Harrison Bergeron said:

---

How does a thread about heaven devolve into a gigantic Trumpgasm circle jerk. The T Facers may be the craziest fundamentalist since the Stalin and Hitler crowds.

---

You'd have to ask Frodo, he's the one having seizures about politics on a faith thread

Oldbear83 said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

How does a thread about heaven devolve into a gigantic Trumpgasm circle jerk. The T Facers may be the craziest fundamentalist since the Stalin and Hitler crowds.

---

You'd have to ask Frodo, he's the one having seizures about politics on a faith thread

---

You can't answer a simple question and it tells me a lot.

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

How does a thread about heaven devolve into a gigantic Trumpgasm circle jerk. The T Facers may be the craziest fundamentalist since the Stalin and Hitler crowds.

---

So then you are a Liberal Democrat? They are the ones who are like Stalin and Hitler. It explains a lot. That's what a thought. Liberal with Theology-Liberal with Politics. Liberalism is poison and toxic.

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

How does a thread about heaven devolve into a gigantic Trumpgasm circle jerk. The T Facers may be the craziest fundamentalist since the Stalin and Hitler crowds.

---

So then you are a Liberal Democrat? They are the ones who are like Stalin and Hitler. It explains a lot. That's what a thought. Liberal with Theology-Liberal with Politics. Liberalism is poison and toxic.

---

"I am gentle and humble in heart," Jesus Christ, Matthew 11:29


"be peaceable and considerate, and always to be gentle toward everyone." Paul, Titus 3:2


"Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love." Paul, Ephesians 4:2


So I ask again, Frodo, what Spirit is that which speaks through you, and how do you reconcile it with what Paul and Christ taught?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If by "water baptism is necessary before we are saved" you mean that without water baptism, we are NOT saved, then wouldn't that falsify Jesus' words? If Jesus said, "whoever believes in him will not perish, but have everlasting life", but yet a person who hears the gospel, believes in Jesus, and trusts in Jesus for salvation, but dies before getting water baptized meaning he ends up NOT getting saved - wouldn't this make Jesus wrong? Because here we have a person who died fully believing in Jesus, but DID NOT get saved!

---

A person who truly believes will act according to that faith. Suppose I tell you a giant meteor will land on you in 10 seconds. If you believe me you will get up and move, if you don't believe me you will not move.

God's Word tells us that at baptism our sins are removed and that we are united with Christ. This is something we will only do if we believe Jesus is the son of God. If a person dies before he can be baptized this is in God's hands and I trust Him to do what is right.

If I say that I can drive my car if I can find my keys this does not mean that the car's battery has nothing to do with being able to start my car.

saabing bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If by "water baptism is necessary before we are saved" you mean that without water baptism, we are NOT saved, then wouldn't that falsify Jesus' words? If Jesus said, "whoever believes in him will not perish, but have everlasting life", but yet a person who hears the gospel, believes in Jesus, and trusts in Jesus for salvation, but dies before getting water baptized meaning he ends up NOT getting saved - wouldn't this make Jesus wrong? Because here we have a person who died fully believing in Jesus, but DID NOT get saved!

---

A person who truly believes will act according to that faith. Suppose I tell you a giant meteor will land on you in 10 seconds. If you believe me you will get up and move, if you don't believe me you will not move.

God's Word tells us that at baptism our sins are removed and that we are united with Christ. This is something we will only do if we believe Jesus is the son of God. If a person dies before he can be baptized this is in God's hands and I trust Him to do what is right.

If I say that I can drive my car if I can find my keys this does not mean that the car's battery has nothing to do with being able to start my car.

---

Yes, a person who truly believes will act on that faith....but is our salvation incumbent on a certain success rate of those acts?

If a meteor was about to land on me, and I fully believed you, but something happened where I couldn't move, then even though I believed you, I will still perish, and I won't be saved. If that is the case with salvation, then Jesus saying that "whoever believes in me will not perish, but have everlasting life" is false because someone can believe in him, yet still not be saved.

If you are saying that in such a case you are trusting God to do right, then suppose God decides NOT to save him - how would that be right, if that would falsify Jesus' words? Wouldn't "right" be to always save such a person, true to Jesus' words? And if so, doesn't that mean then that water baptism is not required for salvation?

