The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to
-
-
First Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
Part 2 The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to be Saved!Mike and many other RCC think if you are not baptized in water you are not saved.Salvation can only come by water baptism think many religious people.Not only the RCC but the church of Jesus Christ and more... I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
Edited by evangelist on 07/19/2009 13:58:35
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
FAL
you can not show me one verse in the bible which say you are not saved if you don't get wet baptized!
Show me verse in the bible which shows a requirement of baptism to get saved and you are damned without a water baptism the outward sign!
Let me say again every christian should get water baptized after they are saved, born agian and are redeemed, justified, and have salvation now.
Just like I know many christian who don't go to a church any more but love God more than some pastors I seen and leaders, and are saved.
But not going to church is not a requirement to salvation or to be saved.
one love
Obeying the Gospel is a requirement.
What did Jesus say when asked what we must do to have eternal life?
Matthew 19:16-19 "And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
Mat 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
Mat 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
Mat 19:19 Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."
Jesus did not come down here to teach us the Old Covenant requirements. The young man already knew the Old Covenant, every Jewish boy knew it well. Jesus gave the answer for the New Covenant.
And Jesus said we must believe AND be baptized to be saved. Who are you to demand evidence that He meant it?
Genesis 17:13-14 "He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
Gen 17:14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant."
Do you think that God takes His new Covenant any less seriously than the Old Covenant? Jesus' blood takes away sin, but it does not take away the requirement to get baptized.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
Malachi 1:11 "For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name [shall be] great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense [shall be] offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name [shall be] great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts."
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
Let me use your own argument against you. Show me a passage that explicitly says that a Christian who commits adultery without repenting will enter Heaven.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
Malachi 1:11 "For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name [shall be] great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense [shall be] offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name [shall be] great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts."
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
Jesus also healed the lame instantly, and it says so in the Bible just as it says that the fig tree died instantly. But the Bible does NOT say that we are saved instantly. So why do you apply miraculous events to salvation. Salvation is frequently described as a future event, a process of sanctification, in hope of receiving our inheritance.
Nope i disagree and that what you said is not the good gospel, that is a gospel in the making and left on yourself doing and processing!
read the book of John 3 again!
I can give you many scriptures that being saved is instantly and that is the gospel.
read also Romans 10:9 till the end and look at the meaning of saved past tense and don't let religion play a greek or word game to decieve you of the too good news Paul taught and Jesus brought to us.
one love
I have read those passages, and you have yet to address the passages I have quoted to you. Some of which included the passages you have previously provided in context.
On this occassion, I draw your attention to Romans 10:16, which falls in the middle of your latest "evidence".
Romans 10:16 "But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?"
The gospel must be obeyed, not merely accepted. You cannot say you accept the Gospel if you are unwilling to live it. And you cannot take a line or two out of context from Paul and expect that Jesus will accept that your personal gospel is the same as His True Gospel.
Then you also have another gospel and another meaning of the gospel FAL!
Is your gospel too good to be true gospel or is it full of do and don't??
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
Edited by evangelist on 08/19/2009 22:06:56
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
quote:
Originally posted by evangelist
FAL
you can not show me one verse in the bible which say you are not saved if you don't get wet baptized!
Show me verse in the bible which shows a requirement of baptism to get saved and you are damned without a water baptism the outward sign!
Let me say again every christian should get water baptized after they are saved, born agian and are redeemed, justified, and have salvation now.
Just like I know many christian who don't go to a church any more but love God more than some pastors I seen and leaders, and are saved.
But not going to church is not a requirement to salvation or to be saved.
one love
Obeying the Gospel is a requirement.
What did Jesus say when asked what we must do to have eternal life?
Matthew 19:16-19 "And, behold, one came and said unto him, Good Master, what good thing shall I do, that I may have eternal life?
Mat 19:17 And he said unto him, Why callest thou me good? [there is] none good but one, [that is], God: but if thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments.
Mat 19:18 He saith unto him, Which? Jesus said, Thou shalt do no murder, Thou shalt not commit adultery, Thou shalt not steal, Thou shalt not bear false witness,
Mat 19:19 Honour thy father and [thy] mother: and, Thou shalt love thy neighbour as thyself."
