What constitutes matters of Brotherhood and Fellowship?

Brother ICANTYou have a couple of very lengthy post here and as always I am more than happy to respond to each item. We have much to discuss on this topic and I am sure we will be moving forward to another topic of fellowship very soon.This topic I believe is very curcial and sets the stage for all others. You have brought up some good points here all of which are easy and fun to respond to.EAMSee ya in a few

I'm not an atheist so, no. You do understand that I was a professing Christian for many years and even attended bible college. I've been around the block a few times. I have no way of verifying or falsifying that, which is why I'm an agnostic. If you responded to me, you did not do so directly. You have to hit the reply button on one of my posts. That alerts me that I have messages waiting for me. It's unreasonable to assume that I would follow every post in this thread, especially if it were not directed to me. Oh, yes, I'm sure you meant it as living, Christian admonishment. EMA, do me a favor and don't condescend to me. I seem to recall on several occasions where I posed biblical questions to you that rendered incapacitated and unable to answer genuinely. Now seems to be no exception. You've even commented on my ability to know the scriptures, so you must be resorting to ad hominem because you have no real argument.

---

"Men never do evil so completely and cheerfully as when they do it from mistaken conviction." — Blaise Pascal

EMA, understand that I have lost track somewhat of the thread so my comment will be towards this particular question alone. Thanks for inviting me to join in.But I will have to do it a little latter.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

A poster pointed out: In Luke 19:9 Jesus tells Zaccheus "Today salvation has come to this house." And this Jesus spoke before His death and resurrection. So what Hyro asks is what then is the purpose of Christ's crucifixion.Christ Himself spoke of how He was restrained from doing everything He could do for the salvation of men UNTIL He should be crucified. In other words, He taught that there was only so much He could do until His redemptive death was accomplished: "I came to cast fire on the earth, and how I wish that it were already kindled! But I have a baptism to be baptized with, and how I am pressed until it is accomplished!" (Luke 12:49,50)The "fire on the earth" represents the impulse of spiritual life. This impulse comes from Jesus Christ releasing His divine life into man. He came to impart divine life into man. He came to dispense this divine spiritual life as "fire on the earth" so that God Himself could dwell within His disciples.This divine life could not enter into His believers until He should be baptized with the redemptive crucifixion on the cross. Until this death was accomplished He was pressed, constrained, limited, and constricted, not being able to fully impart Himself as divine life into man. Luke 12:45,40 prove that Jesus had to go to the cross to be able cast the fire of His divine life into His believers, ie. "cast fire upon the earth".This makes sense because God's salvation is really Jesus Himself. Salvation is ultimately a Person, Christ. So in one sense when Christ came to the believing Zaccheus' house Jesus could say "Today salvation has come to this house."But much more salvific work can be done when He is not only among the disciples but WITHIN the disciples. And to do that He had to die for their sins and resurrect to become the "life giving Spirit" (1 Cor. 15:45) to enter into man that man my live Christ in a mingled and interwoven way.Now we see in John 14 that Jesus insist that He has to go away and prepare a place for the disciples. He means that He has to go to the cross and prepare a way for men to get into God the Father and for the Father and He to enter into man. Let's take a brief look John 14:1-6: The place that the Lord Jesus is going is a living Person, the Father. The place is a Person and the Way to the place is also a living Person, the Lord Jesus: "I am the way and the reality and the life; no one comes to the Father except through Me."Jesus is therefore the living Person as the Way into the living Place which is the Father. And He is going to prepare a place for His disciples in the Father. He is going to the cross to die so that man may be forgiven of his sins and man may come into the Father.Now notice that Jesus encourages the disciples that He alone is not the only one who can be in God and God in Him. If that were the case he would have told them from the beginning. "In My Father's house are many abodes; if it were not so I would have told you; for I go to prepare a place for you." Salvation here is to be united and mingled with God. Jesus is saying that if He alone could enjoy this reality He would have told them from the beginning that they should forget about having His experience. But rather He goes to prepare a place for them to enter "organically" into union with the Father.Traditionally, many Christians have been enfluenced by the KJV version to think that Jesus is talking about going to Heaven to prepare many "mansions". They think that John 14: concerns Jesus going to Heaven to fix up many mansions and then coming again to take Christians to mansions in Heaven. They assume these many mansions are all in the Father's house.However, the word should read "many abodes". And it is the noun in plural of the same Greek word expressed as a singular tense in verse 23. There Jesus says He and the Father will come to His lover and make an ABODE with him. "Jesus answered and said to him, If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word, and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make an abode with him." (John 14:23) In the Father's house there are many ABODES (v.2).
He and His Father as the Divine "WE" will come and make an ABODE with the one who loves Him.In between Jesus goes away to Calvary to die. This redemptive death will prepare a way for the sinners to be justified, forgiven and cleansed so that they may be where Jesus is as the many abodes in the Father's living and organic house.The main point here is that salvation required Christ going to the cross to prepare for man to have a standing in God Himself. Had He not gone to the cross to die for our sins we could not have the salvation of the Triune God, the Divine "WE" coming to make an ABODE witin us constituting us as living members of the Father's house. He had to go and prepare a way for man to get into God.Before He His death and resurrection He was constrained. He longed to cast fire on the earth. That is to dispense the divine life of God into man. Close to His crucifixion He tells His disciples that He goes now to prepare a place for them in God to be the enlarged Father's house. He underwent the "baptism" of His crucifixion and resurrection. He must die and be resurrected to be able to come with His Father to make an abode with those who love Him.I'll stop here for now. Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.Edited by jaywill, : No reason given.

