GCM Home | Your Posts | Rules | DONATE | Bookstore | Facebook | Twitter | FAQs


Author Topic: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20  (Read 5142 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Online RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Manna: 316
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #140 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 06:31:05 »
Frankly, I don't even know what that means.  Have you been dead in the flesh and have you been resurrected from the grave?
It does NOT surprise me that you do not know, holding to what you do. I am going to quote scriptures and you TELL ME the interpretation thereof.
Quote from: Paul
Ephesians 2:5,6"Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved;) And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus:"
Again...
Quote from: Paul
Galatians 2:20,21~I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me. I do not frustrate the grace of God: for if righteousness come by the law, then Christ is dead in vain."
Need more?
« Last Edit: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 06:33:35 by RB »

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #140 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 06:31:05 »

Online 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7603
  • Manna: 235
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #141 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 06:58:13 »
Both Ephesians 2:5-6 is speaking about the spiritual life not the physical life.  And Galatians 2:20 is also about the spiritual life, not the physical life.  The quickening, i.e., the regeneration, is the spiritual not the physical quickening.

As to Galatians 2:21 you again appeal to the poor translation of the KJV.  Even John Gil recognizes that it is faith IN the Son of God that is spoken of there, that Jesus is the object of our faith.  We live this life by faith IN Jesus Christ.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #141 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 06:58:13 »

Online RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Manna: 316
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #142 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 07:24:00 »
Both Ephesians 2:5-6 is speaking about the spiritual life not the physical life.  And Galatians 2:20 is also about the spiritual life, not the physical life.  The quickening, i.e., the regeneration, is the spiritual not the physical quickening.
Is this the best you can do? Pitiful! I NEVER said that Ephesians or Galatians 2:20 is speaking about physical life, that's a poor understanding and assumption on your part to take what I said and come back with what you did....surely you can do better than that, or maybe you cannot...maybe I have given you more credit than I should. BOTH in Ephesians and Galatians Paul is stating a truth of the legal work Christ performed to secured a righteousness his people concerning their redemption that is revealed in the gospel of Christ that Paul preached and taught the first-century believers and us through them.
Quote from: Paul  Reply #141 on: Today at 06:58:13
The quickening, i.e., the regeneration, is the spiritual not the physical quickening.
I know that very well, too bad you reject it according to the teachings of Christ, and his apostles~and I truly before God say that in all sincerity. 

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #142 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 07:24:00 »

Online RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Manna: 316
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #143 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 07:32:40 »
We live this life by faith IN Jesus Christ.
4WD, every time you make such a statement, you are revealing to me that you do not see the truth of the gospel of Christ. The life of faith that any man has ever lived, he does through the faith OF Christ that is freely given on his behalf. No man would ever have faith APART from Christ's faith being imputeth to his account before God, being the VERY ground as to WHY we are regenerated by the Spirit of God, thereby empowering us to have faith, even though ever so imperfect, yet Christ's faith was the GROUNDS of our Justification before God. The law of God can only acquit PERFECTION, not imperfection which the best of God's elect have.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #143 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 07:32:40 »

Online 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7603
  • Manna: 235
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #144 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 07:41:10 »
Is this the best you can do? Pitiful! I NEVER said that Ephesians or Galatians 2:20 is speaking about physical life, that's a poor understanding and assumption on your part to take what I said and come back with what you did....surely you can do better than that, or maybe you cannot...maybe I have given you more credit than I should.

You said,
So, why was Jesus baptized? There could be only one reason~to prove how sins ARE forgiven....through Jesus' life, death and resurrection~his life was MY LIFE living in the flesh;  his death was MY DEATH in the flesh, and his resurrection was MY RESURRECTION from the grave~and boy do we have scriptures supporting this glorious GOSPEL truth!

Perhaps I misunderstood what you meant by that.  But it sounds to me as if you are speaking of physical life there.  Then you quoted Ephesians and Galatians in answer to my question.  Just how is Jesus life your life in the flesh or how is Jesus death your death in the flesh?  Have you died in the flesh? Have you been resurrected from the grave?  Answer  --  No.   As I said, I don't even understand what that means and I doubt that you do either.  If you do, please explain it.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #144 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 07:41:10 »



Online 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7603
  • Manna: 235
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #145 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 07:50:32 »
4WD, every time you make such a statement, you are revealing to me that you do not see the truth of the gospel of Christ. The life of faith that any man has ever lived, he does through the faith OF Christ that is freely given on his behalf. No man would ever have faith APART from Christ's faith being imputeth to his account before God, being the VERY ground as to WHY we are regenerated by the Spirit of God, thereby empowering us to have faith, even though ever so imperfect, yet Christ's faith was the GROUNDS of our Justification before God. The law of God can only acquit PERFECTION, not imperfection which the best of God's elect have.
Faith is not imputed.  And we are regenerated because we have faith.  That is the whole message of Mark 16:16. 

Whoever believes [has faith] and is baptized will be saved [will have sins forgiven and receive the gift of the Holy Spirit], i.e.will be regenerated.