Jesus did not come down here to teach us the Old Covenant requirements. The young man already knew the Old Covenant, every Jewish boy knew it well. Jesus gave the answer for the New Covenant.
And Jesus said we must believe AND be baptized to be saved. Who are you to demand evidence that He meant it?
Genesis 17:13-14 "He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
Gen 17:14 And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant."
Do you think that God takes His new Covenant any less seriously than the Old Covenant? Jesus' blood takes away sin, but it does not take away the requirement to get baptized.
Did Jesus give those inbstruction before the cross or after the redemption of the cross??
You are adding a requirement to a water baptism but no scripture to back it up, as a (requirement).
Yes, you can point to many baptism scriptures and it was done and we should doi it sooner or latter , but again no where can you see it as a must or requirement in context like you will see with believing, belief, trusting,and with a requirement of faith!
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
Let me use your own argument against you. Show me a passage that explicitly says that a Christian who commits adultery without repenting will enter Heaven.
Sure! Look at David who didn't repent when he commited adultery and murder, and I am pretty sure David is in heaven !
David BTW did acknowledge his sins but didn't repent of it which is to be done by animal sacrafice and etc for repentance.
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
Edited by evangelist on 08/22/2009 07:13:20
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/17/2007
Location: USA
David did repent the proper way. We are told over and over even in the O.T. that God did not desire animal sacrifices and we are also told that they could never take away sins, but were just a reminder of sin.
That's why Paul can use David as an example of justification by faith apart from the works of Law in Romans 4 (That is the context of Romans 4, surely you would agree to that).
If David would have tried to seek forgiveness through the rituals of the Law, Paul could not have used him as an example in Romans 4. His two main examples are Abraham, who was not under the Mosaic Law and was justified before circumcision, and David who was under the Law, but did not rely on the law for his rejustification.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
Evangelist. Anything that Jesus taught before His death on the Cross IS the GOSPEL MESSAGE. His death on the cross only sealed it.
That is where you are getting confused. You reject what Christ taught in favor of a misinterpretation of Paul's commentaries on the Gospel.
Paul did not give us the Gospel. He did write about it and answered questions on it, and even taught it when he travelled in ministry. But Paul is NOT the author of the Gospel. Jesus is. And Jesus testafied to His Gospel before His death on the cross. And yes spoke some more on it after too.
Do you have a Last Will and Testament prepared to look after your family should you die? If not, why not? If so, did you write your testament before or after you died?
Do you know of ANYONE who wrote their Last Will and Testament after they died?
Hebrews 9:15-17 "And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions [that were] under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.
Hbr 9:16 For where a testament [is], there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
Hbr 9:17 For a testament [is] of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth."
The Testament is given before the death of the Testator, but goes into effect after the testator dies.
For example, John Doe has a wife two children. John Doe also has a house, a car and assets worth $100,000. If he dies without a will, the Government steps in and sorts everything out. A testator cannot make a Testament after he dies. But if Mr. Doe produces a Will (AKA Last Will and Testament), he can dictate how his estate will be divided amongst his family members. He can also make decisions on who will look after his minor children in the event that his wife dies before him.
The Will may state that the house, the car and the $100,000 will go to his wife and some souvenirs might be left to each of his children. Now while John Doe is alive, the family still lives in the house and drives in the car and has the money, but it belongs to Joe (simplest scenario here). Only after his death, does the Will come into effect.
That does not mean that the Will does not exist before his death. John Doe still has to write the Will while still alive, and should also make anyone affected by the Will aware of its contents.
Jesus spent three years before dying on the cross teaching the Apostles. What He said during those three years is very important to us, because ALL of that is in effect NOW.
Remember Matthew 5:21 onward? Jesus said what it was like before, and then told us how it is to be NOW. If you were a member of the OLD Covenant, you could read and watch pornography to your heart's content. So long as you did not actually touch someone who was not your spouse, you were fine in the OLD Covenant. But in the NEW Covenant, not only can you not touch, you cannot even think about. This was NOT part of the Old Covenant. It was there in spirit, but it was not spelled out in the letter of the Law.
