How to be saved (born again) and join the family of God!!!

[BloodBought 1953]

Yes he was.
I suppose you believe in the false doctrine of Once Saved Always Saved.

If Hitler is Saved, I’ll just do some research and go with whatever “ he” believed——— NOT!

Hitler believed Jesus was the illegitimate child of a Roman Soldier and Mary......sounds like the reflections of Saved man , doesn’t it? What on Earth is wrong with you ?

 

[BloodBought 1953]

I suppose you believe in the false doctrine of Once Saved Always Saved.


Of course I do ! I lack the gonads to call Jesus a liar.....

“ All Of those that BELIEVE in me ALREADY HAVE Eternal Life and shall NEVER come under Condemnation” I bet even Hitler knew what the word “ never” meant.....How about you ?

 

[BloodBought 1953]

Blah Blah Blah
Rubbish Rubbish Rubbish

In spite of this BRILLIANT defense of your confused Doctrine.....Most intelligent people that share their views in these Forums know that without “ Chapter and Verse” , your mere infantile responses and opinions are worth Exactly what we pay for them——-NOTHING......

Now, if I may respond to you at a level that you can understand, how about this? Pffffffttttttt........

 

[Ferris Bueller]

I suppose you believe in the false doctrine of Once Saved Always Saved.


Of course I do ! I lack the gonads to call Jesus a liar.....

“ All Of those that BELIEVE in me ALREADY HAVE Eternal Life and shall NEVER come under Condemnation” I bet even Hitler knew what the word “ never” meant.....How about you ?

What he probably did not understand was what the word 'believe' means.

 

[marks]

Corneilus was saved and baptized in the Holy Spirit before he ever got wet. Baptism is a ritual. A public confession of your faith. Communion is a ritual. Neither is required for salvation. Millions have been saved moments before death in battle, hospital beds and nursing homes without ever getting wet or even having the ability to get wet. If you think water baptism is necessary for salvation then you have just kicked millions out of Heaven.

Baptism was a Jewish tradition used for bring Gentiles into Israel. That is why the Pharisees were so offended by John telling them to be baptized, as if they were no better than pagan gentiles.

The new converts were baptized in the same way, coming into Israel's New Covenant. And this continued on for a while, but after the gospel was given to the gentiles directly, water baptism wasn't considered in the say way.

Much love!

 

[Tong2020]

In Acts 2:15-36 peter preaches to them.
Then
37 Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brethren, what shall we do?
38 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 shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
39 For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, every one whom the Lord our God calls to him.”
40 And he testified with many other words and exhorted them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.”
41 So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.

Did you read that carefully.
vs 37 - they believe what Peters says because they were "cut to the heart" and asked "what shall we do?"
vs 38 Peter told them they needed to be baptised to have their sins forgiven.
Do you think they were saved and not had their sins forgiven?
vs 40 Peter carries on preaching telling them they needed to be saved - so not yet saved despite believing.
vs 41 Those that received the word were baptised
Now you have belief + baptism = salvation, as shown because it says they were added to the Church.

Interestingly, you seem to not see there how the 3000 were saved. That part which God is the doer, not man.

And here again you say “belief + baptism = salvation”, yet in one of your post you said baptism is not necessary for salvation. You confuse me as to what you really believe.

Nonetheless, whatever you decide with that, it remains that salvation is of God, is by God, is by grace. God saves through faith (Eph.2:8-9).

He who does not believe will not be saved but will be condemned.

Yes I agree

Good. And even if he gets himself baptized with water, he remains unsaved.

Tong2020 said: ↑
But he who believes, will he be saved? Yes.

He will be saved IF he gets baptised. The text doesn't say he will be saved just because he believes

And if you are right, then while he is not baptized, the believer is not saved. And with your doctrine there, if the believer dies without having been baptized, he will go to hell.

Tong2020 said: ↑
One who is baptized, at least in the proper sense, is taken to be a believer.

In the proper sense?
Where is that in the text?

I forgot, that you believe in the baptism of infants. That is why you ask “in the proper sense?”. When I say “in the proper sense”, I am referring to baptism where the one baptized truly believes in God, in Jesus Christ, and the gospel the apostles preached, and is done in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ.

