The Thief on the Cross

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Putting off is what I mean by refusal (not consenting to doing it at that time). I've met many who simply put it off because they don't really consider it that important or are scared of water, etc.

IF they are saved, it really isn't that important to them at the moment and they will schedule it at another time. That is not the apostolic practice.

How many of these people died before baptism because of putting something off. Are you saying this does not happen? It has happened quite a bit!

The language of John 3 is pretty clear. We are born or changed of water in baptism (Romans 6).. Paul's teaching is clear.

Paul's teaching in John 3 is actually pretty unclear; what with Paul not having written the Gospel of John and all.

Paul's statements in Romans 6 say nothing about the "First Birth" or being born from a woman's womb. That's the turn that Nicodemus introduced into the conversation with Jesus as recorded in John 3. In Romans 6, Paul likens repentance and conversion to the death of Jesus on the cross. He then likens baptism to the burial of Jesus in the tomb. Nothing here whatsoever about the "First Birth."

I'll have to take your word for your own experiences about people "being afraid of the water" and so forth. I've never experienced that. And, it is helpful that you modified your "refused to be baptized" statement.

Besides, if you really believed that these people simply had to be baptized in water to be saved - wouldn't you just drag them into the water? C'mon. How much do you really believe this stuff? Back it up with some action.

[onefaith2]

Originally Posted by pelathais

Paul's teaching in John 3 is actually pretty unclear; what with Paul not having written the Gospel of John and all.

Paul's statements in Romans 6 say nothing about the "First Birth" or being born from a woman's womb. That's the turn that Nicodemus introduced into the conversation with Jesus as recorded in John 3. In Romans 6, Paul likens repentance and conversion to the death of Jesus on the cross. He then likens baptism to the burial of Jesus in the tomb. Nothing here whatsoever about the "First Birth."

I'll have to take your word for your own experiences about people "being afraid of the water" and so forth. I've never experienced that. And, it is helpful that you modified your "refused to be baptized" statement.

Besides, if you really believed that these people simply had to be baptized in water to be saved - wouldn't you just drag them into the water? C'mon. How much do you really believe this stuff? Back it up with some action.

THe apostles didn't do this. They commanded baptism but you don't see them dragging people. what kind of faith is that when you have to push someone? The eunuch asked Philip. Peter commanded the house of Cornelius, Paul said that John's apostles needed to believe on Him that comes after John.

None of these show forced conversion! Does God force people to receive Him? What kind of suggestion are you making??? Baptism without faith is another bath.. whether in the name of Jesus or in the name of Elvis


You need to reread Paul in Romans 6. Baptism puts us into Christ's death. We are buried with Him but we are put into his death by baptism. Why wouldn't you believe you have to get into Christ's death to be saved??????

3Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?


By the way I was not saying Paul taught in John 3. I said the language of John 3 is clear...

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

The first birth is what Nicodemus thought Jesus was talking about. Jesus was talking about a spiritual birth of water and spirit.

No. Jesus was talking about a Spiritual birth of Spirit. This "Second Birth" followed the "First" or natural birth that Nicodemus mentioned.

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Jesus said that which is flesh is flesh and that which is Spirit is spirit because he was contrasting the two births in Nicodemus' mnd. JEsus said you Nicodemus must be born of water and of Spirit.

Notice that before John 3:5, Jesus said "born again..." When Nicodemus brings his mother's womb into the discussion, Jesus then said, "You must be born of the water and the Spirit." He never said "born again of the water and the Spirit..." because, as Nicodemus pointed out, "How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?"

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Jesus would never tell someone that they would have to be born first naturally and then Spiritually to enter in the kingdom. How does that make any sense? Everyone is already born of water in that case.

Everyone is "born of the water" or "the flesh." That's how we got here.

Jesus did tell Nicodemus that he had to be born first naturally and then Spiritually when He said "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again." (John 3:6-7).

Just what part of "again" are you missing here?