And where does it say in the bible that at water baptism our sins are removed? Jesus was able to forgive peoples' sins on the spot, without water baptism. For example, in Luke 7:44-50, he told the sinful woman that her sins were forgiven without water baptism. And then Jesus said to her, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace." And in Mark chapter 2 - "And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven." In neither of these cases was water baptism required for the forgiveness of sins, only faith. And what about the thief on the cross, who we can safely assume was not water baptized? If Jesus is able to do this without water baptism, why can't we have our sins removed in the same manner? Why is Jesus all of sudden limited to only being capable of forgiving us only if we dunk ourselves in water?

If starting your car and driving was a life or death situation, would you merely declare to everyone "whosoever has their keys, WILL be able to drive their car" a la John 3:16? No, that statement would be faulty, falsifiable, and irresponsible because a whole host of issues could prevent the car from starting, even if they did have the keys. You'd be sure to tell everyone to make certain their car is in full working order, too. In the matter of something as eternally important as one's salvation, wouldn't Jesus do likewise, instead of just saying "whosoever believes..."? And not just John 3:16, but in the over 30+ places in the bible where it talks about salvation through faith, without mentioning water baptism?

Jesus never once said that we are done once we have faith. Faith leads to great things, yes, but Christ told many parables about following through and doing the work, and warned that we could lose what we have if we are slack in obeying God's orders.

The parable of the wise and foolish virgins, for example, as well as when the Master arrives home; one must be vigilant. Jesus quite clearly said that His brothers and sisters were not those you called him 'Lord', but those who did the Will of the Father.

As for water baptism, what is your opinion, BusyTarpDuster, as to why Jesus considered it essential that He be baptised? Obviously He did not need baptism for his soul's safety, but Jesus was direct and emphatic about being baptized, and He baptized people all through His ministry. What purpose do you see there from Christ's point of view?

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If a meteor was about to land on me, and I fully believed you, but something happened where I couldn't move, then even though I believed you, I will still perish, and I won't be saved. If that is the case with salvation, then Jesus saying that "whoever believes in me will not perish, but have everlasting life" is false because someone can believe in him, yet still not be saved.

If you are saying that in such a case you are trusting God to do right, then suppose God decides NOT to save him - how would that be right, if that would falsify Jesus' words? Wouldn't "right" be to always save such a person, true to Jesus' words? And if so, doesn't that mean then that water baptism is not required for salvation?

---

I mentioned to you a few weeks ago that the Catholic Church's stance on this is clear. If one has desire, but dies before they are able to be baptized they will be saved.

The Church recognizes that baptism can occur by water, fire, or desire. I've described them earlier, but let me know if you would like me to do that again.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

And where does it say in the bible that at water baptism our sins are removed?

---

Acts 22:16 -
16 And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.'

Acts 2:38 -
38 Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

1 Peter 3:21 -
21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Jesus was able to forgive peoples' sins on the spot, without water baptism. For example, in Luke 7:44-50, he told the sinful woman that her sins were forgiven without water baptism. And then Jesus said to her, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace." And in Mark chapter 2 - "And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven." In neither of these cases was water baptism required for the forgiveness of sins, only faith. And what about the thief on the cross, who we can safely assume was not water baptized? If Jesus is able to do this without water baptism, why can't we have our sins removed in the same manner? Why is Jesus all of sudden limited to only being capable of forgiving us only if we dunk ourselves in water?

---

You ask a very good question: "Why or how can Jesus do this without water baptism but not us?"

The Church tells us in CCC 1257 -

... God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

God can operate outside the sacraments. We cannot.

To someone outside the faith, I am a bit confused by this perspective. Isn't baptism essentially a symbolic gesture? A proclamation of faith to the world that you have been reborn in Christ?

I'd wager that the majority of those here believe that the penitent thief received salvation and clearly he was not baptized before his earthly demise. So, baptism in this specific case is not necessary? If baptism is not always 100% required in all situations for salvation, then by definition it is not required.

Perhaps though this is due to my misinterpretation of the scriptures.

BearWithMe said:

---

To someone outside the faith, I am a bit confused by this perspective. Isn't baptism essentially a symbolic gesture? A proclamation of faith to the world that you have been reborn in Christ?

I'd wager that the majority of those here believe that the penitent thief received salvation and clearly he was not baptized before his earthly demise. So, baptism in this specific case is not necessary? If baptism is not always 100% required in all situations for salvation, then by definition it is not required.

Perhaps though this is due to my misinterpretation of the scriptures.

---

BearWithMe - You ask great questions. No where in the bible does it say that baptism is a symbol. Jesus tells Nicodemus (and us) in John 3:5 -

Jesus answered, "Very truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit.

For the first 1500+ years, the Church fathers write about baptism being necessary for salvation. It wasn't until Ulrich Zwingli in the 1500's when baptism was purposed as a symbol.

BearWithMe said:

---

To someone outside the faith, I am a bit confused by this perspective. Isn't baptism essentially a symbolic gesture? A proclamation of faith to the world that you have been reborn in Christ?

I'd wager that the majority of those here believe that the penitent thief received salvation and clearly he was not baptized before his earthly demise. So, baptism in this specific case is not necessary? If baptism is not always 100% required in all situations for salvation, then by definition it is not required.

Perhaps though this is due to my misinterpretation of the scriptures.

---

Thanks BearWithMe, you ask an important question.

You have already seen how emotional folks can get on this question. Some of that, I believe, is cultural, people believing what they were always told without stopping to think about it. Others fall into the error of trusting ritual and missing the personal value of a relationship with God.

I would compare becoming a Christian to getting married. There are some people who find a former love of their life when they are very old, and they marry soon before they die. No one would deny they are truly married and one hopes they find great joy in their love together, but no one would use the example of two 80-year-olds getting married to say how most people getting married should act.

A good marriage is a lot of work, and while it is the love that leads to the commitment, the marriage still - very much - needs the fruit of that commitment. All the little things like how you speak, little things you do and sacrifices you make for your loved one.

If we do that much for our spouse, we should do just as much for the Lord if we say we love Him. If we would do that for our brother born from the same earthly parents, we should be ready to help our spiritual brother in need when asked.

If someone is prevented by circumstance or condition from becoming baptized, I do not doubt that God would say it is not important to the matter, but if someone is able to be baptized and will not do so, that is quite a different condition.

I mentioned in a prior post that I grieve for the loss of churches we used to have, churches which were communities of believers, who took care of each other in material needs as well as spirit.

It's all well and good to know that if you lose your job, your pastor will pray for you, but so much more to know that word will get around and members of your church will help you find interviews and help you with your resume. But where there used to be dozens of churches near where I live which would help people find jobs, get off drugs, recover from illness and many other services, but now it's become a rare thing ... although churches will be happy to sell you a self-help book by the Pastor, or assure you that God will wipe away your tears in Heaven.

Christ was quite clear that if you belong to Him, you will act like Him. Sadly, few of us come anywhere close to even trying.

We are all in much greater danger than we imagine, when we let our pride speak instead of seeking to understand.

Coke Bear said:

---

BearWithMe said:

---

To someone outside the faith, I am a bit confused by this perspective. Isn't baptism essentially a symbolic gesture? A proclamation of faith to the world that you have been reborn in Christ?

I'd wager that the majority of those here believe that the penitent thief received salvation and clearly he was not baptized before his earthly demise. So, baptism in this specific case is not necessary? If baptism is not always 100% required in all situations for salvation, then by definition it is not required.

Perhaps though this is due to my misinterpretation of the scriptures.

---

BearWithMe - You ask great questions. No where in the bible does it say that baptism is a symbol. Jesus tells Nicodemus (and us) in John 3:5 -

Jesus answered, "Very truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God without being born of water and Spirit.

For the first 1500+ years, the Church fathers write about baptism being necessary for salvation. It wasn't until Ulrich Zwingli in the 1500's when baptism was purposed as a symbol.

---

Thank you for the response. This is going to sound like a ridiculous question, but please bear with me. For someone who has severe aquagenic urticaria (allergic to water on their skin) and would perish from a water baptism, are they unable to enter the kingdom of god?

Or perhaps a more realistic example, let's say there is a village of people in an extremely arid region where their only source of water is through a deep well, thus, they are physically incapable of baptizing in water. Do they get a free pass?

Oldbear83 said:

---

BearWithMe said:

---

To someone outside the faith, I am a bit confused by this perspective. Isn't baptism essentially a symbolic gesture? A proclamation of faith to the world that you have been reborn in Christ?

I'd wager that the majority of those here believe that the penitent thief received salvation and clearly he was not baptized before his earthly demise. So, baptism in this specific case is not necessary? If baptism is not always 100% required in all situations for salvation, then by definition it is not required.

Perhaps though this is due to my misinterpretation of the scriptures.

---

Thanks BearWithMe, you ask an important question.

You have already seen how emotional folks can get on this question. Some of that, I believe, is cultural, people believing what they were always told without stopping to think about it. Others fall into the error of trusting ritual and missing the personal value of a relationship with God.

I would compare becoming a Christian to getting married. There are some people who find a former love of their life when they are very old, and they marry soon before they die. No one would deny they are truly married and one hopes they find great joy in their love together, but no one would use the example of two 80-year-olds getting married to say how most people getting married should act.

A good marriage is a lot of work, and while it is the love that leads to the commitment, the marriage still - very much - needs the fruit of that commitment. All the little things like how you speak, little things you do and sacrifices you make for your loved one.

If we do that much for our spouse, we should do just as much for the Lord if we say we love Him. If we would do that for our brother born from the same earthly parents, we should be ready to help our spiritual brother in need when asked.

If someone is prevented by circumstance or condition from becoming baptized, I do not doubt that God would say it is not important to the matter, but if someone is able to be baptized and will not do so, that is quite a different condition.

I mentioned in a prior post that I grieve for the loss of churches we used to have, churches which were communities of believers, who took care of each other in material needs as well as spirit.

It's all well and good to know that if you lose your job, your pastor will pray for you, but so much more to know that word will get around and members of your church will help you find interviews and help you with your resume. But where there used to be dozens of churches near where I live which would help people find jobs, get off drugs, recover from illness and many other services, but now it's become a rare thing ... although churches will be happy to sell you a self-help book by the Pastor, or assure you that God will wipe away your tears in Heaven.

Christ was quite clear that if you belong to Him, you will act like Him. Sadly, few of us come anywhere close to even trying.

We are all in much greater danger than we imagine, when we let our pride speak instead of seeking to understand.

---

Hey OldBear, thank you for the thorough response. I feel like I have a better understanding of your perspective on this topic now. It is interesting how different denominations disagree on such core concepts such as salvation.

I definitely agree though in that I also wish the American church would spend more time integrating in communities and first focus on taking care of those in need in their backyard.

BearWithMe said:

---

Thank you for the response. This is going to sound like a ridiculous question, but please bear with me. For someone who has severe aquagenic urticaria (allergic to water on their skin) and would perish from a water baptism, are they unable to enter the kingdom of god?

---

These are great questions. Asking questions mean that you are thinking.

I would assume that this would fall into the category of Baptism by desire. The individual desires baptism, but for whatever reason, they are unable to be baptized.

BearWithMe said:

---

Or perhaps a more realistic example, let's say there is a village of people in an extremely arid region where their only source of water is through a deep well, thus, they are physically incapable of baptizing in water. Do they get a free pass?

---

See answer to question 1, but let me add that the Catholic Church has never made full immersion into water as a requirement for a valid baptism.

The only requirements are matter, form, and intent.

Matter - water. Not Coke, Pepsi, Beer, Tea, etc.
Form - the baptizer used the words "I baptize you in the Name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit."
Intent - the baptizer truly intends to baptize the person (i.e. not in a movie or play, etc)

The Didache (a document that dates back to the first century - which is most likely the first Catechism) succinctly describes how to baptize:

And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19 in living water. But if you have not living water, baptize into other water; and if you can not in cold, in warm. But if you have not either, pour out water thrice upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whatever others can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.


According to the authors of this ancient text, and the Catholic Church confirms this, one can be baptized immersion or pouring.

Quote:

---

The only requirements are matter, form, and intent.

Matter - water. Not Coke, Pepsi, Beer, Tea, etc.
Form - the baptizer used the words "I baptize you in the Name of the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Spirit."
Intent - the baptizer truly intends to baptize the person (i.e. not in a movie or play, etc)

The Didache (a document that dates back to the first century - which is most likely the first Catechism) succinctly describes how to baptize:

And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19 in living water. But if you have not living water, baptize into other water; and if you can not in cold, in warm. But if you have not either, pour out water thrice upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whatever others can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before.

---

Interesting - thanks for the reference!

So to confirm then, Baptism is not actually required to receive salvation, but instead, it is required that you desire to be baptized? Whether that happens or not depends on your personal circumstances.

Mark 2:10 But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins."

This is an important verse in understanding the woman caught in adultery and the thief on the cross. They received forgiveness directly from Jesus when lived on earth. Does not apply to us today.

BearWithMe said:

---

Interesting - thanks for the reference!

So to confirm then, Baptism is not actually required to receive salvation, but instead, it is required that you desire to be baptized? Whether that happens or not depends on your personal circumstances.

---

I'm not a theologian, but I believe that your statement would be summarized in the positive such as, baptism is required for salvation, whether it be by water, blood, or desire.

The Catechism of the Catholic Church says the following in p. 1257:

The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.60 He also commands his disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them.61 Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. The Church does not know of any means other than Baptism that assures entry into eternal beatitude; this is why she takes care not to neglect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized are "reborn of water and the Spirit."

60. John 3:5
61. Matthew 28:19-20

Oldbear83 said:

---

xfrodobagginsx said:

---

Harrison Bergeron said:

---

How does a thread about heaven devolve into a gigantic Trumpgasm circle jerk. The T Facers may be the craziest fundamentalist since the Stalin and Hitler crowds.

---

So then you are a Liberal Democrat? They are the ones who are like Stalin and Hitler. It explains a lot. That's what a thought. Liberal with Theology-Liberal with Politics. Liberalism is poison and toxic.

---

"I am gentle and humble in heart," Jesus Christ, Matthew 11:29


"be peaceable and considerate, and always to be gentle toward everyone." Paul, Titus 3:2


"Be completely humble and gentle; be patient, bearing with one another in love." Paul, Ephesians 4:2


So I ask again, Frodo, what Spirit is that which speaks through you, and how do you reconcile it with what Paul and Christ taught?

---

I have the Holy Spirit living in me. So, are you now admitting that Paul's Books are inspired of God?


2Ti 4:2 Preach the word; be instant in season, out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort with all longsuffering and doctrine.

Th 5:14 Now we exhort you, brethren, warn them that are unruly, comfort the feebleminded, support the weak, be patient toward all men.

Tit 2:15 These things speak, and exhort, and rebuke with all authority. Let no man despise thee.

Which spirit speaks through you? Because didn't you say that Paul is wrong? How do you reconcile that with trying to use Paul to rebuke me for correcting your false teachings?

Frodo: "I have the Holy Spirit living in me"

Let that Spirit speak then. You have suppressed it often in this thread.


And please explain why you are so hostile to Christ's words as I have quoted.

And why you reject even your favorite Paul when he disagrees with you.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Jesus never once said that we are done once we have faith. Faith leads to great things, yes, but Christ told many parables about following through and doing the work, and warned that we could lose what we have if we are slack in obeying God's orders.

The parable of the wise and foolish virgins, for example, as well as when the Master arrives home; one must be vigilant. Jesus quite clearly said that His brothers and sisters were not those you called him 'Lord', but those who did the Will of the Father.

As for water baptism, what is your opinion, BusyTarpDuster, as to why Jesus considered it essential that He be baptised? Obviously He did not need baptism for his soul's safety, but Jesus was direct and emphatic about being baptized, and He baptized people all through His ministry. What purpose do you see there from Christ's point of view?

---

If you're saying we aren't saved unless we "folow through and do the work", then that's a works-based gospel. And then you have to answer how much success we need to have in our performing of that work. Do weak Christians or brand new Christians who still struggle with sin lose their salvation if they die, even if they believed in Jesus with all their heart? Wouldn't this falsify Jesus' words in John 3:16? You don't believe we can have assurance of our salvation, then, correct?

The purpose of Jesus' water baptism is given to us - in Matthew 3:15 Jesus said it was to "fulfill all righteousness" since he had to perfectly fulfill the law and the prophecies to be the Messiah. John I:31 also tells us it was to "reveal him(Jesus) to Israel". It was NOT to baptize Jesus for the same reasons that the Israeli people were getting it for. Nor was for it the same reasons we get baptized today.

For the people of Israel, John's water baptism is clearly said in Mark 1:4 to be a "baptism of repentance". It was to prepare the hearts of the people of Israel for Jesus. John the Baptist even said "I baptize only with water. Jesus will baptize you with the Holy Spirit." Water baptism is a public, symbolic gesture of repentance. You can be repentant without water baptism. Repentance comes from the heart, and I sincerely doubt Jesus is going to reject anyone's repentance just because it wasn't done through water baptism. It's Jesus' baptism with the Holy Spirit that saves.

BusyTarpDuster: 'If you're saying we aren't saved unless we "folow through and do the work", then that's a works-based gospel. And then you have to answer how much success we need to have in our performing of that work. Do weak Christians or brand new Christians who still struggle with sin lose their salvation if they die, even if they believed in Jesus with all their heart? Wouldn't this falsify Jesus' words in John 3:16? You don't believe we can have assurance of our salvation, then, correct?"

I have quoted you Jesus warnings that only those who do His work His brothers and sisters.

I have quoted you Christ's parables about the wise and foolish virgins, His warnings that some would fall away. Those warnings do not 'falsify' John 3:16, they remind us that we need to work our Salvation out, again as Scripture says, with 'fear and trembling'.

You wrote about believing with "all your heart". The problem is that people can confuse strong emotion with commitment that may not be there. Remember how Peter was so sure he would never deny Christ, only to do exactly what Jesus warned he would do.

This in no way means that a new Christian cannot be true, but consider Luke 22:31-32, where Jesus warned Peter that Satan wanted to trap and trick all the disciples, " But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers."

Peter was true in his belief, yet he would fail in that test. This is why in John 21:15-19, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. This was to restore Peter's trust and belief, which had been badly damaged when he denied Christ after the arrest.

Now, some say smoothly that Peter was never in peril of losing his salvation, but I disagree. I believe Christ works hard to keep us within the flock and safe from falling back into the old ways. The Holy Spirit is active not only in seeking new members for the Church, but also in protection and growth of all of us.

This is why we should not trust in just one verse or another and imagine it is the whole of God's Word. Scripture foes not contradict itself, so it is important to study all of it, but with keen attention to Christ's teaching and example.

BusyTarpDuster: "The purpose of Jesus' water baptism is given to us - in Matthew 3:15 Jesus said it was to "fulfill all righteousness" since he had to perfectly fulfill the law and the prophecies to be the Messiah. John I:31 also tells us it was to "reveal him(Jesus) to Israel". It was NOT to baptize Jesus for the same reasons that the Israeli people were getting it for. Nor was for it the same reasons we get baptized today."

Would you please elaborate on what role you see today for baptism? I read about Jesus baptizing people, and His followers doing the same throughout their missions. You can see from Saabing Bear and Coke Bear that they regard baptism as essential for Salvation.

I don't think baptism is some point God will use to disqualify people from entering Heaven, but I do see a purpose and power in the ordinance which makes it part of becoming a believer in practice; first steps as it were.

I also admit that I am influenced by something I learned from my father. My dad helped missionaries in China during the 1980s and 1990s, and he noted that while the Chinese government had no complaint about nominal Christians worshipping, they had strong prohibitions against baptizing believers. There was something about baptizing believers that the Communists really hated. I have always found that important to keep in mind.

Coke Bear said:

---

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

If a meteor was about to land on me, and I fully believed you, but something happened where I couldn't move, then even though I believed you, I will still perish, and I won't be saved. If that is the case with salvation, then Jesus saying that "whoever believes in me will not perish, but have everlasting life" is false because someone can believe in him, yet still not be saved.

If you are saying that in such a case you are trusting God to do right, then suppose God decides NOT to save him - how would that be right, if that would falsify Jesus' words? Wouldn't "right" be to always save such a person, true to Jesus' words? And if so, doesn't that mean then that water baptism is not required for salvation?

---

I mentioned to you a few weeks ago that the Catholic Church's stance on this is clear. If one has desire, but dies before they are able to be baptized they will be saved.

The Church recognizes that baptism can occur by water, fire, or desire. I've described them earlier, but let me know if you would like me to do that again.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

And where does it say in the bible that at water baptism our sins are removed?

---

Acts 22:16 -
16 And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name.'

Acts 2:38 -
38 Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

1 Peter 3:21 -
21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Jesus was able to forgive peoples' sins on the spot, without water baptism. For example, in Luke 7:44-50, he told the sinful woman that her sins were forgiven without water baptism. And then Jesus said to her, "Your faith has saved you; go in peace." And in Mark chapter 2 - "And when Jesus saw their faith, he said to the paralytic, "Son, your sins are forgiven." In neither of these cases was water baptism required for the forgiveness of sins, only faith. And what about the thief on the cross, who we can safely assume was not water baptized? If Jesus is able to do this without water baptism, why can't we have our sins removed in the same manner? Why is Jesus all of sudden limited to only being capable of forgiving us only if we dunk ourselves in water?

---

You ask a very good question: "Why or how can Jesus do this without water baptism but not us?"

The Church tells us in CCC 1257 -

... God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments.

God can operate outside the sacraments. We cannot.

---

Yes, you were good enough to actually give a direct response to my questions, something I had a hard time getting from others. But I asked you a question after your responses, and it went unanswered.

What I understood from you is that if someone desires baptism, or would have desired baptism if they knew it to be essential for salvation, then they are saved. But this basically means that baptism isn't required, doesn't it?

The catechism "... God has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but he himself is not bound by his sacraments" is a contradiction, isn't it? If God isn't bound by his sacraments, why then is He bound by the sacrament of water baptism for salvation? You're saying that God is not bound by the sacraments he is bound by.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster: "The purpose of Jesus' water baptism is given to us - in Matthew 3:15 Jesus said it was to "fulfill all righteousness" since he had to perfectly fulfill the law and the prophecies to be the Messiah. John I:31 also tells us it was to "reveal him(Jesus) to Israel". It was NOT to baptize Jesus for the same reasons that the Israeli people were getting it for. Nor was for it the same reasons we get baptized today."

Would you please elaborate on what role you see today for baptism? I read about Jesus baptizing people, and His followers doing the same throughout their missions. You can see from Saabing Bear and Coke Bear that they regard baptism as essential for Salvation.

I don't think baptism is some point God will use to disqualify people from entering Heaven, but I do see a purpose and power in the ordinance which makes it part of becoming a believer in practice; first steps as it were.

I also admit that I am influenced by something I learned from my father. My dad helped missionaries in China during the 1980s and 1990s, and he noted that while the Chinese government had no complaint about nominal Christians worshipping, they had strong prohibitions against baptizing believers. There was something about baptizing believers that the Communists really hated. I have always found that important to keep in mind.

---

I'm only gonna reference this part what you said:

"I don't think baptism is some point God will use to disqualify people from entering Heaven..."

Thank you. Good grief, you agree with what I've been saying this whole time. You just wanted to fight.

Oldbear83 said:

---

Frodo: "I have the Holy Spirit living in me"

Let that Spirit speak then. You have suppressed it often in this thread.


And please explain why you are so hostile to Christ's words as I have quoted.

And why you reject even your favorite Paul when he disagrees with you.

---

I have no suppressed the Spirit. I have spoken the truth of the Word of God and you have rejected it.

Please explain why you believe Christ's Words when He was on the Earth, BUT
You reject Christ's Words that He gave to Paul?

Paul doesn't disagree with me.

You don't like the fact that Christ sent Paul to be the Apostle of the Gentiles and that I accept the message that Christ Jesus gave to him:

Ro 11:13 For I speak to you Gentiles, inasmuch as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office:

Salvation is not by Works. If it were, then Christ died for nothing:

Ga 2:21 I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain.

(KJV)

Ga 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

(KJV)

Ga 5:2 Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

BusyTarpDuster: "You just wanted to fight."

** sigh **

No, I was never doing that. I have been consistent all along (good grief, I agreed to the main point on page one), but was addressing subsequent implications of posts made.

You and Frodo are very big on winning internet fights, at least on this topic.

Sad, you seem to miss some interesting observations.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster: "You just wanted to fight."

** sigh **

No, I was never doing that. I have been consistent all along (good grief, I agreed to the main point on page one), but was addressing subsequent implications of posts made.

You and Frodo are very big on winning internet fights, at least on this topic.

Sad, you seem to miss some interesting observations.

---

You can "sigh" all you want. The record shows that you AGREED with what I'm saying, but you still chose to bicker with me repeatedly. That's all that really needs to be said here.

You are so bad at self-awareness. You can't even see that it's YOU who is trying to "win a fight" by arguing against us, even though you agree with us. You chose to argue a tangential point that we weren't even asserting, just so you can argue.

You repeatedly make comments that make no logical sense, so much so that you are frustrating to read. Believe me, it is I who have been "sighing" at you. Your comment "No, I was never doing that. I have been consistent all along...." makes no sense. I said you just wanted to fight, not that you weren't inconsistent. In fact, I DO think you've been consistent - consistently ridiculous with all your unnecessary bickering with other Christians about tangential points of your choice that the other wasn't even arguing, while making contradictory, illogical comments in the process.

I think those "observations" you think I'm "missing" are only interesting to you. The only observation here that matters is this: you agree with what I'm saying, yet the record shows you constantly fighting against it.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster: 'If you're saying we aren't saved unless we "folow through and do the work", then that's a works-based gospel. And then you have to answer how much success we need to have in our performing of that work. Do weak Christians or brand new Christians who still struggle with sin lose their salvation if they die, even if they believed in Jesus with all their heart? Wouldn't this falsify Jesus' words in John 3:16? You don't believe we can have assurance of our salvation, then, correct?"

I have quoted you Jesus warnings that only those who do His work His brothers and sisters.

I have quoted you Christ's parables about the wise and foolish virgins, His warnings that some would fall away. Those warnings do not 'falsify' John 3:16, they remind us that we need to work our Salvation out, again as Scripture says, with 'fear and trembling'.

You wrote about believing with "all your heart". The problem is that people can confuse strong emotion with commitment that may not be there. Remember how Peter was so sure he would never deny Christ, only to do exactly what Jesus warned he would do.

This in no way means that a new Christian cannot be true, but consider Luke 22:31-32, where Jesus warned Peter that Satan wanted to trap and trick all the disciples, " But I have prayed for you, Simon, that your faith may not fail. And when you have turned back, strengthen your brothers."