A baptism such as that of infants is not baptism “in the proper sense”.

Tong2020 said: ↑
He is saved not because he got baptized, but because he believes.

That is not what the text says.

It seems that you don’t get what I meant by my statement there. And that is perhaps because you don’t take baptism to be an act of faith.

Tong2020 said: ↑
It follows then that one who does not believe and just got himself baptized, for whatever reason, or was baptized for whatever reason other than that because he believes, will not be saved.

The discussion is not about people who don 't believe and get baptised.

Well that is not a discussion about people who don’t believe and get baptized, but an argument against your position regarding Mk.16:16.

Tong2020 said: ↑
One is not saved and will be condemned, not because he was not baptized, but because he did not believe.

That's not what the text says. It only says that those who do not believe will be condemned.
The issue of what happens when:
a) someone believes but is not baptised
b) does not believe but is baptised
is not addressed.

The text only addresses those who believe and are baptised (=saved), and those who do not believe (=condemned). Other possibilities are not addressed and any conclusions you draw are you personal opinions not based on Scripture.

I'll come back to the rest of your post later.

<<<That's not what the text says.>>>

It is. For the text says “He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.”

will be condemned = will not be saved; not saved

What does the text says is the reason why he will be condemned or will not be saved? The text says “does not believe”. The text does not say “does not believe and is not baptized”.

Baptism is irrelevant and meaningless to the unbelieving. Baptism is only relevant and meaningful to the believing.

The essential is believing. And this is by and through which God saves, even from the beginning (ref. Bible), faith in God and Him whom He sent, Jesus Christ.

Tong
R4784

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
And here’s Acts 16:30-31 that speaks of a question and gives the answer which support my refutation of your take of Mk.16:16 concerning only a part of it even.

30 And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.”

This is typical of clipping a verse out of context.
Firstly Paul didn't say Only believe....
Nowhere in Scripture does it say we are saved by faith alone. That is a mnan-made invention that you are trying to read into texts and it's not there.

Secondly if you carry on reading
32 And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all that were in his house.
33 And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their wounds, and he was baptized at once, with all his family
34 Then he brought them up into his house, and set food before them; and he rejoiced with all his household that he had believed in God.
Paul preached to them and then baptised them at once. - even before they went and had any food.
That shows how important baptism is. It is part of the process of being saved.

<<<This is typical of clipping a verse out of context.>>>

A typical excuse to explain away the reference verse, which shows a clear question and a clear answer to the question.

<<<That is a mnan-made invention that you are trying to read into texts and it's not there.>>>

This is my answer to anyone who ask me the question “what must I do to be saved?”,… Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved.

And this is the answer of Paul and Silas “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved”.

So, perhaps you can tell Paul and Silas, that that is a man made invention and they have taken it out of context.

<<<That shows how important baptism is>>>

And no one here is saying that baptism isn’t important.

Tong2020 said: ↑
Now, regarding 1 Peter 3:21, which I said you consider context. If you already had done so, here are a few questions for you:Tell us, according to the context, what was Peter referring to as the type and as the antitype?
Verse 21 at the end says “through the resurrection of Jesus Christ”. What is the significance of that with regards to what Peter was saying in v.21?
Also, what salvation was Peter talking about there?

Dodging again.

If you don't believe Peter when he said "Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you," then explain why you think Scripture is wrong.

Nope. Not dodging. Those are relevant questions that the reader of the passage ought to look into.

<<<If you don't believe Peter when he said "Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you," then explain why you think Scripture is wrong.>>>

And why would I not believe Peter? This is what dodging is, asking me to explain why a certain scriptures is wrong, which by itself is malicious and ridiculous.

And that we may know your understanding of the verse, what is the “this” in the phrase you have in quote "Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you,"?

Tong
4785

 

[Tong2020]

Tong2020 said: ↑
<<<It is because you could easily argue that personal belief is necessary for salvation and that infants cannot personally believe.>>>

And so? Do you not believe and teach what RCC teaches about salvation and baptism?

<<<I didn't say that baptism was necessary for salvation.>>>

That’s good then. At least you deny that baptism was necessary for salvation.