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Secondly I could quote many references historically.. study it.. the church was not aware of the doctrine you propose until much later. Baptism was always a necessity.

I have studied it. The apostles were "aware" of it. The Bible clearly teaches it. You've shifted the discussion away from John 3 and introduced the concept that "everybody agrees with onefaith2." You'll have to back that assertion up yourself.

Originally Posted by onefaith2

There is not such thing as half born. Where do you get that? If you repent and be baptized you will be saved. Its a promise that the Lord will never go back on. There is no such thing as half born people.

I got it from you. All of those people you refused to drag into the water after praying them through are obviously "half born" - and it's your fault. Make those people get dunked. Don't you care for their souls?

Either that, or I have to question just how sincere you are about this issue. Would you let a baby crawl out into the street? How can you let these babes out into the world without first seeing to their eternal salvation?

[onefaith2]

Besides if every Christian gets baptized then preaching baptism is necessary really is counterproductive correct? The end justifies the means every time.

[onefaith2]

Originally Posted by pelathais

No. Jesus was talking about a Spiritual birth of Spirit. This "Second Birth" followed the "First" or natural birth that Nicodemus mentioned.
?

Jesus did not tell Nicodemus a man had to be born of flesh and of the SPirit to enter. Hey Pel you gotta be born in your mother's womb and then be born of the SPirit to enter the kingdom. DO you seriously not see the problem here?

Originally Posted by pelathais

I have studied it. The apostles were "aware" of it. The Bible clearly teaches it. You've shifted the discussion away from John 3 and introduced the concept that "everybody agrees with onefaith2." You'll have to back that assertion up yourself.
?

You surely haven't studied the church fathers. Now Pel if everyone agreed with me, it'd be boring.

Originally Posted by pelathais

I got it from you. All of those people you refused to drag into the water after praying them through are obviously "half born" - and it's your fault. Make those people get dunked. Don't you care for their souls?
?

Well pel i sure do care for their souls. But me baptizing them without faith just gets them wet. Next time Jesus shoves his death upon someone and you see it, let me know! Jesus just isn't like that, so why would I be that way.

Do you knock people over and say REPENT or I will force you to? Do you threaten someone if they don't confess Christ and nag them till they do???

Please back up your own assertions before you accuse us of not backing up ours.

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Jesus did not tell Nicodemus a man had to be born of flesh and of the SPirit to enter. Hey Pel you gotta be born in your mother's womb and then be born of the SPirit to enter the kingdom. DO you seriously not see the problem here?

I see it as your problem and not mine. Reread the above sentences and tell me that you don't have a problem here.

Originally Posted by onefaith2

You surely haven't studied the church fathers. Now Pel if everyone agreed with me, it'd be boring.

Upon what basis do you make the statement that I "surely haven't studied the church fathers?" I'm afraid that I am far too familiar with the labyrinthine thinking which constitutes many the arguments that some of the "fathers" offer. Your professed agreement with those arguments does nothing to bolster your cause.

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Well pel i sure do care for their souls. But me baptizing them without faith just gets them wet. Next time Jesus shoves his death upon someone and you see it, let me know! Jesus just isn't like that, so why would I be that way.

Do you knock people over and say REPENT or I will force you to? Do you threaten someone if they don't confess Christ and nag them till they do???

Please back up your own assertions before you accuse us of not backing up ours.

I have offered Scripture to support my own beliefs. With regard to seeing Jesus "shoving his death upon someone" - I think you've summed up my own conversion pretty well.

And, it is the Spirit of God that "knocks" people over the head (2 Chronicles 33:11-13; Hosea 6:1-3; Jonah 2). Paul himself appears to have at least suggested that he would do the same (2 Corinthians 7:8-12).

Well, I see that I've gotten you to the "Hey Pel" point of the conversation. I hope that I have not generated any hard feelings. We're really not that far apart on these issues. It's just that I think we really must emphasize the work of God's grace as the proper foundation before moving on to other things (Hebrews 6:1-3).