Having sins forgiven and receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit is regeneration.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #145 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 07:50:32 »

Online RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Manna: 316
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #146 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 07:56:39 »
Having sins forgiven and receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit is regeneration.
So wrong~the elect where regenerated because their sin were legally forgiven on the behalf of Jesus Christ at his resurrection~need help showing this to you? Whether or not you know it, (or want to admit it) you and Kenneth Sublett are not far apart.
Quote from: Jesus Christ
Luke 19:1-9~"And Jesus entered and passed through Jericho. And, behold, there was a man named Zacchaeus, which was the chief among the publicans, and he was rich. And he sought to see Jesus who he was; and could not for the press, because he was little of stature. And he ran before, and climbed up into a sycomore tree to see him: for he was to pass that way. And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up, and saw him, and said unto him, Zacchaeus, make haste, and come down; for to day I must abide at thy house. And he made haste, and came down, and received him joyfully. And when they saw it, they all murmured, saying, That he was gone to be guest with a man that is a sinner. And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold. And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham."
Many of Abraham's natural seed were in Israel but Zacchaeus was a spiritual son of Abraham and the VERY reason why salvation came to him and not his next door neighbor!
« Last Edit: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 08:04:44 by RB »

Online 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7603
  • Manna: 235
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #147 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 08:01:57 »
So wrong~the elect where regenerated because their sin were legally forgiven on the behalf of Jesus Christ at his resurrection~need help showing this to you?
Truly idiotic.  I will come back later on this.  I need to get ready to go to church now.

Online RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Manna: 316
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #148 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 08:06:27 »
Truly idiotic.  I will come back later on this.  I need to get ready to go to church now.
You will come back believing the same lies...UNLESS God is merciful to you to deliver you from them. 

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #148 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 08:06:27 »

Offline Kenneth Sublett

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2071
  • Manna: 39
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)cheives (M)ore
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #149 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 12:24:09 »
A man on a BLACK HORSE came riding into my happy congregation and used this ARGUMENT to CONTRADICT every biblical practice of a historic congregation.  He GROWED the congregation from over 300 to less than a hundred and left a stink in my county which will never go away. So he moved to another town and subverted another congregation and left a stink among faithful churches.

Quote
And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation, I restore him fourfold. And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this house, forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham."

Matt. 1:21 And she shall bring forth A SON
            and thou shalt call his name JESUS:
            for he shall save his people from their sins.

g2424. Iesous, ee-ay-sooce´; of Hebrew origin (H3091); Jesus (i.e. Jehoshua), the name of our Lord and two (three) other Israelites: — Jesus.

Luke 19:8 And Zacchaeus stood, and said unto the Lord;
        Behold, Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor;
        and if I have taken any thing from any man by false accusation,
        I restore him fourfold.
Luke 19:9 And Jesus said unto him,
        This day is SALVATION come to this house,
         FORSOMUCH as he also is A SON OF ABRAHAM [and not GOD]
Luke 19:10 For the Son of man is come to seek
          and to save that which was lost.


G4990. soter, so-tare´; from 4982; a DELIVERER, i.e. God or Christ: — SAVIOUR.

4991. swthri÷a soteria, so-tay-ree´-ah; feminine of a derivative of 4990 as (properly,
        abstract) noun; rescue or safety (physically or morally): — deliver, health, salvation, save, saving.

JESUS WAS THE SAVIOUR WHO CAME NEAR BUT THAT DID NOT SAVE ANYONE.

Mark 16:15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
Mark 16:16 He that believeth AND is baptized shall be saved;
       but he that believeth not shall be damned. [Marked as treacherous]

No one could be Baptized in order to ENTER THE KINGDOM until the Kingdom came on the day of Pentecost. No one could be REgenerated with A new Spirit until they had OBEYED the form or TUPOS and were THEN free from sin.
« Last Edit: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 12:26:22 by Kenneth Sublett »

Offline e.r.m.

  • Church of Christ
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6511
  • Manna: 72
  • Gender: Male
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #150 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 12:27:58 »
Jaime,
Quote
I agree Erm, it would have been ludicrous for Peter to have told the 3000 like my Baptist friend, “repent and be baptized everyone of you for remission of sin and the gift of the Holy spirit, by the way it has nothing to do with salvation!”
I'm thinking, if Jesus said repent be baptized everyone of you and it was Jesus Christ for the Forgiveness of your sins, why would we then.just teach them "repent be baptized in the name of Jesus"? There would be no reason for us to. I don't think he's suggesting that we baptize people in Jesus's name without teaching them the scriptural reason why. Nor do I think TC is referring to those who deliberately went against scripture, seeing verses like Acts 2:38-39, Acts 22:16, and Romans 6:4-7, and deciding anyway to get baptized as a testimony, or because Jesus gt baptized, or such. I think he's referring to the exceeding minority of folk, in comparison, who got baptized without any clear purpose in mind, only because Jesus commanded it. To be honest, I don't know.  But I do think that this pattern, however small it may be arises from the false doctrine that emerged from the following event

The Faith and Practise of Thirty Congregations Gathered According to the Primitive Pattern

Published (in love) by consent of two from each Congregation, appointed for that purpose.

London, Printed by J. M. for Will. Larnar, at the Blackmore neer Fleet-bridge, 1651.


49. That when Baptisme is made known, or any other Action of obedience, then for men to refuse it, they are said to reject the counsel of God against themselves; Luk. 7. 30.

Otherwise known as baptism as an Act of obedience, which baptists and Baptist like churches love.  Putting new language on it 'Just cause Christ said so", doesn't take away the falseness of it. Am thinking, it's simple enough to be baptized scripturally. Why would those churches who leave out the reason for getting baptised, do that?