Today we are held to the Spirit of the Law, not the letter. The Letter of the Law is for lawyers. It was all about legalism and loopholes. But not anymore. We are called to walk after the Spirit, not the flesh.
In the Old Testament, a male not getting circumcized was sufficient reason to cut him off from his people and God. It was a violation of the covenant - sufficent to break it.
Baptism is our entrance into the New Covenant. To refuse baptism is to refuse the New Covenant. You cannot refuse the New Covenant and then expect that Jesus will keep His part. Jesus will always keep His part of the Covenant - with those who are in the Covenant with Him.
Baptism is the means of entry into the New Covenant. If we are not in the New Covenant, then we are either part of the Old Covenant or not part of any covenant. That is not a position I would want to be in.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
Malachi 1:11 "For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name [shall be] great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense [shall be] offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name [shall be] great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts."
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by jdubya
David did repent the proper way. We are told over and over even in the O.T. that God did not desire animal sacrifices and we are also told that they could never take away sins, but were just a reminder of sin.
That's why Paul can use David as an example of justification by faith apart from the works of Law in Romans 4 (That is the context of Romans 4, surely you would agree to that).
If David would have tried to seek forgiveness through the rituals of the Law, Paul could not have used him as an example in Romans 4. His two main examples are Abraham, who was not under the Mosaic Law and was justified before circumcision, and David who was under the Law, but did not rely on the law for his rejustification.
You can't mix the OT with the grace of the NT on Jesus!
David did not repent of his sins and this is my point, so you can't use the excuse of repenting is a must on every sin even mortal before God.
Yes , for yourself and people we need to confess and close the door on satan lie, and disception to condemn you.
You do know Jesus didn't die on the cross while David was alive?
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
David did repent of his sins. In fact he is a great example for repentance.
And no one is mixing the OT and NT. But you cannot dismiss the OT because it lays the groundwork for the NT. Jesus is not some new god that came into the neighbourhood and supplanted the old god. Jesus is the God of the OT and the NT.
And if you read the many passage in the NT warning of deceptions and lies, not once are they of the type that you suggest. On the contrary, they speak directly against your message. The NT specifically warns against the deception that we can walk after the flesh and still receive our inheritance.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
Malachi 1:11 "For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name [shall be] great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense [shall be] offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name [shall be] great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts."
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
NO!; NO! ;NO! FAL
You can't mix the OLD covenant with the new as you are doing!
The gospel began with Jesus afteer the cross, it good news , too good to be true.
Even David mention about us being in the new covenant and being so victorious, and blessed.
The old as you are trying to mix was full of God wraTH; WORKS; merits, legalism, must do, or turn or burns.
The good new of the gospel is all on Jesus , focus on Jesus , all completed by , and through Jesus for us new covenant people.
We are thoses living in the last days, blessed above all nations, and royal preists which is explain in Hebrews that is too good news.
We can walk into the Holies of Holy with boldness because of Christ.
The old covenanat only the high priest could enter and that was a risk because they could have no kind of sins on them and no dirty vessel could enter into that room, but now the new covenant viel is torn for us to walk in as we are born again in a pure spirit to the throne of God , with all rights and no risks even without a water outward baptism.
But without A blood baptism of Jesus Christ is a NO! NO!, that is a requirement!
The example of how powerfull the blood is in the OT when the blood was put on the doors of the Israelites, and without the blood many first burn died.
Animal blood sacrafice was done because the blood is what washed the sins.
Heb 10:18 When sins are forgiven, there is no longer any need to sacrifice for sins.
Heb 10:19 Brothers and sisters, because of the blood of Jesus we can now confidently go into the holy place.
Heb 10:20 Jesus has opened a new and living way for us to go through the curtain. (The curtain is his own body.)
Heb 10:21 We have a superior priest in charge of God's house.
Heb 10:22 We have been sprinkled with his blood to free us from a guilty conscience, and our bodies have been washed with clean water. So we must continue to come to him with a sincere heart and strong faith.
Look again at the old testament tabernacle to get a better picture of God principles.
Look at the place where the animal sacrafice, and where was the washing of the laver!
Also look who went to the Laver!
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
Hello Fal
what you think of Baptismal Regeneration??
Christ commanded His original disciples to go into all the world and preach the gospel (Mk 16:15). Those of every nation who believed in Christ as their Savior were to be baptized "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost (Mt 28:19). These new disciples were to preach the gospel everywhere and to baptize those who believed (v 20) through their testimony as Christianity spread worldwide.
Baptism in the early church was by immersion: "they went down both into the water .... [W]hen they were come up out of the water" (Acts 8:38-39), etc. Why? Because baptism symbolizes the believer's identification with Christ in His death, burial and resurrection: "we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead ... we also should walk in newness of life" (Rom 6:4).
Unfortunately, various innovations and heresies were gradually introduced regarding baptism: that one must be baptized to be saved-- indeed, that baptism itself saves the soul even when administered to infants. These heresies became known as the doctrine of baptismal regeneration. Most Protestants holding these beliefs today are not aware that they originated with the Roman Catholic Church in the Middle Ages.
The Council of Trent (1545-63) stated that while Christ "merited for us justification by His most holy passion ... the instrumental cause [of justification/regeneration] is the sacrament of baptism .... If anyone says that baptism is ... not necessary for salvation, let him be anathema." (1) Vatican ll (1962-65) reconfirms all of Trent (2) and reiterates the necessity of baptism for salvation,(3) as does the universal Catechism of the Catholic Church released by the Vatican in 1993. "Baptism is necessary for salvation ... the Church does not know of any [other] means ... that assures entry into eternal beatitude .... "(4)
Trent anathematizes all who deny that "the merit of Jesus Christ is applied ... to infants by the sacrament of baptism" or who deny that by baptism "the guilt of original sin is remitted,,." (5) Today's Code of Canon Law (Canon 849) declares that those baptized are thereby "freed from their sins, are reborn as children of God and .,. incorporated in the Church. " Canon 204 states: "The Christian faithful are those who .. . have been incorporated in Christ through baptism" and are thereby members of the one, true Catholic Church(6)
For centuries before the Reformation, baptismal regeneration was rejected by Bible-believing Christians, whom the Roman Catholic Church therefore persecuted, tortured and slaughtered by the millions. Non-Catholics taught from Scripture that baptism was only for those who had believed the gospel: "teach all nations baptizing them [who have believed]" (Mt 28:19); "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized" (Acts 2: 41); "[W]hat doth hinder me to be baptized? ... If thou believest [in Christ] with all thine heart, thou mayest" (Acts 8:35-37). Infants can't believe in Christ.
Consider Cornelius's household: they heard the gospel, believed it and were baptized. That there were no infants baptized is also clear, for they had all gathered "to hear all things that are commanded thee of God" (Acts 10:33). "(T]he Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard [and, obviously, understood and believed] the word" (v 44); and they spoke with tongues (v 46), That they had "received the Holy Ghost" (v47) convinced Peter that they were saved. Therefore, he baptized them (v 48).
Nor can infant baptism be supported from the case of the Philippian jailor who " was baptized, he and all his" (Acts 16:33). Again there were no infants present because Paul and Silas preached the gospel "to all that were in his house," (v 32) and "all his house" believed (v 34) and were then baptized.
The early Reformers such as Martin Luther were Catholics who, importunately, retained some Catholic dogmas, among them baptismal regeneration and infant baptism. These heresies are still held by some Protestant denominations today. The issue is a serious one. If baptism is essential for salvation, then to reject that gospel is to be damned. But if salvation is through faith in Christ alone, then to add baptism as a condition for salvation is to reject the true gospel and thus to be eternally lost. The Bible declares that it is wrong to teach salvation by faith in Christ plus anything else, such as keeping the Jewish law (Acts 15:24). Paul cursed (anathematized) those who taught this false gospel that damns the soul (Gal 1:9.9). A gospel of salvation through Christ plus baptism is equally false,
"[T]he gospel of Christ ... is the power of God unto salvation to everyone that believeth [it]" (Rom 1:I6). That gospel, as Paul preached it, required faith in Christ's blood poiired out in death on the cross for the sins of the world and said nothing about baptism. To preach baptismal regeneration is to preach a false gospel that cannot save, which is why Paul cursed those who did so. The difference between faith in Christ alone and faith in Christ plus baptism has eternal consequences. Let us stand firmly for, and faithfully preach, the true gospel that saves.