So what do you mean by your post “belief + baptism = salvation”, if you are not saying that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Stop trying to twist what I said. What I have clearly said is:
Baptism is the normal way that Jesus gave us to be saved under the New Covenant.
We are not normally saved by faith alone and Scripture doesn't say we are.
I say normal and normally because God can always make exceptions if he chooses to. But it is God who chooses how we are saved not us.

Therefore baptism cannot be (strictly) necessary if God can make exceptions. But we cannot make exceptions.

<<<Stop trying to twist what I said.>>>

How did I twist what you said? What’s on with you?

Did you not say that you didn’t say that baptism was necessary for salvation?

Did you not say “Belief + Baptism = salvation”?

Tong
R4786

 

[Tong2020]

How was what? The making sure?

If it's the making sure there was what they called a commitment group we all had to attend before being allowed to join - become members of - the church. They don't do it now though. Anybody could come to the meetings but only people they felt sure were actually born again could become a member and be baptised if they hadn't been already.

Hmm.

Let me share a biblical passage relative to that.

Acts 8:36 Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”

37 Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”

And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”

38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him.

Tong
R4787

 

[Tong2020]

They don't baptise just anybody. If they aren't a Christian they needs some instruction.
People they baptise aren't born again that is why they baptise them. We are Born again in baptism

Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, [or again] he cannot see the kingdom of God.” (John 3:3).... “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. (John 3:5)
You see - born again = born of water and Spirit = baptism

<<<They don't baptise just anybody. If they aren't a Christian they needs some instruction.>>>

Yet they baptize infants, right?

<<<People they baptise aren't born again that is why they baptise them. We are Born again in baptism>>>

At least now I know more about what you believe on baptism.

In John 3:3, in the Greek text, it really says “born from above”, not “born again”. Just pointing that out.

Tong
R4788

 

[Tong2020]

How would know that someone is born again?
From their baptism certificate.

Do you expect something visible - like a rosary hanging round their neck?

Curious. Does the RCC baptismal certificate states that the baptized is born again?

And if so, is that what makes the baptized, born again, in the RCC belief?

Tong
R4789

 

[Tong2020]

@Pearl Yes, I agree; baptism on demand is too widespread...there needs to be some fruit or sense of genuineness about one's professed conversion.

In Acts 2, the 3000 were baptized. Not a small number to begin with. No fruit yet.

@Pearl

Tong
R4790

 

[Mungo]

...and the passage continues about 'the answer of a good conscience toward God'. Hebrews 9.14 speaks of the conscience being purged by the blood of Christ through the eternal Spirit.

And how does that change Peter's clear statement that Batpism saves us?

 

[Mungo]

Curious. Does the RCC baptismal certificate states that the baptized is born again?

And if so, is that what makes the baptized, born again, in the RCC belief?

Tong
R4789

If they have been baptised then they are born again.
As I said to pearl
Jesus answered him, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born anew, [or again] he cannot see the kingdom of God.” (John 3:3).... “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. (John 3:5)
You see - born again = born of water and Spirit = baptism

 

[Mungo]

Interestingly, you seem to not see there how the 3000 were saved. That part which God is the doer, not man.

Don't play games with me.
I told you clearly how they were saved.

 

[Mungo]

And here again you say “belief + baptism = salvation”, yet in one of your post you said baptism is not necessary for salvation. You confuse me as to what you really believe.

Again - don't play games with me.
I've explained that twice already.

 

[Mungo]

Nonetheless, whatever you decide with that, it remains that salvation is of God, is by God, is by grace. God saves through faith (Eph.2:8-9).

Jesus said He who believes and is baptized will be saved.(MK 16:16)

 

[Mungo]

Good. And even if he gets himself baptized with water, he remains unsaved.

And if you are right, then while he is not baptized, the believer is not saved. And with your doctrine there, if the believer dies without having been baptized, he will go to hell.

Again: Don't play games with me. I never said such a thing

 

[Mungo]

It seems that you don’t get what I meant by my statement there. And that is perhaps because you don’t take baptism to be an act of faith.

Again - don't play games with me.

 

[Mungo]

I forgot, that you believe in the baptism of infants.

Again - don't play games with me.
You didn't forget anything.

I've had enough of your games. This discussion is ended as far as I am concerned..