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 33091
  • Manna: 728
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #151 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 13:04:30 »
They have been indoctrinated to believe that baptism is a work of man. I would argue that for the reasons they say that, confessing with our lips must also be a work. Erm, you and I believe it is what God does IN baptism. The baptist believe God does nothing unto salvation, but only adds you to the church, this permitting one to commune with that congregation. To them, “because God said so” is the only reason to do it. I would say God’s remission of sin and the gift of the Holy spirit are paramount, since scripture goes to the trouble to plainly and unequivicably explain that in multiple places. It’s one of the most out in plain site truth in the Bible.

To me, it’s kinda like communion. The REASON we partake of the bread and wine is the main thing, not just blindly eating a piece of cracker and a sip of grape juice and calling it good in a “got’er done manner”.
« Last Edit: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 13:07:20 by Jaime »

Offline e.r.m.

  • Church of Christ
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6511
  • Manna: 72
  • Gender: Male
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #152 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 13:23:10 »
Jaime,
Good parallel.
No one would say do the Lord's Supper just because Jesus commanded it. There's something nefarious at work. If some church taught that Jesus broke the bread and drank the wine and told his disciples to do this, and left out the part "in remembrance of me", would they and the people who follow them be obeying the scripture, doing it just because Jesus said so?
« Last Edit: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 14:06:54 by e.r.m. »

Offline Kenneth Sublett

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 2071
  • Manna: 39
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)cheives (M)ore
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #153 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 13:27:40 »
here is the free e-book. I will put it into html if anyone is interested.

https://play.google.com/books/reader?id=ZLrvcArD3vUC&hl=en&pg=GBS.PP15[

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1301
  • Manna: 35
  • Gender: Male
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #154 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 17:20:04 »
Norton I am say that the act of baptism is not a testimony of God’s work. But God’s work IS evidenced in a changed life. If you agree, THEN WE ARE coming closer to agreement. To say that the act of baptism is a testimony of God’s work, NO. It is only the mode that God does his work. The changed life is that. Yes baptism is evidence of obedience, but only God knows if it is true. The changed life is where evidence of a rebirth being granted. If God doesn’t do His work in baptism, then baptism has no value whatsoever and is a meaningless activity.
Agreed. God's work of saving us is evidenced in a changed life. Why do we change our life? Because God has saved us and made is His own. Well how to we know that God has saved us and made us his own? Paul, in Romans 6, said that they should have gained that insight when they were baptized. And Paul points out what I see as the symbolism contained in the act. If that is true, who is testifying to whom?

In my mind, whether or not baptism is a confirmation or not, is not the main issue. It is just the most reasonable way to explain how it is that baptism, an act of obedience, saves a person, yet God does not save people because of their acts of obedience. Baptists and the like, generally try to make the Scriptures that say baptism saves, disappear. Church of Christ and like, people generally try to make the "not of works" Scriptures disappear or redefine what "works" means. I prefer to leave all those Scriptures in place and harmonize them. My ideas are not in away new. It one time I thought they were, until further search showed that they are very much like all the well known Protestant reformers, including A. Campbell and John Wesley, with the exception maybe of Zwingli. That is, when the reformers were describing adult baptism.
 

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 33091
  • Manna: 728
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #155 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 17:48:08 »
If baptism wasn’t God doing the work, it would have no avail. On our part it is a totally passive submission or dropping our clinched fist of resistance and submitting to the will of God. The very thing that happened with Naaman and God healing him. Once he dropped his clinched fist of restance and submitted to God, God healed him. He didn’t earn or merit his healing. Same with Christian baptism in Christ’s name.

I don’t understand the last half of your post. Scripture says our sins are remitted and we get the gift of the Holy spirit when we believe and repent and are baptized in Christ name. What could be plainer. Other scripture does not contradict that in my mind. The believe and be saved verses apply, the repent and be saved verses apply and the verses that include baptism and salvation apply. All scripture applies cumulatively. Easy peasy. No need for your angst. We shouldn’t be searching frantically for contradictory scriptures to baptism. It is part of the salvation story, and that story is not contradictory to “we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ.” We are not saved by our works, because God does the work in baptism. We earn or merit none of our salvation. If someone is bent on parsing baptism out of salvation, then they must by definition make it a work of man, actually blaspheming what God does in baptism. They even deny that God does what scripture says he does. Also they come up with unscriptural notions of baptism “because of” forgiveness of sin. If Satan could come up with the perfect scheme deceiving mankind to unnecessarily parse baptism from salvation, he would have a successful ploy wouldn’t you think? And if successful, wouldn’t you think it would be awfully widespread. Wide is the gate that leads to destruction. If it’s popular, doesn’t mean it’s right and what God wants.
« Last Edit: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 18:17:25 by Jaime »

Offline soterion

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4088
  • Manna: 150
  • Gender: Male
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #156 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 18:40:54 »

And Paul points out what I see as the symbolism contained in the act.


No symbolism there.

In Romans 6, we find an interesting Greek construction in several places in verses 4-8. Some years ago I did a short study on the concepts found when looking at the Greek preposition σύν (with) as it relates to our relationship with Christ. Especially when the preposition prefixes a verb, it can indicate a participation on our part with Christ. This gives the meaning of unity and sharing between us and Christ in the action. We can read "together with" in each of the contexts to see this idea.

