The Cross of Christ Alone Can Save

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Brethren, explain these passages:

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

The repeated phrase omits and integral part of salvation. It is known that baptism is an act that joins hands with believing faith. It is part of the picture almost. Thus, it is often said in such context (including Acts 2:38)

Colossians 2:11-12 KJV In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: (12) Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
What does Paul say in Romans about circumcision -- particularly as it related to Abraham, and what we have in common with Abram? Romans 4. This scripture clearly draws a picture of Paul's picturesque analogy of "being in Christ." Both burial (going down in water) and resurrection (coming up from water) are seen here. None of which are systematic as a theological vice as much as they are a great demonstration of what is happening. Neither do I believe baptism to be "purely symbolic" as some on here do.


Acts 22:16 KJV And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

"washing away sins" is not done by baptism.... we know this. If one asks he will forgive. By our faith in God we are seen justified, meaning we are pardoned ("washed") of our record of wrong -- and the second part of justification is reconciliation of relationship. Again, we limit Paul to literal speech, turning his every expression into a systematic theology, which it is not. We see here another picture of the life coming to Christ -- they are always baptized -- and what one pictures is someone stepping away from the past and "into Christ." Neither is confession the "way in."

Romans 6:3-4 KJV Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? (4) Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
Doug Moo's thoughts/comments on this passage are incredible. Encourage you to read them. Paul is explaining a concept to Jews, using things Jews would understand. Again, he often uses baptism as being the most visible manifestation of what has happened. I say it again though that I don't believe it's "just symbolism" but that in baptism is a real awareness and presence of Jesus. It's a statement not just in flesh to others, but also in Spirit. But it's not the "way in."


1 Peter 3:21 KJV 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:

This verse has been treated with worthy commentary often on AFF.


Good for starters.

...

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

Mike they can't! The whole issue at hand is they have a paradigm of justificaton that makes the bible a total contradiction. Thus you get the war of faith vs baptism, faith vs works, gospel and law. It's the same old worn out issue that they cannot get past. We can accept faith for what it is and we see it as a whole. They have to skew and totaly distort clear scriptures on baptism. As works have to be misused and abused to fit the rest of scripture and whole lot of lumping has to go on. "works" don't justify.... they yell. Yet they fail to realize justification is more than just about atonement. The framework of covenant is clearly shown by Abraham and he didn't come into covenant to obtain by simply believing something was true with agreement at one point in time and everything was given to him. sorry didn't happen and still won't. god accounted his response as righteous. That is ALL Gen 15:6 is. It's not directly about salvation though it shows the most basic conecept of how God's jsutice works. That God responds to our response and considers/judges it just or not. Just as we do daily. Thus the context is ALL DETERMINING of whether God declares a just response or not.

Who has waged the war of faith vs. baptism? Let's think about that. We believe in baptism, TL.

Don't be so pompous to suggest it's all "so clear" in your direction, when you hardly represent a speck of theological thought with your pseudo-BR theology.

You minimize justification -- that's clear. You don't understand it -- that's even more clear.

Your definition of believing lacks any substance, and only shows your one-dimensional view of it is a straw man for mental assent. God didn't say his "response" was righteous. You contort Paul's whole purpose in what he's saying to attempt to make that point. Why can't you see that? Your interpretation must still match Paul's purpose in Romans 3-6.

Responses/Works... how can you claim this is NOT a works theology? Does it end after baptism and tongues? Are our responses continually judged? Must we repent of all of them? If we forget? How secure is your faith? How can you make a claim other than fragile? What do you and I have in common with Abram -- faith. What is the most-used phrase in Gospel of John - believing. Why is "faith" and "believing" such a hard topic? Why so quick to drag your friends "works" and "credit" out to meet them. What an insult to His gift. You can't even obey God without already being covered by Grace. Don't you get it?

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by pelathais

The title of the thread is "The Cross Alone Can Save."

Justification, or salvation from the penalty of sin is what the cross does. Can you simply say, "As far as the topic goes, I agree - our faith in the cross alone justifies the believer...?"

On the one hand, I don't think he understands justification. I truly don't.

But on the other, he does, but qualifies the justification is of our works.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by mfblume

Two-way street bro., You refuse then so do I.



Easy! Like I have said all along, FAITH THAT WORTS is the faith that saves. And if the works never follow, there never was saving faith. It's so simple. Why is that so hard to follow?

What is not simple is how righteousness is related to everything.

My faith does not even save me. It is the means by which I accept God's gift at a heart level. Jesus and His cross save us.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Mike, are you seeking to equate circumcision as an OT type of baptism? I know (or at least I strongly suspect) TheLegalist would, due to his emphasis upon the covenantal aspects of circumcision. The idea of equating baptism with the OT sign of circumcision doesn't really work when you seek to apply that idea to other passages that discuss OT circumcision as a type of the new birth or salvation.

Ephesians 2:11-18, clearly identifies the NT "circumcision" with the work of Jesus Christ on the cross.

