Posted on 10/06/2015 10:35:57 AM PDT by envisio
I think he meant the so-called Reformation was wrong as well, which makes it more modern or a legend with no recorded history. This does not even take into account the other heresies proposed on this thread by other faith communities devolved from the Reformation.
====== The Summary ======
It is beyond supposition that when Jesus knocked down Saul and confirmed directly to Saul Who this Presence of Glory was, immediately Saul recognized that He was The Lord, called Him by title, clearly observed that He had been raised from the dead, and believed in Jesus as Messiah and Lord Jehovah so much as to immediately yield himself in obedience to Jesus, calling Him "Lord" and asking what he should do as a repentant totally committed brand-new believer, saved by faith alone in Jesus alone, and still seeking to serve Jehovah, but no longer in dark and religious blindness.
By these signs Saul had--according to Scripture--at that moment, his conscience pricked, acknowledged his sins of persecuting Christ through harming His followers, was forgiven, cleansed of sin-guilt by the blood of Christ, and from that moment did never turn back to the old life (unlike Peter who after his calling did time after time after time drop away from following Jesus, despite being rebuked).
In this passage of Acts 9, Jesus did not command Saul to be baptized. What Jesus did was to give the commandments to:
(1) get up;
(2) finish his journey; and
(3) wait until he was told (no messenger or method explained) what (no task mentioned) to do.
This Saul did, and after proceeding to his lodgings (with Judas, probably a fellow unsaved Pharisee), and in utter faith waited there without asking "How long?" and with great precision, did not do anything, refraining from any action outside The Lord's orders--not even eating nor drinking nor finding an emergency room, obeying to the minutest detail just as a slave alert for the next order from the Lord as to how to meet his needs for food or water.
For these three days (the Lord had not indicated how long), but long enough for him to know what the Lord knew about Saul, that he would sit and wait, continually praying, till the Lord issued futher instructions, waiting in anticipation even to death if need be, trusting (like the saved-by-faith-without-baptism sufferer (Job 12:15 and 23:12) that he probably was meditating on) that he was in the arms of Jesus.
As a trained Pharisee, there obviously was never a doubt that if he died while yet waiting, his grace-filled soul would be transported at least to Abraham's Bosom/Paradise through trusting in his salvation that he certainly now knew he possessed.
Even in his old life, Saul could not have been considering slaying the people of the Way, without knowing exactly what their doctrine was as compared to his false, tradition-poisoned doctrine obtained from the religious "scholars" of his day, and of the Christian tapologetic for the doctrine of salvation by faith apart from works of any kind.
But how glad he must have been when the Lord gave him a vision of someone coming to restore his sight, the act accomplished by the signs of laying his hand on Saul, a man called "Ananias." This Damascan disciple (all genuinely saved Christ-imitators are αγιοι, hagioi, saints) came, bearing the Word of prophecy, and announced what the Lord told him to tell Saul regarding the ministry that Saul would be embarking on. Here is what the Lord told Ananias about Saul:
"Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake" (Acts 9:15b,c,d-16).
Note here that the Lord said "he is a chosen vessel ," not "he will be." The Holy Ghost is always very precise describing the event by Luke's report by eye-witnesses. The "is" here gives us every reason to assume that Paul has repented, been saved, and given a new assignment by God in view of that assent to do the Lord's bidding.
Furthermore, God has given Ananias only the instructions as to what he himself was to do: go, find Saul, and place your hand upon Saul for restoring his sight). Going on, God limited the information that Ananias might prophetically announce concerning Saul's office and occupation: that he was a chosen instrument, this making him a Disciple-Apostle (unlike Matthias, who was not chosen by the Lord, in the forty days after His resurrection while He was walking with them, Acts 1:26), to carry His reputation to all cultural tribes (παντα τα εθνη, Mt. 28:19, both Jews and Gentiles, Rom. 1:15-16). And that is it. The Lord did not Ananias any further instruction for Ananias to tell Saul to get up and get baptized.
However, we know, as Ananias did, that the general overall parting instruction of the Risen Messiah Jesus was that His disciples were, as they were journeying, to make more disciples from all the tribes tey would meet (the fruit of a disciple is more disciples, Jn. 15:5, 16), and to baptize these recruited learners, and only these learners when they became qualified by their considered profession of loyalty to Jesus.
Therefore, under that general condition of following whatsoever Jesus had commanded, Ananias implicitly knew that this new repentant, faithful, redeemed, obedient, selected disciple-apostle ought to be urged to immediately and publicly exhibit and confirm his new eternal commitment to Christ by baptism; the mode showing that he had been ritually "cleansed" of sins by immersion in living water in the name and by the authority of the Elohim, the Godhead, as by the same method that all observant Jews to this day execute, even now being ritually purified in the mikvah.
So in restoring Saul's sight and delivering God's information, Ananias was performing a prophet's duties, the words being inspired: "Thus saith the Lord." But in offering the general counsel that all baptized believers would give to the new Spirit-regenerated believer-disciple, that person ought to demonstate the rite of induction into the Company of The Committed by the rite of public oral statement belief (the old Roman symbol of The Faith (click here)), followed by the immersion as described in Romans 6:3-4), Ananias was performing the disciple-teacher's duties.
As you can see, this baptism is completely outside the way we ought to treat infants, and its correct nbderstanding directs us as to the way we should discipleize children as they grow into personal accountability, into The Faith. Neither babies nor Saul are saved by applying what was intended to be the induction rite for believing disciples.
It further shows that the passage Acts 22:13-16 identifies Saul as a redeemed soul counted as a Christian brother by Ananias in his accurate acceptance of the Lord's proclamation of a servant chosen by Him, but his greeting is in uninspired words, just ordinary conversation, as he prepared Saul to receive the spiritual blessing by the act of laying on of the prophet's hands, through which Saul's sight was restored.
Going on to verses 14 and 15, we there see the exercise of the prophetic duty to announce to Saul what God desired of him--an extraordinary function.
Then in verse 16 Ananias reverts to the ordinary form of communication, using entirely justified urging but in uninspired words, for Saul to get right up and get baptized, and announce his new status with the Lord by public profession by testimony and submitting to the commonly accepted and usual ritual of disciples' (water) baptism in his first act of obedience to following the Lord's command as His bondslave.
======= The Conclusions ======
Now, none of this demeans, denigrates, nor impeaches The Lord, The Holy Spirit, Luke, Ananias, Paul, or the Scripture. If there is any impeachment, it is toward the complete dullness in your decoding of the Scripture's meaning and in describing the plan of salvation, as well as in applying the rules of logic and discernment to this saga.
What you have done is to camp on the verse Acts 22:16, with your interpretation assuming that it means that Sauls sins were not forgiven until during/after being immersed, being closed-minded as to its validity, and not comparing the rest of Scripture with that verse to discern what exactly was meant by Ananias. Then you take this proposition, go back to Saul arising from his epiphany and going on to Damascus, and apparently in your scenario, unforgiven whether or not abased, confessed, repentant, and/or believing. Then you take us on to Acts 22, tell us, "See! Ha! Saul had to be baptized to have his sins washed away and thus get his sins washed, and thus saved!"
This is simply circular reasoning, leading to erroneous imaginations and a false gospel.
My FRiend, it won't wash, and I will not accept the gospel you subscribe to, nor recommend it to anyone else.