συσταυρόω ; sustauroō - ...crucified together with Him... (Romans 6:6; Galatians 2:20)
συναποθνῄσκω ; sunapothnēskō - ...died together with Christ... (Romans 6:8; 2 Timothy 2:11)
σύμφυτος ; sumphutos - ...united (planted, grafted) together with Him in the likeness of His death...also in the likeness of His resurrection... (Romans 6:5)
συνθάπτω ; sunthaptō - ...buried together with Him... (Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12)
συζάω ; suzaō - ...shall live together with Christ... (Romans 6:8; 2 Timothy 2:11)

This union with Him in the likeness of His death encompasses our joint crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection in Christ. For me, this study put the final nail on the coffin of baptism being a symbol. Rather, baptism is our participation together with Him in His crucifixion, burial, and resurrection, and by that means we can now live together with Him in our walk through this life.

There are, of course, more to look at concerning this Greek construction, but that is enough for this discussion.

Another point that is interesting to me is found in 1 Peter 3:21. Peter writes that baptism now saves you. Inasmuch as Noah and family were saved through water, even so now baptism now saves you, not in what water itself does, but through your faith in seeking a clean conscience from God.

The interesting part for me is found in the Greek tense contained in "now saves." It means "continually now saves you," or "ongoingly now saves you." The efficacy of baptism doesn't stop when a person comes up out of the immersion; it remains beneficial throughout the Christian's life. What it boils down to, for me at least, is that as we walk by faith, we are continually or ongoingly cleansed by Christ's blood which He shed on the cross (1 John 1:7).

This continual cleansing was initiated when the sinner was immersed out of faith in the power/working of God (Colossians 2:12), which work He exercised in Christ unto our salvation and hope for eternal life.

To call baptism a symbol is a misnomer, at the least.

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1301
  • Manna: 35
  • Gender: Male
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #157 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 21:29:19 »
No symbolism there.

In Romans 6, we find an interesting Greek construction in several places in verses 4-8. Some years ago I did a short study on the concepts found when looking at the Greek preposition σύν (with) as it relates to our relationship with Christ. Especially when the preposition prefixes a verb, it can indicate a participation on our part with Christ. This gives the meaning of unity and sharing between us and Christ in the action. We can read "together with" in each of the contexts to see this idea.

συσταυρόω ; sustauroō - ...crucified together with Him... (Romans 6:6; Galatians 2:20)
συναποθνῄσκω ; sunapothnēskō - ...died together with Christ... (Romans 6:8; 2 Timothy 2:11)
σύμφυτος ; sumphutos - ...united (planted, grafted) together with Him in the likeness of His death...also in the likeness of His resurrection... (Romans 6:5)
συνθάπτω ; sunthaptō - ...buried together with Him... (Romans 6:4; Colossians 2:12)
συζάω ; suzaō - ...shall live together with Christ... (Romans 6:8; 2 Timothy 2:11)

This union with Him in the likeness of His death encompasses our joint crucifixion, death, burial, and resurrection in Christ. For me, this study put the final nail on the coffin of baptism being a symbol. Rather, baptism is our participation together with Him in His crucifixion, burial, and resurrection, and by that means we can now live together with Him in our walk through this life.

There are, of course, more to look at concerning this Greek construction, but that is enough for this discussion.

Another point that is interesting to me is found in 1 Peter 3:21. Peter writes that baptism now saves you. Inasmuch as Noah and family were saved through water, even so now baptism now saves you, not in what water itself does, but through your faith in seeking a clean conscience from God.

The interesting part for me is found in the Greek tense contained in "now saves." It means "continually now saves you," or "ongoingly now saves you." The efficacy of baptism doesn't stop when a person comes up out of the immersion; it remains beneficial throughout the Christian's life. What it boils down to, for me at least, is that as we walk by faith, we are continually or ongoingly cleansed by Christ's blood which He shed on the cross (1 John 1:7).

This continual cleansing was initiated when the sinner was immersed out of faith in the power/working of God (Colossians 2:12), which work He exercised in Christ unto our salvation and hope for eternal life.

To call baptism a symbol is a misnomer, at the least.
I understand that there are some problems with saying that, in Rom 6, Paul is saying baptism symbolizes being buried and raised with Christ. For one, most of us have the picture of Christ being carried into an above ground tomb, and a large stone rolled across the door. He may not have been put under the earth as one is put under the water in baptism. And now that you mention it, I cannot envision how baptism could symbolize crucifixtion.  So, OK I accept that. Your argument makes sense.
Now, I hope you tell that to some of those preachers who say that to obey the gospel means to reenact the death burial and resurrection of Christ in baptism.

Do you reject the idea that baptism symbolizes a cleansing, a washing from sin, or anything else?

« Last Edit: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 21:32:20 by Norton »

Offline soterion

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4088
  • Manna: 150
  • Gender: Male
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #158 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 22:58:38 »

Now, I hope you tell that to some of those preachers who say that to obey the gospel means to reenact the death burial and resurrection of Christ in baptism.

Do you reject the idea that baptism symbolizes a cleansing, a washing from sin, or anything else?

I've actually shared this concept with a few preachers, but long habits are hard to change. If they are going to receive this idea, it will take time. That is likely true for any of us when confronted with something that challenges long held beliefs. I've had to change my mind about some things and it took time.

I can't look at baptism as being a symbol for anything. Instead of it being a symbol of sins being cleansed, I look at it as an indication that sins are being cleansed right then on the cross.

Offline e.r.m.

  • Church of Christ
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6511
  • Manna: 72
  • Gender: Male
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #159 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 23:02:23 »
Norton,
Quote
And now that you mention it, I cannot envision how baptism could symbolize crucifixtion.  So, OK I accept that. Your argument makes sense.
Good point. I hadn't thought about that either.