Jaywill writesYes, thanks Jaywill, this is excally what I was hoping for in this connection and while i was working on a response to ICANTs posts. I hope this helps Hyro on some of those questions.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

No No it was the way you worded your questions and the nature of your questions that made me believe you understood very little in the basics of christianity:"What covenant would that be?"" So now you saying the Apostles could forgive sins"?, Etc, etc So essentially and for all intents and purposes, you dont believe he is Gods son, correct?So now let me ask you a question. If you dont actually believe this scriptural fact, then would it be necessary for me to tell you that if you are not baptized you will be lost?Would there be any purpose in telling you that, since you dont believe anyway?This is how Christ was wording his wishes in Mark 1615-16ICANT is making a big deal about Christ not repeating himself in the latter part of the verse, concerning baptism As I indicated above it is not necessary for him to do that for baptism to be a requirement to be saved, since that is what he said in the first place.From this ICANT incorrectly concludes baptism is not a requirementBelief preceeds baptism and if one initially rejects Christ through unbelief, baptism is of no consequence.There was no need for Christ to repeat himself and be redundant. A person that does not believe cannot have a scriptural baptism in the first place.But NOW WATCH, it is the worst form of interpretation to conclude from this that baptism is not necessary to becoming a child of God, since and more importantly, Christ made it a requirement that FOLLOWED belief. All other verses concerning this subject (baptism) should take their lead from his initial commandEAMEdited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

Hi EMA, What initial command?God Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