Context is also key here to understanding this passage. Consider: [Colossians 2:6-15 (NET)]

Col 2:6 Therefore, just as you received Christ Jesus as Lord, continue to live your lives in him,
Col 2:7 rooted and built up in him and firm in your faith just as you were taught, and overflowing with thankfulness.
Col 2:8 Be careful not to allow anyone to captivate you through an empty, deceitful philosophy that is according to human traditions and the elemental spirits of the world, and not according to Christ.
Col 2:9 For in him all the fullness of deity lives in bodily form,
Col 2:10 and you have been filled in him, who is the head over every ruler and authority.
Col 2:11 In him you also were circumcised — not, however, with a circumcision performed by human hands, but by the removal of the fleshly body,23 that is, through the circumcision done by Christ.
Col 2:12 Having been buried with him in baptism, you also have been raised with him through your faith in the power of God who raised him from the dead.
Col 2:13 And even though you were dead in your transgressions and in the uncircumcision of your flesh, he nevertheless made you alive with him, having forgiven all your transgressions.
Col 2:14 He has destroyed what was against us, a certificate of indebtedness expressed in decrees opposed to us. He has taken it away by nailing it to the cross.
Col 2:15 Disarming the rulers and authorities, he has made a public disgrace of them, triumphing over them by the cross.

How are we "forgiven all [our] trespasses?" By the cross: Romans 3:25.

The repeated appeal here is made to what Jesus Christ has done on the cross. A lot of folks like to introduce the idea that water baptism is the NT equivalent to OT circumcision - they dance right up and plop the idea down; then when you call them on it, they quickly dance away.

So, are you equating NT water baptism with the OT commands and covenants of circumcision?

Great point. Circumcision was used by Paul for more than Water Baptism as well. It was a relating point for Paul when speaking to his Jewish-Christian audience.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

Does Faith in the cross include the resurrection? Then NO!

The resurrection makes the cross valid. It's what is working in the heavenly. Our faith in Jesus as the Lamb of God, and as the one who died is what he refers to. Without the resurrection, the cross has no efficacy. We get that. It's understood.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

being that faith is contextual.......sure I could agree almost to anything HAHAHA! I would agree that all authority comes from the point of the cross unto the resurrection for salvation. Which is the point of Heb 5:9 He became the source.....

Sometimes I swear you speak the King's English even in your own home.

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by augustianian

just jumping in...haven't read everything in this thread.

Is a person justified before he does any deeds in James 2?

James 2 needs to be understood... gasp... in context.

Why is James telling his audience to have "good works." So that they know how to be saved? NO! That's a starting point...

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by TheLegalist

hmmmm define deed! I think work/deed/response all fall into the realm and I believe Blume has went over this many times as well.

When reading James please clarify these points...

1) when does justification take place. see Romans 4, and Gen 12 for starters
2) Is the word "believed" in Gen 15:6 judged/considered as limited to that scripture or with all in view completed in Gen 22 at the offering of Isaac? you get awfully creative with the Story so it fits your agenda. It's really stretching. Remove the word "judged" for a moment. True judgement would have met Abram with death. God "accounted" and "reckoned" more than he "judged"
3) "Scritpure was fulfilled" please show how it relates to the whole of the text in James 2 Good point. Why is James even talking to the church about "good works." As an exposition of salvation theology? Telling them how to be saved??? Or is he encouraging them to live as who they are - Christ followers/imitators? Be honest here.
4) What is teh clear statement of James about faith in James 2?

...

[Jeffrey]

Originally Posted by augustianian

Mf Blume,

Are you saying that justification is conditional on future deeds? Then at what time can I say that I am justified, before the deeds are done or as soon as I get them done?

Abraham in Genesis 15 knew nothing of Genesis 22 but yet he was justified in Genesis 15. Isn't it more accurate instead to say that a believer can know that he is justified before God WHEN he believes (apart from works either future or present)

Saving faith can be present in deeds, can be absent in deeds, and obviously can be present without deeds, and necessarily so at that, considering that faith without deeds IS the kind of faith that saves, otherwise it's not saving faith. Saving faith, which is the issue, is an inclination of the heart that is disheartened by deeds or works...otherwise if it were not such an inclination it would be presumptuous enough to have no need of a worker other than itself. Saving faith IS the acknowledgment of the inability of deeds to justify, whether past present or future, and the reliance on the ability of another to justify regardless, not on account of, deeds whether past, present or future.

If you are saying that saving faith will lead to good works, then I agree. However, saving faith and justification is NOT conditional upon future works. There is a difference between fruit and root.

James says we're justified by works...Paul says it's by faith apart from works. The only difference is the clause "before God." And since God gives faith, and since God justifies then no one can say a person is NOT justified because of the absence of works, and the opposite is true also...no one can say a person is justified because of the presence of works. God knows.

But I agree that it is faith that is the causal agent of salvation.

a

By TL's determination we are either justified a million times in this life (each deed) or not justified at all until we get to the Judgement Seat. A very poor understanding of justification in the view of eschatology especially.