Quote
Do you reject the idea that baptism symbolizes a cleansing, a washing from sin, or anything else?
I do, as you know we believe that is when it actually happens. But if I may point a few other inconsistencies with the symbolizing idea.
One, Paul speaks in Romans 4, two chapters earlier, of the "sign of circumcision", showing  that he had the capacity to express if he saw something as symbolic, and then a short while later does not express baptism in that way, e.g. -  a sign of the covenant or anything.

Second, if one sees Romans 6:3-4 as the purpose of water baptism to symbolize the burial and resurrection, then they must consent that the baptism being spoken of here is in water, and that vs. 4-7 is speaking that in this water baptism, our sins are nailed to the cross. I do consent, according to vs. 5, that there does happen to be a likeness (going down and coming back up), but it doesn't go so far to say that the likeness is the purpose of the baptism.

Third, there is no need to symbolize the dbr. Once we're saved, we're saved,  and we go on our way preaching God's message to others. There's no need to pause after being saved and give a public demonstration symbolizing the dbr to anyone. That was never called for. Matthew 10:32-33 is misused, as it is never spoken of in a context of a coming out event. It is spoken of in general, especially in verse 28 of not being afraid. Jesus reiterates these words in Luke 9:26, after he tells them that he will be killed. The general idea, as I understand it, is if they deny Jesus out of fear, or ashamed of him in any context, then Jesus will treat them like wise before his Father in Heaven. The only expectation was to live for Jesus, acknowledge that we follow Jesus if asked of us, and preach about Jesus, including the cross. There was no call or expectation to do anything to symbolize the death, burial, resurrection, or cleansing, washing from sin,. That was never a thing in the NT. Why would we need to symbolize it since all that is covered in our preaching about the same?
« Last Edit: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 00:09:02 by e.r.m. »

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1301
  • Manna: 35
  • Gender: Male
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #160 on: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 23:30:31 »
Norton,Correct me if I"m wrong. Sounds to me that the conflict is based on Jesus's baptism. That is that Jesus's baptism is a confirmation, therefore is an exception, therefore baptism in Jesus's name for the forgiveness of sins is not an absolute.
Where this falls apart, is where many evangelicals have made this up on their own, that Jesus is baptism is connected to our baptism. There is no scriptural connection between Jesus's baptism and our baptism. And also Jesus's baptism was not an exception.
John the Baptist said
John 1:31 I myself did not know him, but the reason I came baptizing with water was that he might be revealed to Israel.”

The whole purpose of him doing all his baptizing was so that he could find the anointed one and to prepare the way for him. Along the way he performed the mikveh, which was a common practice anyway. Jesus wasn't an exception to what he was doing, he was the reason for what he was doing.

As to why you realized that the Baptists had some justification for accusing us of believing a salvation by works, I don't understand, perhaps you can explain. I imagine you misunderstood what works are according to scripture. Well that, and I've heard some CoC's can be cold hearted and uptight in their behavioral expectations, which could lend to the impression of salvation by works. But that's their fault. Scripturally, baptism isn't associated with works.
I hope you don't think I have been ignoring you. I don't think you understood me about Jesus' baptism. I was defending my statement that baptism is a confirmation. Some were saying that baptism could not be a confirmation because it it for remission of sins. I pointed out that John baptized for remission of sins, yet when he baptized Jesus, it was a confirmation. Yes, I admit there were differences in Jesus' and our baptisms, but there are also similarities.

As to the Baptists having justification for their saying we teach a works salvation: They have no justification for saying that, just because we teach that baptism is for the remission of sins. I have no problem squaring the fact that God has promised remission of sins to those who believe and are baptized. with what the Bible says. What I do have a problem squaring with the Bible is the teaching that God has bound baptism to the remission of sins so tightly that, what God does in saving, and what man does in baptism can not be separated in time or any other way. What that teaching indicates to me is that no matter how much faith, desire, and commitment a person has, it counts for nothing with God, until he is put under water. Whether or not this person of faith is saved, depends not on his faith in Christ, but entirely on whether he has complied with an ordinance. That is about as good an example of teaching salvation by works that I can think of.
« Last Edit: Sun Sep 23, 2018 - 23:32:47 by Norton »

Offline e.r.m.

  • Church of Christ
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6511
  • Manna: 72
  • Gender: Male
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #161 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 00:00:59 »
Norton,
Quote
I hope you don't think I have been ignoring you.
Not in the least.

Quote
I don't think you understood me about Jesus' baptism. I was defending my statement that baptism is a confirmation. Some were saying that baptism could not be a confirmation because it it for remission of sins. I pointed out that John baptized for remission of sins, yet when he baptized Jesus, it was a confirmation.
Thank you for clarifying. I have to chew a little bit more if I would agree that baptism is God's confirmation to us, and I might have to re-read your posts on that.

Quote
Yes, I admit there were differences in Jesus' and our baptisms, but there are also similarities.
Ok.

Quote
As to the Baptists having justification for their saying we teach a works salvation: They have no justification for saying that, just because we teach that baptism is for the remission of sins. I have no problem squaring the fact that God has promised remission of sins to those who believe and are baptized. with what the Bible says. What I do have a problem squaring with the Bible is the teaching that God has bound baptism to the remission of sins so tightly that, what God does in saving, and what man does in baptism can not be separated in time or any other way. What that teaching indicates to me is that no matter how much faith, desire, and commitment a person has, it counts for nothing with God, until he is put under water. Whether or not this person of faith is saved, depends not on his faith in Christ, but entirely on whether he has complied with an ordinance. That is about as good an example of teaching salvation by works that I can think of.
I would agree. You described it well. God and God alone does the saving, when He sees the desired response, of which faith is a huge part. I would go so far as to say that baptism falls under the larger category of faith. Baptism with no faith is a sham.
« Last Edit: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 00:04:36 by e.r.m. »

Online RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Manna: 316
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #162 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 04:36:11 »
No one could be REgenerated with A new Spirit until they had OBEYED the form or TUPOS and were THEN free from sin.
Truly idiotic~(borrowing the words of 4WD to me).

If a person would truly try to understand what Kenneth has written with this statement, then he must confess if honest with himself that this typical statement from those men who believe in baptismal regeneration make all of the time, yet few point out that this statement is a CLEAR confession that they believe in WORKS performed by men BEFORE they have spiritual life and the indwelling Spirit of God. They have men OBEYING God while at enmity against him and without any spiritual strength to do so, per Paul in Romans 5:6; 8:5-9. One does not have to be a deep theologian to see through this corruption of God's word in order to exalt man and allow him to glory in his obedience before regeneration of the Spirit. To glory in one's works AFTER regeneration is wicked and sinful, so much more BEFORE one is born of God! Men like Kenneth make void the life, and death, and resurrection of Jesus Christ, and frustrate the grace of God, and have fallen from the true doctrine of grace, and are truly trusting in their own works that they have done to get to the world to come.

Online RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Manna: 316
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #163 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 05:06:41 »
They have been indoctrinated to believe that baptism is a work of man. 
Everone that has ever lived and participated in religion have been indoctrinated~now, those truly born of God, or as Christ called them...the very elect as they begin to hear and grow in grace, they begin to pull away from any indoctrination that they had been taught and as much as lieth in them begin to follow the word of God above the doctrines of men. It takes TIME and some of them never completely rid themselves of what they learn from men~it is a most difficult task of doing so.
Quote from: Jaime Reply #151 on: Yesterday at 13:04:30
I would argue that for the reasons they say that, confessing with our lips must also be a work.
That would be a sound argument from the scriptures~any act whereby we use OUR ENERGY to perform a spiritual act toward God would be consider a work done by man whereby he has an ACTIVE PART IN.
Quote from: Jaime Reply #151 on: Yesterday at 13:04:30
The baptist believes God does nothing unto salvation
That is totally incorrect~the majority of Baptist teach the same gospel as you folks do when it is all said and done. I know, been part of them. You folks come in the front door with your chest sticking out, they do the same through the back door. You both hold to free will and every other doctrine just about, only they corrupt water baptism a little different than the coc do. But BOTH would fall under Galatians chapter one of preaching another gospel.

Now, I will say that the Primitive Baptist is not your typical Baptist church, even though they too corrupt water Baptism by re-baptizing any and all that have not been baptized by their preachers since they believe that they are the true kingdom of God on earth and the only way into this kingdom is to be baptized by their elders, as they call their preachers of the gospel REGARDLESS of their ages. They do not mix any works into the gospel that they preach~they for the most part follow men like John Gill, John Brine, etc. There are a lot of PB in Texas and all through the south, not as much up north. Abraham Lincoln was raised a Primitive Baptist.
Quote
http://pblib.org/ALincoln.html
Many through Kentucky and Tennessee. 

« Last Edit: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 05:10:12 by RB »

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 33091
  • Manna: 728
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #164 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 05:48:38 »
Red, I said the Baptists believe God does nothing unto salvation IN BAPTISM. their is nothing for us to stick our chests out in pride over acknowledging that baptism is where God remits sin and conveys the Holy Spirit. It is simply what scripture says.if our hearts are not right prior to baptism, we just got wet, nothing more. Parsing baptism out of scripture is purely INSPITE of the message of scripture as a whole.  God remits sin and grants us the Gift of the Spirit in baptism. Not a single reason for pride on our part, anymore than saying someone is prideful because they repented.

Online RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Manna: 316
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #165 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 06:34:22 »
. their is nothing for us to stick our chests out in pride over acknowledging that baptism is where God remits sin and conveys the Holy Spirit.
Jamie, I agree that there IS a salvation in water baptism, that those who never were baptized into Jesus Christ enjoy that they who never were DO NOT enjoy. But, it is ONLY in a practical sense, NOT in a legal sense. Our sins are legally forgiven by the cross of Jesus Christ~"HIS" life of perfect obedience, death, and resurrection. In water baptism is where we give to God the answer of the report from his word concerning his Son, Jesus Christ being made sin for us, that we may be made the righteousness of God through HIS LIFE of perfect obedience FOR US.

Jamie, it is so clear, that regeneration MUST come to a sinner BEFORE he has the POWER to hear, see and give that answer. The very reason why it was imperative for Christ to come in the flesh in the likeness of sinful flesh was to be a surety for us, because of every man in the flesh was incapable of doing any spiritual acts toward pleasing God, because of them having lost the image of God through the fall of Adam and Eve. They lost the knowledge, wisdom, and understanding of being able to do SPIRITUAL ACTS pleasing to God~all sinners are without the spiritual strength of pleasing God, void of any faith, and love toward God UNTIL God regenerates them giving them the authority of doing so.
Quote from: Jaime Reply #164 on: Today at 05:48:38
if our hearts are not right prior to baptism
BINGO! That's scriptural...... the truth of the word of God! One's heart MUST be changed before water baptism, and by nature, every man's heart is exceedingly sinful and void any love to spiritual things~that which is born of flesh IS FLESH....sinful and at enmity against God, UNTIL God in mercy quickens that heart and gives the sinner a new heart by creating IN  the sinner a NEW MAN~and THEN THAT MAN can hear, see and then obey.
Quote from: Jaime Reply #164 on: Today at 05:48:38
Parsing baptism out of scripture is purely INSPITE of the message of scripture as a whole. 
I would never do that for sure~baptism is connected with the gospel of Jesus Christ and beautifully shows where our sin is forgiven......through the death and resurrection of Jesus Christ.
Quote from: Jaime Reply #164 on: Today at 05:48:38
God remits sin and grants us the Gift of the Spirit in baptism.
Legally, blasphemy! It is at baptism and the beginning of our walk with God we come to understand the KNOWLEDGE OF THE INDWELLING SPIRIT, which until then, we have NO knowledge of any spiritual truth~but we quickly learn that we have God living IN US to be our teacher and guide through our walk through this world unto our promised inheritance.
« Last Edit: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 06:38:31 by RB »

Online 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7603
  • Manna: 235
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #166 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 07:59:32 »
Legally, blasphemy! It is at baptism and the beginning of our walk with God we come to understand the KNOWLEDGE OF THE INDWELLING SPIRIT, which until then, we have NO knowledge of any spiritual truth~but we quickly learn that we have God living IN US to be our teacher and guide through our walk through this world unto our promised inheritance.
Legally  --  Schmegally.  The Bible says nothing about coming to understand the knowledge of the indwelling Holy Spirit in baptism.  It says we receive the gift , the indwelling, of Holy Spirit in baptism. Not the knowledge of the Holy Spirit, but the indwelling Holy Spirit.  The Holy Spirit is the gift.

You speak of legal salvation and practical salvation.  The Bible doesn't.  You create the false construct in order for it to fit your false doctrines.

Forgiveness of sins was given by God long before Christ came to earth as a human.  The whole atonement thing in the Law of Moses was for the forgiveness of sins.  The baptism of John was for the forgiveness of sins.  Christ himself, personally when He walked the earth, granted the forgiveness of sins.  Paul said,  "What does Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness" (Rom 4:3) He continued,However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.  David says the same thing when he speaks of the blessedness of the one to whom God credits righteousness apart from works: "Blessed are those whose transgressions are forgiven, whose sins are covered (Rom 4:5-7).

Clearly God forgave sins from the very beginning.  But that did not and does not tell the whole story. While sins were forgiven, there was still a price to be paid.  And that price was eternal condemnation.    It is in the cross that the penalty for those sins is paid.  The difference between the blood of bulls and goats and the blood of Jesus Christ is not in the forgiveness of sin but in the payment of the penalty for the sins, even if they are forgiven.  Paul, John and the author of Hebrews all speak of Christ as the propitiation for sin. 

Propitiation:

G2434

ἱλασμός

hilasmos

hil-as-mos'

atonement, that is, (concretely) an expiator: - propitiation.



Paul says in Galatians 3:13  "Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us." That curse was the curse of condemnation.  Christ paid the debt for the whole world on the cross (1 John 2:2).  We receive forgiveness of sin in believing, repenting, confessing and being baptized.

Online RB

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5604
  • Manna: 316
  • Gender: Male
  • Acts 24:16
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #167 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 08:10:44 »
Schmegally
No such word in the English language. Is that why you used the make up word? Is it because you reject giving the scriptures a proper sense. I have a meeting that's much more valuable than speaking to you at the moment. 

Later... RB

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 33091
  • Manna: 728
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #168 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 08:18:01 »
Red, a repentant heart is necessary before baptism. Remission of sin and the gift of the holy spirit result from baptism. The 3000 were not regenerated prior to repentance and baptism. Pricked in their heart is Godly sorrow, NOT regeneration. Why would they need the gift of the Holy spirit if the pricking was the regeneration? Scripture says Godly sorrow leads to repentance and repentance leads to salvation. You have the order screwed up. And I contend you cannot have regeneration WITHOUT REMISSION OF SIN AND THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. And scripture says those two things come at baptism.
« Last Edit: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 08:59:17 by Jaime »

Online 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7603
  • Manna: 235
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #169 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 08:32:21 »
No such word in the English language. Is that why you used the make up word? Is it because you reject giving the scriptures a proper sense. I have a meeting that's much more valuable than speaking to you at the moment. 

Later... RB
I made up the word schmegally just like you made up the phrases legally saved and practically saved.  And you are correct, there is no such word in the English language just like there are no such phrases in the Bible.

Online 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 7603
  • Manna: 235
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #170 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 08:36:08 »
Red, a repentant beart is necessary before baptism. Remission of sin and the gift of the holy spirit result from baptism. The 3000 were not regenerated prior to repentance and baptism. Pricked in their heart is Godly sorrow, NOT regeneration. Why would they need the gift of the Holy spirit if the pricking was the regeneration? Scripture says Godly sorrow leads to repentance and repentance leads to salvation. You have the order screwed up.And I contend you cannot have regeneration WITHOUT REMISSION OF SIN AND THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. And scripture says those two things come at baptism.
Jaime, neither Red nor Calvinists even know and understand what regeneration is.  In their theology it is a made-up concept to get around the false concept of Total Depravity.

