin was indeed effectively remitted.

On the other hand, your position holds that the work of the Cross only made it possible for another plan to be introduced. Man is still condemned by those sins, which were supposed to be imputed to Christ and remitted on the Cross, until he is water baptized. If he is still condemned by those sins, then the Cross was ineffective in removing them from the eyes of God. Your view of the Gospel declares the Cross ineffective.

I asked, "Is man condemned by God for the sins you have agreed were remitted prior to the resurrection at Calvary?"

You would not answer.

I believe NO - he IS NOT condemned for any sin remitted on the Cross prior to the resurrection. Does this mean that ALL men are saved? Absolutely NOT. It means that God has dealt with the sins of the world, but has set before man the testimony of His Son.

Man either 1) accepts with a heart of faith the record God gave of his Son setting to seal that God is true and LIVES in a state of justification.... OR... 2) man calls God a liar by rejecting the record he gave of his Son and REMAINS SPIRITUALLY DEAD in a state of condemnation.

He that believes in the Good News of Christ's finished sin remitting work of the Cross is quickened from spiritual death unto spiritual life (John 3:15-16, 36; John 5:24; John 6:40,47; John 11:25,26) BUT he that refuses to believe the Good News of Christ's finished sin remitting work of the Cross abides spiritually dead in the wrath and condemnation of God (John 3:18; John 3:36; John 16:8-9).

Is man condemned by God for the sins proven by the resurrection to have been remitted at Calvary?

NO! He is condemned because of unbelief that those sins were effectively dealt with by God through Christ on Calvary. He is condemend because he has rejected the Gospel message of Christ.

Steve, I fearfully wonder at times whether you are rejecting the Gospel message of Christ by holding a position which inherently implies the Cross was ineffective.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Adino

Steve, you've redefined the Gospel. Good News of sin remission is a matter of history accepted with a heart of faith. Good News IS NOT a plan for sin remission to be performed by mankind. The Gospel report is 'obeyed' by 'acceptance,' there is no additional plan to follow. The Gospel is the Good News that God's plan WORKED!

You said that if your PLAN makes the work of the Cross inadequate so does the idea of repentance and faith. NO! There is a huge difference! Simply returning to God by resting your heart in the Good News of Christ's finished work indicates an acceptance that the work of the Cross was indeed adequate and that sin was indeed effectively remitted.

On the other hand, your position holds that the work of the Cross only made it possible for another plan to be introduced. Man is still condemned by those sins, which were supposed to be imputed to Christ and remitted on the Cross, until he is water baptized. If he is still condemned by those sins, then the Cross was ineffective in removing them from the eyes of God. Your view of the Gospel declares the Cross ineffective.

I asked, "Is man condemned by God for the sins you have agreed were remitted prior to the resurrection at Calvary?"

You would not answer.

I believe NO - he IS NOT condemned for any sin remitted on the Cross prior to the resurrection. Does this mean that ALL men are saved? Absolutely NOT. It means that God has dealt with the sins of the world, but has set before man the testimony of His Son.

Man either 1) accepts with a heart of faith the record God gave of his Son setting to seal that God is true and LIVES in a state of justification.... OR... 2) man calls God a liar by rejecting the record he gave of his Son and REMAINS SPIRITUALLY DEAD in a state of condemnation.

He that believes in the Good News of Christ's finished sin remitting work of the Cross is quickened from spiritual death unto spiritual life (John 3:15-16, 36; John 5:24; John 6:40,47; John 11:25,26) BUT he that refuses to believe the Good News of Christ's finished sin remitting work of the Cross abides spiritually dead in the wrath and condemnation of God (John 3:18; John 3:36; John 16:8-9).

Is man condemned by God for the sins proven by the resurrection to have been remitted at Calvary?

NO! He is condemned because of unbelief that those sins were effectively dealt with by God through Christ on Calvary. He is condemend because he has rejected the Gospel message of Christ.

Steve, I fearfully wonder at times whether you are rejecting the Gospel message of Christ by holding a position which inherently implies the Cross was ineffective.

Again my articulate friend is hedging.