EMA writes:
there is no such thing as a child of the devil. I would make the statement to him as well as you there is no such thing as a child of the devil. If there is show me where he purchased anyoneEMA writes:
The devil never gave birth, paid a price for anyone. When Christ said you are a product of your father the devil, he did not mean father in that sense. He simply meant you are acting like him. We are a prduct of our own mind, thedevildidnt MAKE us do ,it, we did it own our own Yes words have meanings, just l ike the sword means sword,but that is not how Jesus menat it.He did not mean father in that sense. If he did show me where he gave birth or purchased anyone Im sure the greek word for sword is sharp pointy object but I doubt Jesus meantt it that way when he said he came to bring a sword, do you
. That is wrong and nonsense. If they dont have they ability to choose then Christ could not have ligitimatley called him the father of lies, no could Michael make a choice to NOT bring a charge against him His mothers child and the creators creation. Until on esins at the age of accountability,, he could be considered Gods child, but that changes as soon as one sinsThis is nit picky non-sense and you already know people are the creators property, they are not Gods children until purchased or boughtback.EMA writes:
So, a person that is alienated from God through free will , sin, is a proper candidate for baptism. you baptize a sinner. he is neithe a child of God or a child of Satan. If you have performed the act of baptism, it was of no affect. The Holy Spirit is the one who does the baptism, whether it is baptism IN the Spirit forthe purpose of the miraculous or baptismin water to bring one into the body. 1 Cor 12, or baptism in water, he does both, but for different purposes.The baptism in the Spirit is by the means of water by the great commision. If it is not you need to demonstrate otherwiseEMA writes:
Wrong thats an ignorant statement Mark 16:16 and ten thousand others You have steadfastly ignored my respose to this simple contention. It is stated in Mark 16, it is stated in acts 2::38. Besides this you have ignored my response that states, baptism follows belief, therefore the writers knows that anyone that does not believeneeds not to be baptized. There is no need to repeat the need NOT to be baptized if they dont believe. I will keep brining this up until you deal with it Because baptism follows belief ther e is no need to repeat oneself, if a person does not believe. Belief in these passages is beiing used as a synecdoche. When will you address this point
. Wrong from every aspect. Lets look at the ordersChrist: Belief, Baptism =SAVED. No belief, baptism not required, due to lack of belief, therefore condemned. Mark 16:16Peter: Belief, baptism, =REMESSION OF SINS (SAVED), gift of the Holy Spirit Acts2:38Paul: Belief, Baptism by Holy Spirit into one body, the church, = SAVED. If your not inside the body, your outside the body (lost) 1 Cor 12ICANT: Belief, =saved, then baptism, then added to the churuch or body. From his own mind, no passage.
Icant is backwards and against Christ on this issue, Peter on this issue and Paul on this issueRemember our first rule of interpretation. Always interpret the later writers by what Christ had alraedy said. That is exacally what you see in the Apostles and what you see thm doing.EMA writes:
You simply dont understand the similarities or differences in a conditional and declarative statement. Youve constructed a rule that is perpousterous and only applies to verses you wish that definition to be applied. Your same rule applied to verses that only mention belief are also declarative statements Great, now tell me whether a person needs to be told they DONT NEED TO BE BAPTIZED, if they dont believe in the first place.This is how Jesus was making the statement in Mark 16. This how the verese you quote on belief are being used. They are all speaking of belief in the general sense of the word. But, we must interpret them verses by anything Christ had ALREADY DICTATED or comandedEMA writes:
No problem, just tell me what the opposite of "saved" is. So the opposite of not being baptized is, not saved or child of th devil. That is where Christ places baptism
EMA writes:
Tell me what the opposite of "shall be saved", is. Then logically belief in Christ or God is not even necessaryto be saved at which point you make God and yourself a liar. How can there not be a requirement to believe and one be condemned for that which is not required We now have you on record as saying that God makes no requirements to being saved, even belief, for you say belief is not a requirement.EMa writes:
why yes it is. When you decide what the opposite of being saved is, then you will have your answer as to whether baptism is a requirement Will a person be condemned if they dont believe, Yes or No? If so then there is no need for me to explain to them that they dont or do need to be baptized correct.?
I am amazed that person of your intelligence cannot see that simple point
EMA writes:
ill ask you the question again. Can a person that does not believe in Jeusus CHrist be properly and scripturally baptized? Yes or No?No. As we know this statement violates Christs order set out in Mark 16. So technically you are unscriptural already, but I will go further to show you your error..This part is human philosophy that violates Christs order in Mark 16. If aperson thinks I am being to technical and nit picky, we must remmber two things. In these matters I can only go by what Christ wished and dictated and all other scriptures concerning the same subject must be interpreted in light of what Christ stated. All other writers throughtthe Holy Spirit will teach excally what Christ commanded and they did that very thing. It is ICANT and men like him that are changing that orderSecondly one is sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise when they ARE/were "Baptized by one Spirit INTO one body" You cannot be in the body without believing and being baptized INTO the body. Didnt i tell you every other writer speaking by the Spirit would echo Christs words, and there you have it. The Holy Spirit of promise in Epesians is the same Spirit Paul speaks about when he says we were baptized by one Spitit into one body"For as many as have been baptized INTO Christ (the Body) have put on Christ".
EMA writes:Im sure I dont understand every aspect of it,but Ido know you may not
because you keep using expressions like, baptisimal regeneration, which is a nonsensical term. It is truley sad that you view baptism in this manner. it is the Holy Spirit ICANT that is the AGENT, not the water. It is this method that God has chosen for us to reach the blood of Christ. No thinking person or serious Bible student considering the subject of baptism would make such a comment as you have avbove. The Apostlesand writers veiwed it as a beautiful thing. "WE were Baptized BY ONE SPIRIT INTO ONE BODY. If you are not in the body you are outside of Christ.To be in the body ine needs to be baptized by the Spirit through the advent of water. Its simply to easy tomiss.quote: This is human philosophy, nonsense, aand unscriptural, especially sense the HS is never mentioned. I dont agree with the above statement its idiocy and a misrepresentation of Baptism in the scriptures. It doesnt surprise your source messed this up, since most everything else you teaches is goofy as well. Ha Ha Im just kidding on that remarkJohn like Christ, would not make such a statement like you just put in their mouth,
ICANT writes:Are you saying I misquoted John or that he did not write the book of John in the New Testament?
No you didnt misquote him, you simply misunderstand him. The mental exercise of belief is in his statement, with the rest of the desires that Christ issued in mark 16;16
But you accused me of putting words in his mouth. That is misquoting. IOW saying something John did not say.EMA writes:
Do you mean to imply that Mark and Matthew are not inspired. If you need it from John it is in chapter 3:5, One must be born of water and the Spirit. Now tell me if this does not echo what Paul said when he stated,
John told Nicodemus:Jesus writes:
John 3:3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
3:4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
The Bible is its own best interpreter. Wrong, the mistake you are making once again is isolating scritures and not taking what they have to say as a whole on a subject. While I agree Jesus is talking about the water of birth, then he transitions to spiritual baptism in the Spirit, there is no reason to suspect that he was not speaking about that he also made an EDICT IN ANOTHER PLACE. Take the two together Mark 16 aqnd this passage and make sense out of them as does Paul. "For we were baptized by one Spirit into one body. You know in your heart ICANT by reading the following words he is talking about the self same words Christ spoke in Mark 16 Look at them carefully In the following verse Paul speaks of water Baptism. " For as many as have been baptized into Christ have PUT ON CHRIST." These are nearly the same words in 1 Cor 12 and certainly the same as those echoed in Matt 2819-20 and mark 16:15-16 I dont think it is necessary to assume he is talking about water baptism simply , because the water is not used." What baptism was Christ speaking of when he said, "baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit". My guess is water baptism, even if the word is not used. Dont you think so?Do you need the word water to appear in every verse to know that is what it meansEMA writes:
"We are baptized BY one Spirit into one body" an exact comparison to the statement to Nicodemus
Are you saying this is water baptism? And a blind man will ignore every reference to water baptism that does not include the word water. What type of baptism did Christ command in matt 28:19-20. I suppose there is no need to baptize any in water ever, since we do not have commad to baptize in water. Does your reasoning make sense to you. Look closley at verse 13 ICANT, even thsimplest bible student will deduce the waters of baptism, but its initiated, conducted and carried out by he Holy Spirit, just like Christ commanded Here is why. Lets say you go preach the gospel to a fella and at the end of the preaching he says, why Mr ICANT, your insane, there is no way I BELIEVE IN JESUS AS THE SON OF GOD. Which would mean there is no need to begin to explain or state to him the need to not be baptized, because he DOESNT EVEN BELIEVE.But now watch, does this negate the condition that Christ gave if he did believe, to be saved, absolutley not. Why would one ignore such a simple command.You simply stating that these are not commands does not make them not commands, especially when we have them commanded throughout the rest of the NT.Your contention about a declarative statement is sloppy at best and easily refutedBut now watch again, you would leave off the need to be baptized if the person did not believe, just like Christ left it off in the latter part of the verse.I dont want to keep kicking a dead horse, but if you dont see that simple point maybe someother reader will.Also again it is the Holy Spirit that baptizes even in water. And one cannot be a part of the body or in Christ until they have obeyed what Christcommanded and what ONLY the Holy Spirit can accomplish I am forced with a decision. I can take ICANTs word on how to become a child of God or I can take Christs, the Holy Spirits and Pauls words through the same Spirit.You are also mistaken about the fact that the body and the church are NOT the very samething. Your confused about that nodoubt because your understanding of the plan of salvation is initially misguidedCol chapter one. "And He is the head of the body, the church, who is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in all things He may have the preeminence. "They are excally the samething Agreed. But it is the Holy Spirit that directs, and empowers ANY and ALL baptism, whether in water or for the purpose of the miraculous. There is simply no way that the baptism in either 1 Cor 12 and Ephesians cannot be undersood to mean water baptism.. The context of each (now watch) and the words spoken by Paul in both passages, concrning baptism, correspond directly to Mark 16-15 and 16, both in VERBAGE AND PURPOSE.Mark 16 Belief, baptism, saved
1 Cor 12. Belief, baptism, by HS, into one body (saved), whether Jew or Gentile. The plan of salvation
Ephesians. belief, baptism, INTO Christ, PUT ON CHRIST, (saved)
Finally and formerly.Mattt28:19-20. Go ye therefore and teach all nations, making deciples of them BAPTIZING them in the name of the Father Son and Holy Spirit.Question. How can one miss that each of these is speaking of the water baptism Christ commanded in Mark and MattFood for thought http://www.bibletruths.net/archives/BTAR374.htmEMA writes:
ICANT writes:
Are you calling John the Baptist a liar when He said in John 3:36: The conditions in delarative statements APPLY at some point, I defy you to demonstrate otherwise. If they do not, then as I stated beofre even belief in Christ is NOT required.But there are and can be no conditions in a declarative statement. With all due respect ICANT, this is beyond any doubt the silliest statement I have ever heard. Belief is an exercising of the facts presented to you, you have a choice to decide based on the information presented to you concerning Christ. "He that comes to God MUST believe that he IS and that he is a rewrder of them that diligently seek hime"."Except ye believe in me you will die in your sins" Sorry ICANT there is both a command and a condition here.. How does one NOT BELIEVE without trying? And how can one be condemned for something he is not even commanded to do and results follow, if he doesnt do it.Heck I was worried about baptism and now you have even removed Belief, whats next?
In all my years of discussion and debate, I must say I have never seen a brother inChrists approach to the scriptures, quite like yours.EMA writes:
Another translation is not required,you simply need to understand the one you have EMA writes:
As you call this a heresy do you make it a matter of fellowship? Amen something we agree on.Since the word water is not used in the great commision of Matt 28 and Mark 16, or Acts chapter 2. What type of Baptism is being refered to, water, Spirit or both at the sametime.If you believe it is water baptism and it is involved in his statements, and what was taking place in Acts chapter 2, how do you know its water baptism he refering to and to which"they that gladly recieved the word were baptized",refers to water baptism, since in none of these instances the word water is used?IOWs do we need the word water to be used everytime to determine the type and nature of the baptism? I doubt it
EAMEdited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

Hi EMA, A person is the creation of a earthly father and mother.God formed a man from the dust of the ground in Genesis 2:7.
He made a woman from the rib of that man in Genesis 2:22.
He created mankind, male and female in Genesis 1:27.
Those are the only people God created according to the Bible. What is the age of accountability?You say until then he is considered Gods child. What do you base that upon? A person is a product of his earthly parents forever.A person could be considered God's child until he reaches the age of accountability.But at that moment things change.OK whose child is that person when the change takes place? Are you telling me the next time we have someone to come forward and request baptism I don't have to do anything.Are you saying they can get in the baptistery and the Holy Spirit will baptize them?That's sounds like a good idea because I won't have to get wet. Please explain the details of how the Holy Spirit performs the act of water baptism. Baptizo means sumerged. The church was baptized by the Holy spirit at Pentecost.Cornelius and all those in his house that heard the word was baptized in the Holy Ghost. I have not ignored anything you said. I just don't agree with what you have said. I don't agree with your song and dance explanations of how Mark 16:16 is a conditional clause when it is a declarative statement.It is declared that a person who believes and is baptized shall be saved. This is a positive.It declares that a person who believes not shall be damned.
This is a negative.Where is the negative that says He who is not baptized shall be damned?It can only be found in the Book of Mormons. You just made Mark 16:16 into a condition statement which it is not.It does not say belief and baptism equals saved.It says a person who believes and is baptized shall be saved.Jesus says in many other places which I have cited and you have refuted none of them that a person that believes shall be saved, has eternal life etc.There is no place in the Bible where Jesus says if a person is baptized they have eternal life or shall be saved. There is no place in the Bible that says a person who has not been baptized shall be damned.You keep taking 1 verse in the Bible and making it trump all the other statements of Jesus. Positive and Negative declarative statement concerning believing. Including the reason the person is condemned being because they have not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. It says nothing about not doing good works, being a part of a church, or being baptized as reasons for being condemned. Positive and Negative declarative statement concerning believing. Here is 14 scriptures that say belief produces, eternal life some even say if you don't believe you are already condemned.In none of these verses is baptism a requirement to receive eternal life.But you want to take one verse and trump all of these verses and there are many more. Mark 16:16 does not say baptism is a requirement to receive eternal life.You are the one jumping up and down shouting that your verse trumps every other verse in the Bible. Mark 16:16 is not a command or a dictation.But Jesus did say before he was crucified and John recorded it in "Jhn 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. "He that heareth my word,
And believeth on him that sent me,
hath everlasting life. Does hath mean a present posession?
but is passed from death unto life. Does that mean he has eternal life?Where did Jesus mention anything about that person being baptized as a requirement to receiving everlasting life, and being past from death unto life.The only requirements:Hear the wordBelieveReceive everlasting life and shall not ever be condemned.I love the present perfect tense in the Greek which this verse is written in. That tense says a person who hears the word and believes has everlasting life as a present posession and will have everlasting life at any time that ever comes to be present. John tells us mankind is condemned already (PAST TENSE) because mankind has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.So mankind is lost because mankind does not believe.Nowhere in the Bible does Jesus use a conditional statement concerning receiving everlasting life.He does state positively that those who believe have everlasting life.He does state positively that those who do not believe have everlasting damnation.Therein mankind is given a choice.Mankind can stay in a condemned condition forever separated from God in everlasting punishment.ORMankind can accept the offer of a free full pardon offered to whosoever will.But mankind does not have to accept that offer of a free gift.
He can add restrictions to receiving that free gift. As some teach you have to join the church, be baptized, pay tithes, and attend church so many times a month or year in order to get that gift.But when you add anything to acceptance of the gift it ceases to be a gift and becomes something earned by obedience.God wants obedience because you love Him and appreciate what He did for you not in order to receive a gift He has offered to all mankind. Mark 16:16 is not an Edict. It is a declarative statement. Who did Jesus tell the church to baptize in the great commission? That is the reason Jesus gave positive and negative declarative statements, as in John 3:36 I asked you the question about which you did not answer.Are you calling John the Baptist a liar when He said in John 3:36:"He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. "Please note John gave a positive and a negativeAre you calling Jesus a liar when He said in John 5:24:"Jhn 5:24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life."Please note Jesus gave a positive and a negativeGod Bless,