http://www.cnview.com/on_line_resources/baptismal_regeneration.htm
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
Edited by evangelist on 08/22/2009 15:00:04
-
-
Fifth Member
Contact:
PM
Member since 01/17/2007
Location: USA
God used water and spirit every time he made a new creation in the OT.
Why don't we start with the prophecy for baptismal regeneration in the OT.
Eze 36:25 I will sprinkle clean water upon you, and you shall be clean from all your uncleannesses, and from all your idols I will cleanse you.
26 A new heart I will give you, and a new spirit I will put within you; and I will take out of your flesh the heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh.
27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes and be careful to observe my ordinances.
Water, then Spirit, baptismal regeneration.
Jhn 3:5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.
Water and Spirit baptism necessary for salvation.
Mar 16:16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.
baptism necessary for salvation, thus involved in regeneration.
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.
Water and Spirit, forgiveness of sins = baptismal regeneration.
Acts 22:16 And now why do you wait? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on his name.
Baptismal Regeneration of Paul
Titus 3:5 he saved us, not because of deeds done by us in righteousness, but in virtue of his own mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit,
6 which he poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior,
7 so that we might be justified by his grace and become heirs in hope of eternal life.
Water and Spirit baptismal regeneration. Does it get any clearer? Oh wait, I forgot you guys don't believe water means water. Also no dunking, but poured out upon us.
1Pet 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,
Baptism saves, therefore regenerates. A symbol does not regenerate. If you are saved before baptism, there is no need to make an appeal to God for a clear conscience during baptism. Forgiveness of sins is precisely what brings about the clear conscience.
Sounds like your author is one of these "trail of blood" fantasy Baptists.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 11/17/2007
Location: Canada
Amen to jdubya. Dave Hunt is a notorius anti-Catholic and hardly a source of good gospel teaching.
Me. I like the Bible. Straight up. We have presented you the Bible itself for our evidence and you keep coming back with the opinions of men.
Is Wommack your Pope? You seem to think that he is infallible. What about Dave Hunt? Is he infallible too?
You have not provided any verses that contradict what we have given you. And even Dave Hunt's passages were only raised to suggest that perhaps, in Mr. Hunt's opinion, might not have involved infants. But have nothing to do with baptism not being a requirement.
Pax et Bonum,
Faith_at_Large
Malachi 1:11 "For from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same my name [shall be] great among the Gentiles; and in every place incense [shall be] offered unto my name, and a pure offering: for my name [shall be] great among the heathen, saith the LORD of hosts."
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 07/10/2003
Location: Germany
quote:
Originally posted by Faith_at_Large
Amen to jdubya. Dave Hunt is a notorius anti-Catholic and hardly a source of good gospel teaching.
Me. I like the Bible. Straight up. We have presented you the Bible itself for our evidence and you keep coming back with the opinions of men.
Is Wommack your Pope? You seem to think that he is infallible. What about Dave Hunt? Is he infallible too?
You have not provided any verses that contradict what we have given you. And even Dave Hunt's passages were only raised to suggest that perhaps, in Mr. Hunt's opinion, might not have involved infants. But have nothing to do with baptism not being a requirement.
You stlll havent shown me one verse that says water baptism is an requirement!
one love
I may or may not believe coming forward is a necessary condition for salvation. But, if I clearly taught elsewhere that repentance/belief alone was sufficient no one would think coming forward is necessary for salvation,or water baptism is necessary for salvation.
-
-
Contact:
PM
Member since 06/26/2002
Mar 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.-- Jesus Christs
Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. -- Peter
Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. -Paul
The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to be Saved - C moore.
The truth does not change according to our ability to stomach it.
Flannery O'Connor
|
|
Subscribe by Email
RSS