You know what guys? Quite frankly, I could care less what anyone thinks about baptism. I want to know what is their plan of salvation. I want to know how they plan to get past the prying eye of God, and into Heaven. After all, that is most important thing in all of creation. What good does it do someone, if they have an issue or two right, here and there, and still end up in eternal fire, where the smoke of their torment goes up forever? (Rev 14:11)
I think it’s fine
We had rededications when I was young in my SBC a butch
It’s Good News actually in the old vernacular
You have denied that the words recorded in scripture from the mouth of Ananias are inspired, even though the LORD Jesus appeared to Ananias, appeared to Saul, told them both what to do, which was recorded in Acts under the inspiration of the Holy Spirit without error, doubt, rebuke, or disapproval of anything that Ananias is recorded as saying. Therefore you do err. And as he journeyed, he came near Damascus: and suddenly there shined round about him a light from heaven: And he fell to the earth, and heard a voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest: it is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. And he trembling and astonished said, Lord, what wilt thou have me to do? And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the city, and it shall be told thee what thou must do. And the men which journeyed with him stood speechless, hearing a voice, but seeing no man. And Saul arose from the earth; and when his eyes were opened, he saw no man: but they led him by the hand, and brought him into Damascus. And he was three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink. And there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and to him said the Lord in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold, I am here, Lord. And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and enquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth, And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight. Then Ananias answered, Lord, I have heard by many of this man, how much evil he hath done to thy saints at Jerusalem: And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name. But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel: For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake. And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized. And it came to pass, that, as I made my journey, and was come nigh unto Damascus about noon, suddenly there shone from heaven a great light round about me. And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest. And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me. And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do. And when I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of them that were with me, I came into Damascus. And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there, Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him. And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard. And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
Acts, Catholic chapter nine, Protestant verses three to eighteen,
Acts, Catholic chapter twenty two, Protestant verses six to sixteen,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James,
bold emphasis and color selection mine
You might be projecting the sense that liberty means license. I don't think you want to encourage that, do you?
I don't care of one is highly educated college professor or very adept and successful businessman in world affairs before yielding to Christ. When one is taught of the Faith of Christ that saves and accepts it, one does not immediately become a mature Christian. One must become as, and becomes, a babe in Christ and God to become saved. Yieldjng to Him regarding cancelling one's sins, believing in His righteousness and gracious love, and understanding Him as a disciplinarian of both just and unjust, yes. But as to knowing Him intimately, no. That takes many years, and is not a smooth path in this world.
The newly born-again one is a babe in Christ, and without being led by discipleship into greater maturity by others who have themselves been discipled, one stays behind as a "crib Christian," feeding on the milk of the Gospel (salvation), but missing the meat of the Gospel (taking up one's Cross) through intimate experience of The Father, The Son, The Holy Spirit, and His mature saints who have walked the Blood-soaked path with Him.
When saved, one becomes free from the penalty of sin, but freed only to love, serve, and obey Him through learning to discard sinful attitudes and habits, now having been freed from the power of sin before which we had no ability to abandon the claims of Sin and Satan as masters, depraved self as the governor, and the world system as the intruding environment. Think of Pinnochio.
Gaining spiritual maturity is not a boot-strapping operation of "Just me, God, and the Bible." That is not God's plan. And that is why Christ has given us the local autonomous faithful, Bible-preaching, disciplining, evangelizing assembly of regenerated disciple-priests to--with Him the Church's Head--oversee and improve our experience in the culture of Christ.
And the rules of its conduct are not the world's rules. For the believer to grow in grace and conduct, the commands of Christ and His Apostles must be taught, understood, and followed. One is not "free" as a bondslave of Christ, to just behave and do as the old nature desires.
Do you think your "historical orthodox Christian beliefs" make it easier to know Christ, or harder?
If these are truly Biblical standards, yes, much more so than trying to make your way in the Christian culture by just setting up your own rules as they occur to you. Is this liberty in Christ? No, it is refusing His Plan A for one's nurture. There is no Plan B, the only alternative is anarchy and is the way our old man responds to Satan's way of undermining the pillar and foundation of God's work on earth.
If it is the rules of the Roman denomination, no, it is full of extra-biblical practices that bear little or no relation to the fifty command of Christ recorded in the New Testament.
And, do they ALL agree with His Word when it is rightly divided?
No, they don't ALL agree. That's why the local church, not some broad-flung denominational band of associated churches who can never get it right throughout never was and is not of God's plan, IMHO after almost eighty years of observing them. But that's why we have the Bible, and why the Bible's authority, sola Scriptura, is the only doctrine that spiritually bonds, though physically separate, all local autonomous assemblies that remain healthy and productive in evangelizing enlisting, enabling, employing, and enriching true, mature, blood-washed, serving saints of God. With minor but non-disabling differences people from these assemblies throughout the world know of their fellowship and unity of mind and purpose in advancing the interests of the Kingdom of The God, Rick Warren not withstanding.<
If you think this is done without applying Christian discipline, through systems already demonstrated to be Biblically planned and effective, you would be wrong. But if you are thinking of assembly environments that emphasize relationships to Christ and each other rather than rules and rituals, and reliability of Scripture more than citations from past and current religious leaders, you would be right.
