Posted on 01/16/2015 5:56:35 AM PST by metmom
CLASSIFICATION IS ONE OF THE MOST DIFFICULT of all tasks. Even in the realm of religion there are enough lights and shades to make it injudicious to draw too fine a line between men and men. If the religious world were composed of squares of solid black and solid white classification would be easy; but unfortunately it is not.
It is a grave error for us evangelicals to assume that the children of God are all in our communion and that all who are not associated with us are ipso facto enemies of the Lord. The Pharisees made that mistake and crucified Christ as a consequence.
With all this in mind, and leaning over backwards to be fair and charitable, there is yet one distinction which we dare make, which indeed we must make if we are to think the thoughts of God after Him and bring our beliefs into harmony with the Holy Scriptures. That distinction is the one which exists between two classes of human beings, the once-born and the twice-born.
That such a distinction does in fact exist was taught by our Lord with great plainness of speech, in contexts which preclude the possibility that He was merely speaking figuratively. "Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God," He said, and the whole chapter where these words are found confirms that He was speaking precisely, setting forth meanings as blunt and downright as it is possible for language to convey.
"Ye must be born again," said Christ. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." This clear line of demarcation runs through the entire New Testament, quite literally dividing one human being from another and making a distinction as sharp as that which exists between different genera of the animal kingdom.
Just who belongs to one class and who to the other it is not always possible to judge, though the two kinds of life ordinarily separate from each other. Those who are twice-born crystallize around the Person of Christ and cluster together in companies, while the once-born are held together only by the ties of nature, aided by the ties of race or by common political and social interests.
Our Lord warned His disciples that they would be persecuted. "In the world ye shall have tribulation," He said, and "Blessed are they which are persecuted for righteousness' sake: for theirs is the kingdom of heaven. Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you, and persecute you, and shall say all manner of evil against you falsely, for my sake."
These are only two of many passages of the New Testament warning of persecution or recording the fact of harassment and attack suffered by the followers of the Lord. This same idea runs through the entire Bible from the once-born Cain who slew the twice-born Abel to the Book of the Revelation where the end of human history comes in a burst of blood and fire.
That hostility exists between the once-born and the twice-born is known to every student of the Bible; the reason for it was stated by Christ when He said, "If ye were of the world, the world would love his own: but because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the world, therefore the world hateth you." The rule was laid down by the apostle Paul when he wrote, "But as then he that was born after the flesh persecuted him that was born after the Spirit, even so it is now."
Difference of moral standards between the onceborn and the twice-born, and their opposite ways of life, may be contributing causes of this hostility; but the real cause lies deeper. There are two spirits abroad in the earth: the spirit that works in the children of disobedience and the Spirit of God. These two can never be reconciled in time or in eternity. The spirit that dwells in the once-born is forever opposed to the Spirit that inhabits the heart of the twice-born. This hostility began somewhere in the remote past before the creation of man and continues to this day. The modern effort to bring peace between these two spirits is not only futile but contrary to the moral laws of the universe.
To teach that the spirit of the once-born is at enmity with the Spirit of the twice-born is to bring down upon one's head every kind of violent abuse. No language is too bitter to hurl against the conceited bigot who would dare to draw such a line of distinction between men. Such malignant ideas are at odds with the brotherhood of man, says the once-born, and are held only by the apostles of disunity and hate. This mighty rage against the twice-born only serves to confirm the truth they teach. But this no one seems to notice.
What we need to restore power to the Christian testimony is not soft talk about brotherhood but an honest recognition that two human races occupy the earth simultaneously: a fallen race that sprang from the loins of Adam and a regenerate race that is born of the Spirit through the redemption which is in Christ Jesus.
To accept this truth requires a tough-mindedness and a spiritual maturity that modern Christians simply do not possess. To face up to it hardly contributes to that "peace of mind" after which our religious weaklings bleat so plaintively.
For myself, I long ago decided that I would rather know the truth than be happy in ignorance. If I cannot have both truth and happiness, give me truth. We'll have a long time to be happy in heaven.
>”Notice the wording “pledge” of a clear conscience toward God. Like the old you died and the new saved you promises a in the keeping of Christ Jesus’s commands. Also note that the resurrection is what saves not the baptism.”
Well as I noted in my other reply, I don’t speak Greek - but the translation as “pledge” is unique to the NIV.