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

ICANT writes: Yes I believe what John said but according to you I dont need to believe what he said, because according to you belief is not a requirement. So which is it ICANT, I do need to believe according to these D statements or I dont. Ill let you explain your glaring condtradiction in that respect.One minute you tell me that if i dont believe John Im calling him a liar at another point you say I dont need to believe because its not a requirement. Hmmmmmm?The conditions in delarative statements APPLY at some point, I defy you to demonstrate otherwise. If they do not, then as I stated beofre even belief in Christ is NOT required. See what I meanWith all due respect ICANT, this is beyond any doubt the silliest statement I have ever heard. Belief is an exercising of the facts presented to you, you have a choice to decide based on the information presented to you concerning Christ. "He that comes to God MUST believe that he IS and that he is a rewarder of them that diligently seek him"."Except ye believe in me you will die in your sins" Sorry ICANT there is both a command and a condition here.. How does one NOT BELIEVE without trying? And how can one be condemned for something he is not even commanded to do and results follow, if he doesnt do it.
Heck I was worried about baptism and now you have even removed Belief, whats next?In all my years of discussion and debate, I must say I have never seen a brother in Christs approach to this topic, quite like yours.Ema writes:As you call this a heresy do you make it a matter of fellowship? Amen something we agree on.EAM You are mixing oranges with apples. There are certain things Christ is and was to God that we were not initially. Simply because Christ was Gods son before his baptism it does not mean that baptism is not the place we reach the blood of Christ. Acts 2:38 and 1 Cor 12:13 make it clear that it as at that point we become children of God.Your illustration has no application, therefore no validity. However,It made him the sonof God if itwas to fulfill all righteouness, which he claims of baptism. "it is necessary to fulfill ALL RIGHTEOUNESS" Jesus even obyed the command to be baptized, even though it was for a different reason for him. Now lest you say that proves it is not for the remmission of sins presently. I wouldpoint out that Christ also participated in the days of atonement and other sacrifice offerings, even though he had no need specifically, other than to honor the law, to every jot and tittle and to fulfill all righteousness" Baptism was a command thenand it is necessary EVEN now to fulfill all righteouness.
Again why should God (Christ) pay taxes, but he did. Why should God keep he sabbath, but he did If there are no conditions here, what is the opposite of "WILL BE SAVED"?
How can there be no conditions ever anywhere, even belief.?I will give you one point brother, on this point you are not self-contradictory, because you have logically removed belief by implication and direct statment. You are not be self-contradictory,but you are consistently wrong. about the usage of a declarative statement.Even if we proceed on the premise that a declarative statement is not conditional when spoken generally to a group, you have not and cannot demonstrate by its definiiton, that those statements dont apply in specific as conditions always anywhere. You and you alone have given this exxagerated explanation to a declartive statement.Secondly, it can be easily demonstrated in other passages thaat those same conditions apply in some conditional statement, ie Acts 2:38, Matt 28:19-20, Acts 10Click to display messageMsgID 560626:Re: FELLOWSHIP
(Message 130)Thread 14376:What constitutes matters of Brotherhood and Fellowship?Forum 33:Comparative Religions', 500, event)" onmouseout=" hb.off(0)" href="dm.cgi?action=msg&m=560626" target=_blankMessage 130 I asked for the second time:
ICANT writes:
Romans writes:
6:23 For the wages of sin is death; but the gift of God is eternal life through Jesus Christ our Lord. I guess you missed my response, when I said the laws and definitions of man, do not always apply in thespiritual realm. secondly, it is completley a FREE gift beecause, belief, repentance confession andbaptism are not works , they acts OF FAITH, or FAITH IN ACTION.lets say you didnt know Christ, but for some wierd reason YOU thought God wanted you to dunk yourself in water to get closer to him, thats a WORK, because God didnt ask you do do it.If God desires you to do it, its an act of faith. Hence anything we do that God requires (even baptism is not a work) its being saved by Grace, through FAITH. Faith without works or action is dead. Before or after we come to ChristYou, unknowingly and others perhaps, have limited the word faith to the simple definition of a mental exercise. That is NOT biblical faith any anysense of the wordAsk yourself why Christ walked not only down the isle but numerous miles to obey the command to be baptized.? Was Jesus doing a work to save himself or was he exercising and exhibiting anACTIVE Faith. You chooseTo fulfill all righteousness one needs to be obedient to that which God wishes. if baptism is necessary to fulfill all righteouness and Christ attaches it to being saved, or a condition to being saved, then it would follow logically and scripturally that it is necessary to do to BE SAVEDThink about Mark 16:16 again. You contend that because hedid not mention baptism in the latter part of the verse, that he did not make it a condition to being saved.But now what kind of sense would that make. In the first part of the verse he makes it a condition, then turns right, around and makes it not a condition. Does your explanation of that verse make any logical sense? Answer is noNow watch.Or is it more reasonable to conclude that because baptism