God bless brother, I love you also in Christ and its ok for us to have a strong discussion on this, I don't think less of you for it. It is better to really work through issues even with strong language and conviction than to just ignore them because of the hard to understand parts.
Thank you for your being loving in Christ. I agree that we can be bold with our words in defending the truth of what we believe the Bible says and yet... love (with the love of Christ).
You said:
Bear with me brother as I might be bolder than usual here. I think its this man in the video that swayed you a bit and my discussion is towards him and his teaching in part.
Alan Ballou believes in what is called “
Initial Salvation, and Final Salvation.” Other Christians believe this doctrine, as well (of which you can research online). I actually held to the same view on the two aspects of salvation (of which I name differently) long before I even heard this term because the Bible has led me to that truth. I have done my own studies that we are saved first INITIALLY by God's grace without works through faith (a belief alone). But after we are saved by God's grace, we need to continue in the faith and enter a secondary aspect of salvation of which the Bible describes as the Sanctification of the Spirit and a belief of the truth (See: 2 Thessalonians 2:13). This is a call of the gospel (2 Thessalonians 2:14 - and the gospel is 1 Corinthians 15:1-4). For God's grace teaches us to deny ungodliness and that we should live righteously and godly in this present world (See: Titus 2:11-12).
Please know that I do not agree with everything Alan Ballou teaches or says. He does not understand the Trinity, and so that is where we strongly disagree. But I am praying for him on that point. But when it comes to Sanctification and the faith, Alan brings up VERSES that many Christians today ignore (Which is scary).
Update:
I had to remove these videos from Alan Ballou (that I posted before).
While I liked Alan Ballou’s videos before on Sanctification and putting away sin and they were really helpful, the problem is he is a false accuser of the brethren. In the YouTube comment section in this video
here, Alan Ballou falsely accused me of several things that I are not actually true. I said that while I agreed with his viewpoint on how there are two aspects of salvation, I told him that I disagree with his view on “obeying the gospel.” I told him “obeying the gospel“ is defined for us in Romans 10 in that it is believing the gospel message. He also implied there was no free will when we come to the Lord (Which is Calvinism), and he used John 6 as an example. I explained to him why this is not Calvinism and instead of disagreeing in love and respect, he started to falsely accuse me (as if I had teachers, and I went to bible college - when that is not the case). I tried to tell him in love that he was falsely accusing me here, and he never replied back. You can see the conversation under the same username I use here (Bible Highlighter) with there being 16 replies to my comment to him. I refuse to watch somebody who falsely accuses other Christians
You said:
And yes, I strongly disagree with you on the baptism issue here, but strangely a month ago I would have strongly agreed with you and you had seen many things. We need to not be tossed to and from by some bible teacher in a video. I strongly disagree with that teacher as well. Send me a link to his email or page and I may try to talk to him also. I would even go to the gatherings where he teaches and share with the whole church. But its not easy to do right now.
I had felt slightly uneasy about the position I held to in regards to “
Spirit baptism replacing water baptism,” but there were verses that appeared to infer it. So I continued to believe in it. In fact, this thread was originally going to be a defense of that position. Where is it written that water baptism has ended? Where is it written that the apostles were acting in error? Where is it written in Hebrews 9:10 that it is exclusively talking about baptism in the name of Jesus and not other OT washings? So I see the Spirit baptism replacing water baptism topic as a fuzzy position to hold to at best. It is also not a coincidence that this belief is taught by Mid Acts Dispensationalists with some of them holding to Hyper Grace.
I have talked with these types a long time ago at another forum (TheologyOnline).
Here is one example of their defense of Hyper Grace:
Are You Hyper-Grace?
What is Hyper Grace?
What is hyper-grace? | GotQuestions.org
Please note that I disagree with Gotquestions view of sin and salvation. They teach that a believer is generally characterized by living a holy life, but if they backslide into a lifestyle of sin (i.e. they go prodigal), they are still saved.
Is a backsliding Christian still saved? | GotQuestions.org
No, as far as I have seen it has not gained much popularity. Many hold to the traditions of men more so. And the reason some hold this view, (from what I have studied) is they have a revelation from Holy Scripture. The men I have read from the past have such a strong scriptural understanding of this that other groups had changed their view because they said it was unanswerable their argument from the scripture.
Well, it is true that Mid Acts churches are not as popular and or others who hold to Spirit baptism replacing water baptism may not be a popular view among professing Christians as a whole. Perhaps he was thinking it was popular among certain Christian circles or that it was gaining in popularity. It could also he merely said that without really doing the research. But in either case, the issue of course comes down to Scripture really and not if he is correct on every point or issue.
As for your convincing others: Again, that has nothing to do with what the Bible actually says on this matter. Inferences off certain verses is not the same thing as direct evidence of Scripture. The inferences you make on certain verses involving this topic (while they sound good and could even be possibly true by a small percentage chance) can lead to...
#1. Accusing the apostles falsely.
#2. Not following a given instruction by God within the faith.
#3. Not Staying True to the Bible Alone Position.
You said:
This has nothing to do with me or the men I speak of from the past and this doctrine does not do that in any way. I am not denying that we need to live a godly life and let God work in us which will reflect in our daily lives. I do not teach works added to the gospel for salvation which many seem to do in a sneaky way buy wrongly understanding James.
There is nothing sneaky about it. The Bible is plain in that after you are saved by God's grace through faith, you have to be fruitful or you are going to be cut off like a branch and thrown into the fire (Reread John 15:1-11). This is not an automatic thing to be fruitful always. Believers are told in Scripture to continue in the faith, continue in grace, continue in his goodness otherwise one will be cut off just like the Jews.
Titus 3:8 they are told to be careful to maintain good works. Titus 3:8 says we should be affirming this constantly. When was the last time you heard a church affirm good works constantly? Titus 3:14 says, “And let ours also learn to maintain good works for necessary uses, that they be not unfruitful.” Did you hear that? It says that we are to LEARN to maintain good works so that the brethren be not unfruitful. How can they be unfruitful if it is just an automatic thing?
You said:
No, that is not correct. I had had communications with a few groups when evangelizing and visiting assemblies such as the Toronto Church of Christ and Lutherins etc. They pushed hard their water baptism for salvation issue and many verses.
I believe we are first saved INITIALLY by God's grace through faith without works (Ephesians 2:8-9) (Ephesians 2:1).
I am against the position that water baptism is done for INITIAL Salvation (Which is what the Catholic church and the Church of Christ believes). Lutherans claim that baptism is for salvation, but I am not done the research to see if they believe that is the first thing you must do to be initially saved. Do I see baptism as a salvation issue? Well, I believe a person can accept Jesus as their Savior before they die in their hospital bed and be saved (without water baptism). John 1:12 makes it clear that even those who believe on his name are given power or right to become sons of God. I see that a believer can even go years in being saved without being water baptized. But I see that if a believer lives out their faith, they will in time know of the baptism issue and desire to obey the Lord as a part of the faith. If they reject baptism, it falls dangerously close in rejecting an aspect of the faith (Which can potentially lead to problems). Is it a salvation issue ultimately? I cannot say really. The Bible does not specifically say. Only God can make that determination ultimately. But a believer should not reject water baptism because it is a part of the faith and the just live by faith.