No one is saved by either doctrine, or baptism. IMHObrings up this question:
What if a person comes to believe but isn't baptized yet?
But he believes all the proper doctrine...
Can he be defined a Christian?
[
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
No one is saved by either doctrine, or baptism. IMHObrings up this question:
What if a person comes to believe but isn't baptized yet?
But he believes all the proper doctrine...
Can he be defined a Christian?
How are we Born Again then, if we aren’t birthed by the Living Spirit?No one is saved by either doctrine, or baptism. IMHO
You have me on that one. I see support in Scripture both ways. I'm tempted to answer that it depends on whether baptism leads to receipt of the Holy Spirit. Just looking at Acts for the moment:I think we're just kidding around.
But seriously.....
Baptism.....
brings up this question:
What if a person comes to believe but isn't baptized yet?
But he believes all the proper doctrine...
Can he be defined a Christian?
What say you?
I said nothing about the Spirit. I agree, that is essential.How are we Born Again then, if we aren’t birthed by the Living Spirit?
Doctrine certainly doesn’t give us rebirth, I 100% agree with you on that one.
I agree on doctrine.No one is saved by either doctrine, or baptism. IMHO
[
Ah, did you mean water baptism, I agree 100% if you do.St. SteVen said:
No one is saved by either doctrine, or baptism. IMHO
I said nothing about the Spirit. I agree, that is essential.
What I did say was, "No one is saved by either doctrine, or baptism."
[
You have me on that one. I see support in Scripture both ways. I'm tempted to answer that it depends on whether baptism leads to receipt of the Holy Spirit. Just looking at Acts for the moment:
That baptism leads to receiving of the Holy Spirit is suggested by Acts 2:38: “Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins may be forgiven; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.”
Exactly....But not by Acts 8:14-17: “Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had accepted the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them. The two went down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit (for as yet the Spirit had not come upon any of them; they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus). Then Peter and John laid their hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit.”
Problem: How does the Holy Spirit dwell in a body UNLESS it has been forgiven of sin?That baptism is not necessary for receipt of the Holy Spirit is suggested by Acts 10:44-48: “While Peter was still speaking, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard the word. The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles, for they heard them speaking in tongues and extolling God. Then Peter said, ‘Can anyone withhold the water for baptizing these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?’ So he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.”
In the Name of is easy, but another topic.A lot going on here. And these three all concern baptism in the name of Jesus Christ -- we haven't yet broached the subject of baptism in one name or in three!
I don't think this is historically accurate. Here's an interesting article:The problem, Lambano, is that it was believed from the beginning that Jesus was God.
This was proclaimed both in the NT and also by those taught by the Apostles.
A common strategy for defending monotheism in this period is to emphasize the unique divinity of the Father. Thus Origen (ca. 186–255),
The God and Father, who holds the universe together, is superior to every being that exists, for he imparts to each one from his own existence that which each one is; the Son, being less than the Father, is superior to rational creatures alone (for he is second to the Father); the Holy Spirit is still less, and dwells within the saints alone. So that in this way the power of the Father is greater than that of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and that of the Son is more than that of the Holy Spirit… (Origen, First, 33–4 [I.3])
Many scholars call this strain of Christian theology “subordinationist”, as the Son and Spirit are always in some sense derivative of, less than, and subordinate to their source, the one God, that is, the Father. One may also call this theology unitarian, in the sense that the one God just is the Father, and not equally the Son and Spirit, so that the one God is “unipersonal”.
I skimmed through it.I don't think this is historically accurate. Here's an interesting article:
History of Trinitarian Doctrines
Early Christianity was apparently heterogenous. You had strictly monotheistic Jewish-Christian sects like the Ebionites and later the Nazarenes. I don't know about strictly monotheistic Gentile sects. Of those who held to the divinity of Jesus, "Subordinationism" was apparently the dominant theological model:
I don't know what a Subordinist Trinitarian is. I'm sure it's in the article.Would a Nicene Trinitarian consider a Subordinist Trinitarian a Christian? How about a Jewish Monotheistic follower of Jesus? A strictly monotheistic Gentile follower of Jesus?
We can't one be a Binitarian and still deserve the title "Christian?"To be called a Christian one must believe that Jesus is God.
The only way to do this is to believe the Trinity.
Yes, water baptism.Ah, did you mean water baptism, I agree 100% if you do.
Tell me more. Thanks.Also, while doctrine won't save a person, I do believe that one incorrect doctrine in particular COULD cause some to forfeit their salvation.
What particular institutional church?What are the limits of individuality for persons in the church?
View attachment 53538
Good point. It would vary from church to church.What particular institutional church?
You don't think the Lord has an institutional church, however faulty it may be, that He had raised up for His own purpose?Good point. It would vary from church to church.
I meant in general. And was differentiating between the Body of Christ and the man-made church.
[
A question came up earlier about what a person owes to a group they join.Good point. It would vary from church to church.
I meant in general. And was differentiating between the Body of Christ and the man-made church.
That could be, but I am differentiated between the two.You don't think the Lord has an institutional church, however faulty it may be, that He had raised up for His own purpose?
Amen!Yes, water baptism.
Very controversial, though. Many believe you are not saved without it. Scripture below.
I see water baptism as a religious ceremony. A ceremony is an outward sign of an inward reality.
The inward reality is the important part. (renewed relationship with God)
Just to be clear, I recommend water baptism for all believers.Yes, water baptism.
Very controversial, though. Many believe you are not saved without it. Scripture below.
I see water baptism as a religious ceremony. A ceremony is an outward sign of an inward reality.
The inward reality is the important part. (renewed relationship with God)
Matthew 28:19-20 NIV
Therefore go and make disciples of all nations,
baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
20 and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you.
And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age.”
Acts 2:38 NIV
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.