Respectfully --
Your statements regarding the analyses I have posted are illogical and asinine, and your habit of following them with passages of Scripture cannot and does not make your claims more sensible.
I would suggest that if you intend to post these passages, you might at least give some kind of rationale as to how and why you think they support your position. Oterwise, as I said before, you're just wasting bandwidth.
Since you continue in this irrational pattern, with no modification of your approach, there does not seem to be any reason to continue to debate you.
You have denied, and persist therein, that Ananias' words to Paul as recorded by the Apostle and the Holy Spirit are inspired of God. And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also? Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.
John, Catholic chapter, Protestant verses forty to forty one,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James
You have denied, and persist therein, that Ananias' words to Paul as recorded by the Apostle and the Holy Spirit are inspired of God. And some of the Pharisees which were with him heard these words, and said unto him, Are we blind also? Jesus said unto them, If ye were blind, ye should have no sin: but now ye say, We see; therefore your sin remaineth.
John, Catholic chapter nine, Protestant verses forty to forty one,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James
1 Corinthians 12:13
When Ananias healed Paul’s eyesight by laying hands on him, who healed the eyesight Ananias or the Holy Spirit?
When the Church baptized someone into Christ, are they regenerated by the Church or the Holy Spirit.
1 Corinthians is not teaching there are two baptisms, one spirit and one water. No the Scriptures are clear there is only one baptism, it is the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and has been going on in obedience to Jesus’s command for almost 2,000 years now.
The Bible doesn’t say it will take 2,000 years for someone to figure out how to “ rightly divide the Word”, but it does say in the latter days many false prophets will arise. Hmm....
I do agree no one baptized using three names. Go read Matthew 28:19 again carefully, you will notice the word name is singular not plural.
You do mention there were some faithful Christians “tortured and put to death” after the first century........I hear that a lot but they never have any names. Can you name some faithful Christians in the 2nd, 3rd and 4th centuries that rightly divided the word and were tortured and killed? Not asking for 1,000, just one would do. Any???
Finally, is there some teacher that has written a book in the last 50 years that you could recommend to,me to learn more about why the three names weren’t used in baptism and what the third commission is? I am fascinated by this rightly dividing the word.
My plan for salvation is being in Christ. According to the Scriptures, there is only one way into Christ, one is baptized into Christ.
Are you in Christ? If yes, show me anywhere in the Scriptures where it says there is another way into Christ other than baptism.
What a lot of words trying to make Acts 22:16 mean something else than what it says......namely Paul needed to be baptized to have his sins forgiven. Welcome to the Christian Faith taught and believed for 2,000 years.
“I could care less what anyone thinks about baptism. I want to know what is their plan of salvation. I want to know how they plan to get past the prying eye of God, and into Heaven. After all, that is most important thing in all of creation. What good does it do someone, if they have an issue or two right, here and there, and still end up in eternal fire, where the smoke of their torment goes up forever? (Rev 14:11)”
Amen.
People who do not have eternal life by entrusting themselves to Christ alone for salvation...
... and then get baptized...
Just become wet sinners.
One thing I can count on: your words are not inspired, nor even well considered, so I take my leave of you for now.
That is not at all the import of the passages considered, nor is it consistent with Paul’s explanations of God’s plan of salvation, no matter how you bloviate. Wish your attitude toward Bible truths were different. My FRiend, you’re on sinking sand as far as redemption is concerned. Please reconsider.
Romans 1:16-17, a good Lutheran standby — and Ephesians 2:8-10 which doesn’t yield to Roman spin.
Romans 6:3-4
Romans 6:3-4 does not effect salvation. The action is symbolic, a figurative rehearsal of something that has already happened for the believer.
Where do you find the word symbolic anywhere in Romans 6?
It describes what happens when someone is baptized into Christ, we are baptized into his death.
Where is the symbolism?
Funny how when the historical faith is denied, all kinds of clear biblical passages must take on new unheard of meanings.
Woe unto them that are wise in their own eyes, and prudent in their own sight!
Be not wise in thine own eyes: fear the LORD, and depart from evil.
so I take my leave of you for now
This being the third cmment to this effect, like the cock crowing thrice, so to speak.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.