First he chides me in saying that a man will be condemned even though his sins are historically forgiven and remitted and Calvary WHEN IN TRUTH HE BELIEVES THE SAME.
The DIFFERENCE is the METHOD of accepting. HIS method is foreign to Jesus and the Apostles.
Jesus COMMANDED Mt. 28:19-Mk. 16:16-Luke 24:47.
The Apostles OBEYED Acts 2:38.
In his method obedience to REPENT which is NOT enough.
God's method delivered by the man who had the keys Mt.16:18-20 and sanctioned by the other Apostles Acts 2:14 includes repentance BUT ALSO includes baptism in Jesus Name FOR the remission of sins and the infilling of the Holy Ghost. ALL operated by the heart through faith.
When one refuses to obey the gospel message he rejects the remedy for sin provided at Calvary.
It is one thing to make and provide the prescription it is another thing to take and apply the prescription.
Calvary provided the prescription obedience through faith applies the prescription.
The presciption provided is forgiveness and remission of sins in HIs shed blood the application is obeying Acts 2:38.
NOT ONE person has applied the provided prescription for sins( the shed blood of Christ) without obeying Acts 2:38.

[*AQuietPlace*]

Just pondering.... when the disciples sat in the Upper Room awaiting the comforter, were they not yet saved? If one of them had died of a heart attack while waiting, would he/she have burned in hell?

[Adino]

First he chides me in saying that a man will be condemned even though his sins are historically forgiven and remitted and Calvary WHEN IN TRUTH HE BELIEVES THE SAME.

Don't understand why a man so bright is having such a hard time with the facts, Steve. You say the man is condemned BY THOSE SINS ALREADY REMITTED. I say he is NOT condemned by those sins already committed, but he is condemned FOR THE SIN OF UNBELIEF (John 3:18; John 3:36; John 16:8-9). I hold UNBELIEF as the "sin unto death" (1John 5:17). The man who denies Christ is the man "denied before the angels of God" (Luke 12:9). There is a vast difference in our position.

Tell us plainly, Steve.

Is a man still condemned for those sins already remitted on the Cross until he is baptized?

Yes or No? Have a backbone here, friend Take a position. Say YES or NO. Why are you so afraid of voicing your position? Is it because you know it deems the Cross as INEFFECTIVE?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

Just pondering.... when the disciples sat in the Upper Room awaiting the comforter, were they not yet saved? If one of them had died of a heart attack while waiting, would he/she have burned in hell?

A couple of different opinions here among Oneness Apostolic Pentecostals

1. Some believe the 120 were saved under the Old Covenant and then on the Day of Pentecost they were baptized in the Spirit (born of the Spirit) and then they all got baptized in water (born of the Spirit) so they were saved under the New Covenant.

2. Others believe the 120 plus 380 other believers were already saved because they believed in the resurrection of Jesus and had been His disciples (some since the beginning of His ministry), and then 120 of them received an enduement of power, a special anointing of the Holy Spirit called the promise of the Father on the Day of Pentecost.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Adino

Don't understand why a man so bright is having such a hard time with the facts, Steve. You say the man is condemned BY THOSE SINS ALREADY REMITTED. I say he is NOT condemned by those sins already committed, but he is condemned FOR THE SIN OF UNBELIEF. I hold UNBELIEF as the "sin unto death" (1John 5:17). The man who denies Christ is the man "denied before the angels of God" (Luke 12:9). There is a vast difference in our position.

Tell us plainly, Steve.

Is a man still condemned for those sins already remitted on the Cross until he is baptized?

Yes or No? Have a backbone here, friend Take a position. Say YES or NO. Why are you so afraid of voicing your position? Is it because you know it deems the Cross as INEFFECTIVE?

YES a man will be condemned though his sins were forgiven at Calvary BECAUSE he must accept the forgiveness.
The United States court system had a similar case years ago a convict by the name of Wilson recieved a pardon from President Andrew Jackson however he refused the pardon. This went up the court chain and every court ruled he was pardoned thus he MUST be released however when his case came before the Supreme Court the Justice in his wisdom ruled " a pardon is NOT a pardon unless accepted by the one being pardoned." A pardon cannot be forced on anyone they can either accept or reject.
On Passover night the faith to slay the Lamb was one thing to apply the shed blood was another. To have faith in the shed blood in that night meant to apply the blood AS PRESCRIBED.
I contend though YOU have faith in the slain Lamb historically YOU MUST apply the blood as PRESCRIBED!
That prescription is Acts 2:38.

[Adino]

Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*

Just pondering.... when the disciples sat in the Upper Room awaiting the comforter, were they not yet saved? If one of them had died of a heart attack while waiting, would he/she have burned in hell?

My opinion...... absolutely NOT. They would have been saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone.