Acts 2:38

5,007 Views | 67 Replies | Last: 1 mo ago by Thaddeus73
Thaddeus73
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
So I'm meeting with a protestant friend of mine at Luby's once a month to discuss the differences between his church and mine. I gave him this verse:
  • ACTS 2:38: 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.
I told him that it says that when you are baptized, your sins are forgiven and you receive the Holy Spirit, like Jesus did when He was baptized. He disagreed.

I can't believe it...
Yukon Cornelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Typically my guiding principle is if my interpretation is in conflict with another scripture I'm probably wrong. So your interpretation is that both elements of repentance and Baptist must be present for salvation. Which is understandable. However in light of this verse:

1 John 1:9 (ESV): 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

We only see repentance is present for salvation. So the understanding of Luke requiring both events is probably not accurate. It probably more likely means the FOR is referring specifically to repentance and baptism is highly recommended.

A modern example. "You must get in the car and buckle up to drive to the store". What is actually a necessity to driving? Just getting in the car. Buckling up is an assumed natural by product of the first action but not a necessity for the intended result (driving/salvation).
Thaddeus73
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Baptism saves us, according to 1 Peter 3:21. Why? Because it forgives us our sins and gives us the gift of the Holy Spirit...
Yukon Cornelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I'll address that after you address my points.
AgDadx2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
1 Peter 3:21
Yukon Cornelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Referring to that verse doesn't reconcile the conflict between OPs interpretation and the verse in first John.
AgDadx2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
So what does "highly recommended" buy you? It's either necessary or it's not I would think.
Yukon Cornelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
In the context of salvation I don't think baptism is necessary but I would say baptism is highly recommended for one to be obedient to God and have a clean conscience.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Yukon Cornelius said:

Typically my guiding principle is if my interpretation is in conflict with another scripture I'm probably wrong. So your interpretation is that both elements of repentance and Baptist must be present for salvation. Which is understandable. However in light of this verse:

1 John 1:9 (ESV): 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

We only see repentance is present for salvation. So the understanding of Luke requiring both events is probably not accurate. It probably more likely means the FOR is referring specifically to repentance and baptism is highly recommended.

A modern example. "You must get in the car and buckle up to drive to the store". What is actually a necessity to driving? Just getting in the car. Buckling up is an assumed natural by product of the first action but not a necessity for the intended result (driving/salvation).

1) where does OP anywhere talk about "necessary for salvation?"

2) where does 1 John 1:9 talk about salvation?

3) where does Luke say anything about "required for salvation"?
Yukon Cornelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Maybe we have different ideas of what forgiveness of sins and salvation mean? To me they are synonymous.
AgDadx2
How long do you want to ignore this user?
" In the context of salvation I don't think baptism is necessary but I would say baptism is highly recommended for one to be obedient to God and have a clean conscience."

I would think that in order to be saved, one would need to be obedient to God. Having a clean conscience wouldn't be a bad idea either, so if these are obtained through baptism, then ......?
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think most can agree there are potential issues by taking one verse by itself and forming some kind of doctrine.
Yukon Cornelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Like I said. You have to reconcile that thought or idea with first John.

1 John 1:9 (ESV): 9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

Forgiveness of sins and being cleansed in this verse is predicated on confessing our sins. Which I understand as repentance. The baptism here is missing.

You must reconcile your view to this scripture otherwise you are in conflict with it.

But to each their own.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
The Israelites had means to receive forgiveness of sins. God in the OT forgives sins all the time. But St Paul says they did not receive the promises so that they would not be perfected apart from us. In other words, forgiveness of sins is not the entirety of the gospel or the revelation of Christ Jesus.
TeddyAg0422
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
This is a limiting factor of sola scriptura
Thaddeus73
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
My point is the plain meaning of the verse. My friend has a habit of denying the simple and plain meaning of every scripture I give him, because to agree with me would mean that the Catholic position is correct, and his is wrong. If he's right about everything, then the ordinary guy who picks up a bible and reads a scripture has to twist himself into a pretzel to understand something that is as plain as the nose on your face. The scripture plainly says that if you are baptized, your sins are forgiven and you receive the Holy Spirit. How it says anything else is proof that individual interpretation of scripture is a total and abject failure.
Yukon Cornelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Well that's your individual interpretation of scripture..
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
TeddyAg0422 said:

This is a limiting factor of sola scriptura

Sorry I fully reject that the Word of God has any limits.
TeddyAg0422
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Fair enough, but I think when something is discussed little in scripture, it is of benefit to look at what other writers think, particularly if they had close relationships with people that were close with Christ himself.

