|
Post by jonathandwhitehead on Apr 24, 2009 17:11:07 GMT -5
This might open up a can of worms, but Church of Christ folks do have some good points on the conversion accounts in the Book of Acts. I have been challenged quite a bit by the writings of a Church of Christ guy named Mark Copeland (executableoutlines.com) As far as I can tell, baptism is either mentioned or implied in just about every account of the preaching of the Gospel in Acts. In fact, it seems that in every case of conversion described in detail in the Book of Acts, baptism is mentioned. You don't see people being commanded to "pray and receive Christ" or anything like that, but you do see people being commanded to "repent and be baptized." It would seem almost that an act of faith is initially shown by a person being baptized - not by praying a prayer. More on another time..... I would agree. So how do you believe one "Calls upon the name of the Lord." Also, is it at the point of "calling upon the name of the Lord" that a man is saved?" Hope to hear from you soon. Jonathan Whitehead
|
|
|
Post by Rhema Seeker (Guy) on Apr 24, 2009 18:01:23 GMT -5
Someone show me where in the New Testament people were full of the Holy Ghost and no one was ever converted. Are you serious? Stephen was full of the Holy Spirit and instead of converting, they stoned him. One of the greatest preachers was converted after stoning Stephen. Apostle Paul. Sure Paul assisted at that time, but Stephens Faithfulness had to have an affect on him later in his conversion. And I am sure many more. Besides that, they did not walk away from Stephens preaching. They stayed and was pricked in their heart.
|
|
|
Post by messengermicah on Apr 25, 2009 8:54:06 GMT -5
So in other words Jonathan no one pays any attention to you when you preach?
|
|
|
Post by jackjackson on Jun 30, 2009 22:51:01 GMT -5
Baptism was not a new NT thing, but was a regular part of Judaism called "micvahs". It was a matter of rendering the unclean, clean again. It had nothing to do with being dirty, but spiritually unfit (unclean) to even enter the Temple.
Once converted, a new NT believer would submit to being Mikvahed (Baptized) to symbolize their acceptance that they were spiritually unclean and needed to be cleaned. The Mikvah was always in living water, not stagnant water.
It was also not a "one time" thing. Many that had come to be mikvahed by John were Jews that had been Mikvahed often as they had become "unclean". Mary became "unclean" when she gave birth to Jesus and had to offer sacrifices. She was not a sinner for having a child, merely rendered unclean for the prescribed days (see Lev.).
As for the "Sinners Prayer", I have lead many in it, but woud rather see their fruit afterwards continue in endurance until the end. Many seem to rely on that "one time" prayer as their "get out of jail free card", like getting their clock punched. They trust in a prayer, and then go on living in sin, damned for hell.
A maariage starts with "I do's" but will never last unless both are committed in love and obedience. The Sinner must not just try and avoid hell, but truly be convicted a transgressor, breaking the Holy Commands of God. He should see sin in a new light and have a hatred for it, and a thirst for living righeously.
The grace of God which brings salvation, teaches us to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and live soberly and righteously in this life (see Titus) and Paul teaches us the instructions in righteousness are found in the Scriptures (which only included Torah and Prophets when he was writing). I guess that is why God defines "good doctrine" as not forsaking His Torah (Prov. 4:2). Sad to see so many have.
|
|
|
Post by jonathandwhitehead on Jul 11, 2009 21:45:23 GMT -5
Baptism was not a new NT thing, but was a regular part of Judaism called "micvahs". It was a matter of rendering the unclean, clean again. It had nothing to do with being dirty, but spiritually unfit (unclean) to even enter the Temple. Once converted, a new NT believer would submit to being Mikvahed (Baptized) to symbolize their acceptance that they were spiritually unclean and needed to be cleaned. The Mikvah was always in living water, not stagnant water. It was also not a "one time" thing. Many that had come to be mikvahed by John were Jews that had been Mikvahed often as they had become "unclean". Mary became "unclean" when she gave birth to Jesus and had to offer sacrifices. She was not a sinner for having a child, merely rendered unclean for the prescribed days (see Lev.). As for the "Sinners Prayer", I have lead many in it, but woud rather see their fruit afterwards continue in endurance until the end. Many seem to rely on that "one time" prayer as their "get out of jail free card", like getting their clock punched. They trust in a prayer, and then go on living in sin, damned for hell. A maariage starts with "I do's" but will never last unless both are committed in love and obedience. The Sinner must not just try and avoid hell, but truly be convicted a transgressor, breaking the Holy Commands of God. He should see sin in a new light and have a hatred for it, and a thirst for living righeously. The grace of God which brings salvation, teaches us to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and live soberly and righteously in this life (see Titus) and Paul teaches us the instructions in righteousness are found in the Scriptures (which only included Torah and Prophets when he was writing). I guess that is why God defines "good doctrine" as not forsaking His Torah (Prov. 4:2). Sad to see so many have. Water Baptism is a New Testament "thing." It was instituted by Christ and performed by the authority of Christ for (in order to obtain) the remission of sin. Matthew 28:18 Acts 2:38 Your argument is made from an unscriptural and scripture-less erroneous view of the New Testament pattern and dispensation of the Old and New Covenants. You've accused the New Testament Christians of being entangled in the yoke of bondage, returning to and being justified by the old law because as you have just written: "The grace of God which brings salvation, teaches us to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, and live soberly and righteously in this life (see Titus) and Paul teaches us the instructions in righteousness are found in the Scriptures (which only included Torah and Prophets when he was writing).The New Testament "instructions" can be found in the New Testament. It is for this reason that the New Testament was written. The Apostles wrote down the New Testament pattern and doctrine that we may have fellowship together with them (1 John 1:3). As the Apostles went through the cities they delivered decrees for the New Testament church (Christians) to keep (Acts 16:4). Before the word of God was perfected, completed, or finished men received miraculous inspiration, prophecy, or tongues in order for the New Testament Christians to be built up in the New Testament faith where the Apostles writings were not to be found. Men in the New Testament were condemned for Old Testament justification because as Paul said; the Old Testament is written for our learning and not for our pattern (Romans 15:4). The Sinners Prayer is false, read Acts 10.
|
|
|
Post by jackjackson on Jul 13, 2009 18:09:16 GMT -5
You obviously have little concept of the original covenant, or you would see the renewed covenant, not a new one that removes the former. Gal 3:17 tells us that no new laws annul old ones. I too, in my ignorance (2 Peter 3:16-17) used to understand the same way you have been taught. You couldn't have come to that conclusion by just reading the Scriptures.
As for Romans 15:4, note that Paul says the things written were for our learning, that we through patience (or continuance in what they tell us) and comfort (exhortation) of the Scriptures (Torah and prophets) might have hope.
I am not speaking about any type of OT justification; I am speaking about means by which we can be disqualified after coming to faith.
If you study, you will find that ritual washing, is all throughout the OT. It was a symbol of cleansing, making one new, clean; just as John the Baptist did, and Jesus after him. This was not new though.
If Jesus or any Apostle taught doing away with the Torah; they were false prophets according to Duet 13 and 18. Those chapters in Scripture are true long before the NT. No new can annul the old (Gal 3:17); so either you are misunderstanding Paul and Jesus and they really didn't teach against the Torah; or it was right and Scriptural to put them to death (leaving us with no Messiah).
I suggest we have inherited the lies our fathers inherited (Jer. 16:19).
|
|