follows a belief in Christ, that if one does not belief, the need for baptism is not even an issue and that is why Christ did not repeat himself Now which of OUR two propositions is more reasonable and of the two which do you think Christ was using?ICANT writes/quotes Apparently you believe none of them even in these passages because you say they are not requirements, even the ones you quote aboveI however, believe Every single, declarative statement, one of them, but I also KNOW that the conditions in the verses you quote above are as applicable as Mark 16:16.You boast but cannot prove that the conditions in mark 16:16 are not conditions or that they do not apply, then quote me a bunch of other D statements and say see see, why dont you believe thisThen watch what you, you turn right around and start quoting other declarative statements in other passages and say these are the ones we should follow and brag that there is no baptism mentioned. Why not take all the declarative statements and all the conditions, in all of the NT, and not just the ones you likeBut you like to pick and choose the conditions of declarative statements you like and disregard the ones you don’t like. I like to take all the passages, not just some of them. Give it a whirl ICANT. That’s not necessary, just answer the one you keep avoiding. Is it necessary to tell someone they will be lost if they are not baptized, IF THAT IS, they don’t believe in the first place, Yes or NoEAMEdited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

Hi EMA, There is no such thing as a condition in a declarative statement.You need a conditional clause or statement to have conditions required in a sentence.But you do not believe the statement John the Baptist said.John made a declarative statement "He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life:""HATH" is present perfect tense meaning a present posession.You don't believe that because they have not been baptized.John made a declarative statement, " he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. "That part you do believe, because you require them to believe before baptism. But if they receive eternal life when they believe they already have eternal life and baptism is not necessary in order to obtain something they already have.There are no conditions in the two declarative statements made by John. But He tells you how you can know you have everlasting life as well as how you can know you do not have everlasting life.John did not include the command to be baptized as a condition to receive the everlasting life he was talking about.But John was sent from God with the authority to baptize.But John required proof of a changed life before he would baptize. I see a conditional statement which says, "Except ye believe in me you will die in your sins".There is no command to believe and you can not produce one. I am sorry I don't fit in your idea of what a person should be like. If it was a command in order to receive salvation then you should be able to produce a scripture in a conditional clause that says, "You must be baptized in order to receive eternal life." Or a declarative statement that says, "if you are not baptized you shall be damned".Now as to fulfilling all righteousness, that is a different story as that has nothing to do with receiving eternal life. It does have to do with following Jesus and the first step is to be baptized.Jesus did not preach a sermon, heal a person, work any miracle until after His baptism.You can not follow Jesus until you are baptized. There is no condition of will be saved in Mark 16:16.
There is no condition of will not be saved in Mark 16:16. There is a declaration, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;"There is a declaration, " he that believeth not shall be damned".There is NO " he that is baptized not shall be damned".Your final requirement for being saved is baptism so you read Mark as: I am sorry EMA that is not what it says and there is no way you can make Mark 16:16 say what you want it to say.If you want a verse that says that buy a Book of Mormons.Look at 111 Nephi 11 which says: But repentance, confession and baptism are all works.Repentance is the act of turning from your wicked ways that means give up certain things. Then you have to take a new direction.Confession is the act of speaking words for with the mouth confession is made.Baptism is the act of entering a pool of water and somehow being immersed in that body of water.Yep all seem like you have to move a muscle, that is work.Shucks believing is also a work, or is it? You don't have to move a muscle to believe.But accepting the gift of God is not a work. You don't have to move a muscle to get it. All you have to do is accept it. There are no conditions in any of the verses as all are declarative statements.I do believe everyone of them but you do not as you have to add that they also have to be baptized in order to receive eternal life. I believe every declarative statement in the Bible.There just is not a declarative statement in the Bible that says "He that is not baptized shall be damned" and there is no conditional statement in the Bible requiring baptism in order to receive eternal life. Let me break this down."Is it necessary to tell someone they will be lost if they are not baptized,"It is not necessary to tell anyone they will be lost if they are not baptized as it is not a requirement in order to be saved."IF THAT IS, they don't believe in the first place, "I can't find any place that baptism is used as a requirement to receive eternal life.I can find where people who have heard the word and believed the word and received the Holy Spirit are baptized.But everyone I know of was already a son or daughter of God prior to baptism.The only fit subject for baptism is a born again believer.God Bless,Edited by ICANT, : No reason given.