This doesn't mean these extra-biblical authors are 100% correct, but when they have seemingly reached a consensus on how they interpret or formulate things, I find it hard not to take their word for it
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Thaddeus73 said:

My point is the plain meaning of the verse. My friend has a habit of denying the simple and plain meaning of every scripture I give him, because to agree with me would mean that the Catholic position is correct, and his is wrong. If he's right about everything, then the ordinary guy who picks up a bible and reads a scripture has to twist himself into a pretzel to understand something that is as plain as the nose on your face. The scripture plainly says that if you are baptized, your sins are forgiven and you receive the Holy Spirit. How it says anything else is proof that individual interpretation of scripture is a total and abject failure.

Romans 10:8-13:
But what does it say? "The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (that is, the word of faith that we proclaim); because, if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved. For with the heart one believes and is justified, and with the mouth one confesses and is saved. For the Scripture says, "Everyone who believes in him will not be put to shame." For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, bestowing his riches on all who call on him. For "everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved."

Baptism was so integral to Paul's salvific message to the Romans that he more or less did not even mention the word, outside of Romans 6 a couple of times, which I cannot see how it ties to a person's salvation.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Hey God, I love you so much and I am so grateful to you condescending to become a man, subjecting yourself to human weaknesses, and willingly dying to save me. So, can you please let me know the absolute bare minimum needed on my part to avoid going to everlasting punishment, so I can do exactly that and no more and get back to living my life?

Thanks.

Love,
Modern Protestants.
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Am I "modern" if my church abides by a document written in 1689?
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I guess we just need to follow the Constantine model where we wait until the very last moment of our lives to be baptized so we make sure our sins are washed away at the most opportune time.

Talk about doing the bare minimum. It's easy to get dunked in water. It's hard to live a life dedicated with an affectionate obedience towards Christ.
Yukon Cornelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
No one here is advocating to do the bare minimum. You mockery is noted.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Literally yes. Modern era begins around 1450-1500 AD.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
What other purpose than minimalism can justify asking what is necessary to the extent of excluding commandments like baptism that come from the Lord?
Yukon Cornelius
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Again no one is advocating for excluding any commandment from one's life.

This thread was started as some gotcha so the OP could bag on his friend publicly and Protestantism. Funny how simple understanding of first John is ardently ignored. Only to get more insults instead of interpretation.

Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Actually you brought up, without prompting, and completely unrelated to the OP, why baptism isn't necessary for salvation.

What motive do you have for teaching people they don't need to be baptized?
Thaddeus73
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Since the Bible says that baptism saves us, how can it not be necessary for salvation?

1 Peter 3:21
Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
AgLiving06
How long do you want to ignore this user?
It's not a "Protestant vs Roman Catholic" debate here. This was not even questioned during the Reformation. All sides agree that baptism saves.
The Banned
How long do you want to ignore this user?
10andBOUNCE said:

TeddyAg0422 said:

This is a limiting factor of sola scriptura

Sorry I fully reject that the Word of God has any limits.

I agree... but Sola Scriptura, in practice, limits the Word of God to the biblical texts. Is it possible God's Word extend beyond the bible?
10andBOUNCE
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
I think that's obviously where we diverge. I believe the written Word of God has given us everything we need.
Zobel
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
Except Jesus, of course
PacifistAg
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
10andBOUNCE said:

I think that's obviously where we diverge. I believe the written Word of God has given us everything we need.

But even the written word tells us that what is in the text doesn't include everything He said and did. All the books of the world couldn't contain all He said and did. It also tells us to stand firm to the traditions we are taught, and those traditions are passed down through Apostolic succession.
Farmer1906
How long do you want to ignore this user?
AG
PacifistAg said:

10andBOUNCE said:

I think that's obviously where we diverge. I believe the written Word of God has given us everything we need.

But even the written word tells us that what is in the text doesn't include everything He said and did. All the books of the world couldn't contain all He said and did. It also tells us to stand firm to the traditions we are taught, and those traditions are passed down through Apostolic succession.

Can you give some examples of traditions passed down that are needed yet not in the word?
Page 1 of 2
 
×
subscribe Verify your student status
See Subscription Benefits
Trial only available to users who have never subscribed or participated in a previous trial.