To read it the way you are insisting, you’re saying that “my pledge saves me.” That’s jumped right past decision theology, that’s gone straight to works righteousness.
Here again is the link to the exegesis of the Greek of this passage: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TjcrsZFVyKw It’s only a few minutes, well worth the listen. If you accept his analysis, the translation of “pledge” is kinda dishonest.
“Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.” Romans 6 3-4.
>40 But the other criminal rebuked him. “Don’t you fear God,” he said, “since you are under the same sentence? 41 We are punished justly, for we are getting what our deeds deserve. But this man has done nothing wrong.”
42 Then he said, “Jesus, remember me when you come into your kingdom.[a]”
43 Jesus answered him, “Truly I tell you, today you will be with me in paradise.”
This scripture clearly shows that baptism isn’t part of salvation, but a commandment afterward. The thief clearly was saved with his last minute confession.
Nope. Jesus was right there, personally told the thief “you’re saved.” Did Jesus say that to you? Not to your face. He instituted baptism (AFTER the thief on the cross, so baptism wasn’t even instituted yet at the time of the crucifixion) to accomplish this. Baptism is Jesus telling you “you’re saved, oh and here’s the Holy Spirit too.”
No doubt that Jesus’ resurrection saves you. No one is saved BY their baptism, merely THROUGH their baptism. I can look to God’s promises made in baptism that through it, I am His.
Also, for the rest of your life, you can look back to your baptism in times of doubt and know of God’s promises made therein, instead of looking towards some emotional “decision” I made to “accept Jesus as my personal Savior.”
>Your faith has saved you not your faith and baptism has saved you!
Actually, God’s grace saved me, though my faith. And God’s promises were given to me in my baptism.
It’s not absolutely required to be baptized to be saved. One who has faith without being baptized is certainly saved. But if one comes to faith by hearing the word (if you can be saved via audible sound waves, why can’t you be saved via water?), yet rejects being baptized, one certainly can question whether he has faith. Why would one have faith reject God’s promises?
>You got the wrong type of baptism here...
>1Pe 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
>THIS baptism is a ‘like figure’ of the baptism you are referring to...It doesn’t ‘correspond’ to anything...
>THIS baptism doesn’t clean anyone...
>THIS baptism is NOT an appeal for anything...THIS baptism is the answer of a good conscience toward God...That is TOWARD GOD, NOT from God...
> When you pervert the scriptures, you get a perverted interpretation...
Well I have a hard time accepting that the ESV is a perversion of the scriptures. If you like the KJV, that’s fine. Doesn’t change anything.
You appear to be saying that this verse says that “water” baptism is “a like figure” of “spirit” baptism? Problem is, there is only one “type” of baptism. It’s just baptism. “one Lord, one faith, one baptism, one God and Father of all” Eph 4:5-6. Water baptism is redundant, since baptizo implies that there is water.
The context makes it clear that baptism corresponds to Noah’s flood. See v. 20. I’ll even use the KJV, since it appears to be your preference:
“18 For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
22 Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.”
Still compares to the flood.
John also expands on this in 1 John 5:
1 John 5 New King James Version (NKJV)
5 Whoever believes that Jesus is the Christ is born of God, and everyone who loves Him who begot also loves him who is begotten of Him. 2 By this we know that we love the children of God, when we love God and keep His commandments. 3 For this is the love of God, that we keep His commandments. And His commandments are not burdensome. 4 For whatever is born of God overcomes the world. And this is the victory that has overcome the world—our faith. 5 Who is he who overcomes the world, but he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God?
6 This is He who came by water and blood—Jesus Christ; not only by water, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who bears witness, because the Spirit is truth.
Yeah I know same old talking points just like saying same old Gospel, but you still can’t use Scripture to dispute it.
When you have two books and they say opposite things, at least one has to be a perversion...
And when Jesus says later in John 6 that the Spirit gives life and the flesh is no help at all, then Catholics completely ignore that.
I guess according to them He didn’t really mean it.
Paul tells us in Ephesians 3 that Christ dwells in our hearts through faith.
How does He get from your stomach to your heart?
The best place to find the truth is in Scripture.
The best place to find the truth is in Scripture.
It certainly isn’t in any organization that calls itself a church and consistently violates God’s commands in Scripture and excuses it and justifies it to boot, as Iscool and CB and others have demonstrated.
If you have a few moments I recommend reading it. Be patient as Greg goes into detail on the various historical positions.