---

"John 5:39 (KJS) Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me."

Then he writes Everytime I read one of your posts (concerning this topic) I get one of those, oh my Gosh he cant be serious thoughts. Now I understand what you are attempting to say and do but it involves the height of silliness and total disregard for common senseI dont think you see the logical implication that flow from that which you are asserting. Ill try and explain laterIll get to its entirity this evening, thanks however for the discussion.EAMEdited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.

EMA writes:
That's not necessary, just answer the one you keep avoiding. Is it necessary to tell someone they will be lost if they are not baptized, IF THAT IS, they don't believe in the first place, Yes or NoICANT writes: So the simple answer to my question is No, it is not necessary to tell a person that they need to be baptized, if they dont believe in the first place. thank you.My point in asking the question was to do a simple test to see whos approach to Mark 16 was more credible. Yours which states that he does not make baptism a requirement, which is refuted by the first part of the statement, "He that believieth AND IS baptized WILL be SAVED. Later on we learn the nature, reason and purpose of BaptismOr mine which implies and follows the more logical course of the statement that its not necessary to repeat it because it wont matter if one does not believe.EMA writes:
quote:
He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. Yes I believe what John said but according to you I dont need to believe what he said, because according to you belief is not a requirement. So which is it ICANT, I do need to believe according to these D statements or I dont. Ill let you explain your glaring condtradiction in that respect.One minute you tell me that if i dont believe John Im calling him a liar at another point you say I dont need to believe because its not a requirement. Hmmmmmm?
The conditions in delarative statements APPLY at some point, I defy you to demonstrate otherwise. If they do not, then as I stated beofre even belief in Christ is NOT required.
There is no such thing as a condition in a declarative statement.Actually and I did not see this before mark 16 is actually an Imperative StatementImperative - An imperative sentence gives a command.
Example: Cheryl, try the other door.
Sometimes the subject of an imperative sentence (you) is understood.
Example: Look in the closet. (You, look in the closet.)Hence (He) that believes and is Baptized will be saved. Imperative ICANT not Delarative.Declarative - A declarative sentence makes a statement. A declarative sentence ends with a period.Example: The house will be built on a hill.Interrogative - An interrogative sentence asks a question. An
interrogative sentence ends with a question mark.
Example: How did you find the card?Exclamatory - An exclamatory sentence shows strong feeling. An exclamatory sentence ends with an exclamation mark.
Example: The monster is attacking!Imperative - An imperative sentence gives a command.
Example: Cheryl, try the other door.
Sometimes the subject of an imperative sentence (you) is understood.
Example: Look in the closet. (You, look in the closet.) Exacally and that is exacally what you have in mark 16. I dont know how much more conditional the conditions that Christ gave can could possibly appear or be stated. Your assertion that these are not conditions violates every principle or reason not to mention common sesne But your missing your own point and argument my brother. if Johns statement is declarative in nature as you assert with no conditions then none of it applies anyway. I dont need to adhere to things that appear to be commands but are actually not, correct? you write: Then how in the world is the above statement applicable or obligatory twords me if there are no conditions, not even belief This would be true if it did not violate, Acts 2:38, 1 Cor 12:13 and Ephesians where he states, For as many as HAVE BEEN Baptized into Christ, (1 Cor 12, "For we were all baptized by one Spirit, into one body") have put on Christ.These are certifiable and undeniable statements by an inspired Apostle on how one enters the Body of Christ. Notice how the two passages concerning the same subject are identical and interchangable. Neat thing, that Word of God Brother I love you as a brother but the above statement makes absolutley no logical sense but Johns baptism like Christ's was "for the remission of sins". In order to obtain the remission not because of, Christ had not yet made the sacrifice If your boss said in a general meeting, "Those that are not coming in on fridays, do not need to come in on monday""Whooo Hooo, four day weekend". Homer J SimpsonIf you were one of them would YOU take that as a command and would there be results if you didnt follow those instructions, commands or whatever? Although it is a so-called declarative statement, its conditions applyEMA writes: brother I have already done this to many times to mention. Again, "what is the opposite of "shalt be saved"? Is there something in-between saved and lost, damned or condemned. tell me what it is Please As I stated earlier you MIGHT have a case here if Mark 16, were an isolated single passage concerning baptism, it is not. Acts 2:38, I Cor 12:13, Ephesians, explain and compliment Christ intentions in mark 16:15-16. they are a commentary on his instructions earlier. christ stated it Paul, Peter and other s explain its nature and purpose.Now watch another one. "the like figure where unto Baptism does also NOW SAVE US, not the putting away of the fitlth of the flesh, but an answer of a good conscience". Again before you go off half cocked, incorperate Pauls explanations concerning these statements by Christ and Peter. Once this is done it fits together like a perfect puzzel. So you are saved BUT you cant follow him? I dont even know what that means or how it makes any sense. perhaps you could put it on a 3 by 5 card for one of our distinquished atheist here, or perhaps that drier than dirt Sam Harris.Boy, have you ever tried to sit and listen to him in a discussion. I keep wanting to slap him in the back of the head and say spit out knucklehead. He is no, Guy N. Woods, thats for sure And you see no conditions in any of this passage, correct? again provide the grammatical rule that says, that while at the moment of the statement, as in writing a letter, these so-called non-conditions by you, never at any point apply down the road or when presented to the person in question That is not what I say and that is not how I quote or use the verse and I have now responded to that contention to many times to mention In a knuckleheaded kind of way they have got the passage right, except for the fact they are missing the same two points as you do. baptism is only a requirement if someone believes, if they do not, there is no need to repeat the reuirement, Christ understood this and that is how he is making the statement.
They show thier error by doing and adding what christ did not for obvious reasons.Secondly, they appearently, like yourself do not understand that Baptism is a part of Belief or faith. If I do not have enough faith in the evidence to believe in christ, then I do not have enough faith to follow his command to be baptized.So again, ignoring this simple biblical principle they show thier human non inspired reproduction of what is not necessary, the need to repeat what Christ had already commanded in the first part of the verse. Its all Just Faith, no matter what we are asked to do.EMA writes:
I guess you missed my response, when I said the laws and definitions of man, do not always apply in thespiritual realm. secondly, it is completley a FREE gift beecause, belief, repentance confession andbaptism are not works , they acts OF FAITH, or FAITH IN ACTION. You need to watch your self- contradictions brother.Repentance is a worK?A mental action, that involves the Not doing of what I was doing before, which requires no muscle movement, by not DOING what I was doing before, thats a work? By your own definition repentance is not a work.Confession, which is primarily a condition and attitude of the heart is a WORK? Boy, If a man could save his self by works, you would make it simple and easy.Baptism is a WORK? Let me try this once again. You cannot nor can anyone else baptize you. It is the Holy Spirit that baptizes you, "into one body", the church. Jump up and down in the water as many times as you please and that is not baptism, that is playing aroundYour only partly correct, actually none of the things you mention are worksEMA writes:
I however, believe Every single, declarative statement, one of them, but I also KNOW that the conditions in the verses you quote above are as applicable as Mark 16:16. Would you say Saved is the samething as Eternal life, Yes or No?EMA writes:
That's not necessary, just answer the one you keep avoiding. Is it necessary to tell someone they will be lost if they are not baptized, IF THAT IS, they don't believe in the first place, Yes or No As I stated in the beginning, the answer to my and the Lords question is NO, it is not necessary to tell them something that would be a repetition of what he had already made a command and instruction in the previous statement. Is this a true statement, "He that believeth AND IS baptized, shall be saved." It that a true statement, Yes or No?Remember ICANT, it is the Holy Spirit that does everything in baptism, all you have to do is TRUST (BELIEVE) AND OBEY, "For theres no other way to be happy in Jesus but to trust (believe) and obey".Remember the words to the song?Hyro wrote earlier: He like yourself does not understand that baptism is most certainly not a work or even a law, it is vulgar to call or refer to that which the Holy Spirit does HIMSELF ("For we were ALL baptized BY one Spirit INTO one BODY") a work or a law?While God and Christ most certainly made it a condition to salvation, one could not, nor could anyother person baptize you, it is an action and agency of the Holy Spirit, to brignh one INTO the body. It is salvation by Grace through faith, thats it.Faith is obedient to anything God, requires, suggests, intimates, wishes or desires, before, during or after salvationlet me add one thing here before we go on. Doctrine is important but it is not the only heart and soul of Christianity.When we stand before the Lord I am going to bet one of the main questions is going to Not be "Did you get all of that doctrine correct" Hopefully we did.But I think he is going to say, were continuously going about doing good. did you make anybodys life better. In a small day to day way did you make a differnce in anybodys life?Jesus went about doing good and gave out alot of doctrinal truths along the way. But if we have one and not the other it is a waste of time.Myself and ICANT are kind of tearing at eachother here, but neither of us considers this the ONLY heart and soul of Christianity.Didnt want anyone to think we were that petty concerning the Lords life and instructionsEAMEdited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.Edited by EMA, : No reason given.