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Thats my point! Of course we sin. That means that being born of God isn't just an event, that born again work continues in our life. You can't say a person is born of God when they believe but yet they are sinning. They contradict one another. Sinneth means to continue in sin, not commit a mistake. That is what John is trying to say and the only way to be delivered from sin's power.. is found in Romans 6! We have to bury the old man.

NOPE. That is not your point. Your point has been that a man is born again when he is baptized and receives the Holy Ghost and saying that being born of God is not an event contradicts your position because you view the new birth as being completed at baptism and reception of the Holy Ghost. Of course I think you were trying to say that there are things we should go on and do after being born again and with that I agree, but I would not have chosen your wording that being born of God isn't just an event because I think it really is just an event and a very amazing one at that!

Further, using the 1 John verse about those that sinneth not being born of God in the way you are also contradicts your position that baptism and receiving the Holy Ghost is what accomplishes the new birth because you call baptized and spirit filled believers born again even if they sin. So I'll make you a deal. Start preaching that baptized and Spirit filled believers who sin aren't born again and I won't call you a hypocrite for using that verse against my doctrine but not applying it to your own.

I wanted to add that if you find yourself struggling for explanation of 1 John 5:18 which doesn't contradict your view that being baptized and receiving the Holy Ghost is the new birth then ask and I'll happily give you an explanation that will allow 1 John 5:18 to not contradict your view or mine.

Either way it seems that you are not on good standing in citing 1 John 5:18 as an argument against the way I have been using the verses in 1 John 5. So what exactly was it that you found wrong with my arguments from those verses in 1 John 5? Remember, I presented 3 or 4 verses from that chapter and used them all to bring out the same point. You have only claimed that the point I brought out was wrong but you never explained (although you at least tried with 1 John 5:18) why the reasoning I used was wrong or even offered an alternate explanation for those passages.

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Thats my point! Of course we sin. That means that being born of God isn't just an event, that born again work continues in our life. You can't say a person is born of God when they believe but yet they are sinning. They contradict one another. Sinneth means to continue in sin, not commit a mistake. That is what John is trying to say and the only way to be delivered from sin's power.. is found in Romans 6! We have to bury the old man.

correct... the cleansing of sin by his blood is a life thing not just a one moment thing.

[Monarchianism]

Originally Posted by jfrog

Part 1 of my response. The other will have to come later



1st of all, Paul was writing to already born again Christians. (Isn't that a great argument?). So, when he commented on their sorrow due to his first epistle which led to their repentance and salvation he was talking to people that were already born again Christians. So it seems to me that due to their already born again status the repentance that 2 Corinthians 2 mentions is a turning from works that born again Christians should not be doing. This is different than the repentance it takes to be born again which is turning from unbelief in Christ. Now don't get me wrong, the repentance of unbelief will lead (if given enough time) to the repentance that causes a Christian to turn from Unchristian works but those two repentances are not the same.

Now you have overly confused me on where you stand.
And yes, I knew it was to already born-again Christians.
I guess we will end it here and move on to another subject?

[Monarchianism]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Thats my point! Of course we sin. That means that being born of God isn't just an event, that born again work continues in our life. You can't say a person is born of God when they believe but yet they are sinning. They contradict one another. Sinneth means to continue in sin, not commit a mistake. That is what John is trying to say and the only way to be delivered from sin's power.. is found in Romans 6! We have to bury the old man.

I would argue that all sin is not a mistake. It is your control over it.
I was taught that the passage of not sinning after being born of God is referring to those that are higher on the scale ( if you want to call it ) in not sinning, because of the power of God. But, even though they sin, they must ask forgiveness before "night falls" as a figure of speech. Basically, God will not allow you to "sleep on it." Believe me, I've woke up crying while it was still dark outside... and that's when I realized what he meant.
( Of course, this is after I received the Holy Ghost ) It does convict.