“Nope. Jesus was right there, personally told the thief “you’re saved.” Did Jesus say that to you? Not to your face. He instituted baptism (AFTER the thief on the cross, so baptism wasn’t even instituted yet at the time of the crucifixion) to accomplish this. Baptism is Jesus telling you “you’re saved, oh and here’s the Holy Spirit too.”
Yes he did indeed tell me to my face and to my entire body as I was saved he took up residence in my heart and I became a new creature. I’m truly sorry that you haven’t experienced being born again! The Holy word of God also tells me I’m saved for just asking no more no less. Apparently you missed the John the Baptist story! No, water didn’t tell me that I was saved yes the Holy Spirit told me I was saved and am saved. Also noted is that while the name changed from Mikveh or Mikvah to Baptism the process is essentially the same. Something else you might want to check out is that it wasn’t a mere sprinkling as you Catholics do, but immersion. That’s why they went to the river to be baptized, so they could be immersed. If sprinkling was acceptable then they would have filled a vessel with water and did it somewhere else.
Boom!
Oh, baloney. The Bible is the only place to go for the truth. It is certainly not the catholic church. I have never read so many untruths as I have on here by some Catholics. Y’all toss stuff out there hoping a little of it will stick. Peter is not the rock. Jesus is. You know I feel sorry for y’all. It seems like y’all have been brainwashed. Read the Bible and quit depending on what man says. No man is perfect but God is.
Maybe you need to shed some light on the Jewish practice of mikveh. Seems to be needed for some of our Fromans here.
1 Corinthians 1:17
For the Messiah did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel
Thanks you beat me posting the verse.
We can conclude from the above verse that water baptism is not the Gospel. We see this again in 1 Corinthians 15. Seems the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ is the focus of the Gospel message and those who believed this were baptized.
Why do people make this so difficult?
A one word answer.....
control
Indeed. Did I PM you the link to Death Cookie?
> Yes he did indeed tell me to my face and to my entire body as I was saved he took up residence in my heart and I became a new creature.
He did? How did he do that?
> I’m truly sorry that you haven’t experienced being born again!
I’ve been born again. I don’t base things on “experiences” - which only lead to problems when you no longer have that “experience” anymore. Besides, there’s nowhere in the Bible that asserts you experience God through your “experiences.”
> The Holy word of God also tells me I’m saved for just asking no more no less.
But, without God’s help, you can’t even ask! Even faith is a gift from God. And truly, you can be saved without being baptized.
> Apparently you missed the John the Baptist story!
???
> No, water didn’t tell me that I was saved yes the Holy Spirit told me I was saved and am saved.
Then how did He do it? Because God’s Word tells you baptism is what does it:
“Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his.” Romans 6:3-5.
“In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.” Colossians 2:11-12.
“And Peter said to them, ‘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. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.’” Acts 2:38-39
“For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.” Galatians 3:27.
“...he saved us, not because of works done by us in righteousness, but according to his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit...: Titus 3:5
> Also noted is that while the name changed from Mikveh or Mikvah to Baptism the process is essentially the same. Something else you might want to check out is that it wasn’t a mere sprinkling as you Catholics do, but immersion. That’s why they went to the river to be baptized, so they could be immersed. If sprinkling was acceptable then they would have filled a vessel with water and did it somewhere else.
And they did. Many were baptized in their houses, in days before bathtubs and running water. 3,000 were baptized on Pentecost in Jerusalem, a city without a river. There are no instructions on HOW to baptize, other than in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Baptism by pouring is recorded all the way back to about the first century. Besides, mandating how the water is applied implies that it is the water itself that accomplishes the baptism, instead of God.
By the way, I’m not Catholic.
I agree that the Bible is a source of truth about God and how we can follow God’s will to join Him in Heaven.
The Catholic Church is also a source of Truth as Jesus delegated to Peter, the Apostles and their successors, and the Church until the end of time.
I would certainly not expect the anti-Catholic sentiment expressed on this formum to represent God’s truth or to fully understand it. No one has tried to explain your rationale except CB and his issue with blood. Even that was a major stretch and yet he and you ignore the very clear words of the Lord and call Him a sinner.
As much as you claim to be followers, the opinions and talking points expressed here indicate that you are not interested in the Truth. You are only interested in your personal opinions. You do not believe all the words of Jesus in the Bible.
May you receive God’s love and return it with your faithfulness to His Word.
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.