Peter was true in his belief, yet he would fail in that test. This is why in John 21:15-19, Jesus asked Peter three times if he loved him. This was to restore Peter's trust and belief, which had been badly damaged when he denied Christ after the arrest.

Now, some say smoothly that Peter was never in peril of losing his salvation, but I disagree. I believe Christ works hard to keep us within the flock and safe from falling back into the old ways. The Holy Spirit is active not only in seeking new members for the Church, but also in protection and growth of all of us.

This is why we should not trust in just one verse or another and imagine it is the whole of God's Word. Scripture foes not contradict itself, so it is important to study all of it, but with keen attention to Christ's teaching and example.

---

You: "I have quoted you Jesus warnings that only those who do His work His brothers and sisters."

And isn't that "work" faith itself? Here's another Jesus quote for you:

"Do not work for food that perishes, but for food that endures to eternal life, which the Son of Man will give you. For on Him God the Father has placed His seal of approval."

Then they inquired, "What must we do to perform the works of God?"

Jesus replied, "The work of God is this: to believe in the One He has sent."

John 6:27-29

OldBear: "Christ told many parables about following through and doing the work, and warned that we could lose what we have if we are slack in obeying God's orders."

How is this not promoting a works-based salvation?? You are literally saying we have to "do the work" or we won't be saved. You are literally using the word "work" and tying it to whether you are saved or not.

Again with the arguing and harassing.

Worst of all, you imagine you are doing nothing wrong.

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster: "You just wanted to fight."

** sigh **

No, I was never doing that. I have been consistent all along (good grief, I agreed to the main point on page one), but was addressing subsequent implications of posts made.

You and Frodo are very big on winning internet fights, at least on this topic.

Sad, you seem to miss some interesting observations.

---

"but (I) was addressing subsequent implications of posts made."

The implication of saying that water baptism doesn't save is NOT that baptism becomes useless or unimportant. This is an implication merely created erroneously in your head. It was never even implied by us. Yet this is what you wanted to constantly fight about.

saabing bear said:

---

Mark 2:10 But I want you to know that the Son of Man has authority on earth to forgive sins."

This is an important verse in understanding the woman caught in adultery and the thief on the cross. They received forgiveness directly from Jesus when lived on earth. Does not apply to us today.

---

Can you explain how it does not apply to us today, and where you came up with this belief? Why could Jesus only do this while he was alive on earth in his physical, corruptible body, but he can't today while he is still alive in Spirit and in his glorified, resurrection body? Where did his authority to forgive sins go? Didn't Jesus say after his resurrection that "ALL authority in heaven and earth has been given to me"? Why would he lose the authority to forgive sins AFTER his glorification?

I apply Jeremiah 17:23 to you then.

Oldbear83 said:

---

I apply Jeremiah 17:23 to you then.

---

If you agree with what I'm saying, the how does it apply? Or are you saying I'm wrong, that salvation is based on works and water baptism? Do you or do you not believe in works-based or water baptism-based salvation?

Quit talking out of both sides of your mouth, and be clear and direct for once. Just answer the question succinctly. It'll be MUCH for fruitful for discussion.

BusyTarpDuster2017 said:

---

Oldbear83 said:

---

BusyTarpDuster: "You just wanted to fight."

** sigh **

No, I was never doing that. I have been consistent all along (good grief, I agreed to the main point on page one), but was addressing subsequent implications of posts made.

You and Frodo are very big on winning internet fights, at least on this topic.

Sad, you seem to miss some interesting observations.

---

You can "sigh" all you want. The record shows that you AGREED with what I'm saying, but you still chose to bicker with me repeatedly. That's all that really needs to be said here.

You are so bad at self-awareness. You can't even see that it's YOU who is trying to "win a fight" by arguing against us, even though you agree with us. You chose to argue a tangential point that we weren't even asserting, just so you can argue.

You repeatedly make comments that make no logical sense, so much so that you are frustrating to read. Believe me, it is I who have been "sighing" at you. Your comment "No, I was never doing that. I have been consistent all along...." makes no sense. I said you just wanted to fight, not that you weren't inconsistent. In fact, I DO think you've been consistent - consistently ridiculous with all your unnecessary bickering with other Christians about tangential points of your choice that the other wasn't even arguing, while making contradictory, illogical comments in the process.

I think those "observations" you think I'm "missing" are only interesting to you. The only observation here that matters is this: you agree with what I'm saying, yet the record shows you constantly fighting against it.

---

You make good points.