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1301
  • Manna: 35
  • Gender: Male
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #171 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 09:59:46 »
Norton,Not in the least.
Thank you for clarifying. I have to chew a little bit more if I would agree that baptism is God's confirmation to us, and I might have to re-read your posts on that.
Ok.
I would agree. You described it well. God and God alone does the saving, when He sees the desired response, of which faith is a huge part. I would go so far as to say that baptism falls under the larger category of faith. Baptism with no faith is a sham.
I think we are in agreement on most points except maybe your last few sentences where you mentioned God seeing the desired response. God knows the thoughts and intents of the heart, and does not necessarily need to see the desired response. If for every commandment, God had to see the desired response, then none could be saved. The false system of salvation by works insists that God must see the, desired response or action before one can be saved. The Biblical system of salvation by faith insists that God counts one's faith as righteousness. Why should anyone describe baptism as if it belonged under the system of salvation by works, and then insert baptism, so described, into a system of salvation by faith?
« Last Edit: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 10:11:19 by Norton »

Offline Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 33091
  • Manna: 728
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #172 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 11:11:23 »
Because God’s inspired word  stated what happens in baptism. Without the word, we would have no leg to stand on. Baptism being a faith response in no way nullifies salvation by faith. No more that confessing with our lips nullifies salvation by grace through faith. Baptism conveying the remission of sin and the gift of the Holy spirit, in no way nullifies or poo poos salvation by grace through faith. It was only contemplated so since the moderns tried to parse baptism away from salvation evidenced by SO MANY these days that postpone baptism by months and years totally foreign to the first century Christians. Something I contend the adversary would do or cause people to believe such. What greater deception could he impose?
« Last Edit: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 11:20:42 by Jaime »

Offline e.r.m.

  • Church of Christ
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 6511
  • Manna: 72
  • Gender: Male
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #173 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 11:16:00 »
Norton,
Romans 4:19-22 Without weakening in his faith, he faced the fact that his body was as good as dead---since he was about a hundred years old---and that Sarah's womb was also dead. [20] Yet he did not waver through unbelief regarding the promise of God, but was strengthened in his faith and gave glory to God, [21] being fully persuaded that God had power to do what he had promised. [22] This is why “it was credited to him as righteousness.

Genesis 21:1-5 Now the Lord was gracious to Sarah as he had said, and the Lord did for Sarah what he had promised. [2] Sarah became pregnant and bore a son to Abraham in his old age, at the very time God had promised him. [3] Abraham gave the name Isaac to the son Sarah bore him. [4] When his son Isaac was eight days old, Abraham circumcised him, as God commanded him. [5] Abraham was a hundred years old when his son Isaac was born to him.


Granted, God did the much greater part, which Abraham had faith in, hence being credited to him as righteousness. But didn't that belief involve acting?, also as when in Genesis 22:10-12, God said "Now I know that you fear God," only after Abraham reached out his hand and took the knife to slay his son? His acting was part of his belief, as getiing baptized according to Mark 16:16 is part as well of believing in Jesus.

In Acts 19 Paul included baptism in the definition of them having believed Acts 19:2-3 and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” They answered, “No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” [3] So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”...
In Acts 2:44 All the believers were together and had everything in common.
The "believers" were those who had believed and been baptized.
« Last Edit: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 11:32:43 by e.r.m. »

Offline yogi bear

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 11879
  • Manna: 743
  • Gender: Male
Re: A textual issue with Mark 16:9-20
« Reply #174 on: Mon Sep 24, 2018 - 12:20:34 »
Here is my problem

Quote
Why should anyone describe baptism as if it belonged under the system of salvation by works, and then insert baptism, so described, into a system of salvation by faith?
Baptism is called works by many while the rest like belief repent and confess are not classified as such and that makes no sense to me why pinpoint baptism of all the responses to the gospel call and call it a work.

WE are told that we must obey the gospel to be saved and those that do not will be condemned. That is recorded in the word so just how does one according to the word obey the gospel is it not recorded?? I know beyond doubt that it is God did not tell us that we are to obey and not tell us how.

Paul preached against salvation by works and it was in reference to the old law (old covenant) the new covenant is referenced as the truth (faith) which includes the inspected response to the gospel call which takes in hearing believing confession repentance and baptism in Christ name as the expected response to the call.

Galatians 3:1-5 (KJV)
1  O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
2  This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
3  Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
4  Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain.
5  He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

works of the law  (old covenant), or by the hearing of faith? (new covenant)

people not understanding the teaching here mess up and call obeying the gospel a work of man to earn but it is far from that. The bible language calls one to obedience and as Peter says save yourself but that does not equal a works base salvation man has muddied the water into that belief. 

Acts 2:38-40 (KJV)
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.
39  For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
40  And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.

Following is many passages that teach one must obey the gospel of Christ (does that mean we are commanded to have a works base salvation works because it is what scripture teaches) so to obey is not a work.

Romans 6:16-18 (KJV)
16  Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
17  But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
18  Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.

Romans 10:15-17 (KJV)
15  And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!
16  But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report?
17  So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Galatians 3:1-5 (KJV)
1  O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
2  This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
3  Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
4  Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain.
5  He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?


Galatians 5:4-7 (KJV)
4  Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
5  For we through the Spirit wait for the hope of righteousness by faith.
6  For in Jesus Christ neither circumcision availeth any thing, nor uncircumcision; but faith which worketh by love.
7  Ye did run well; who did hinder you that ye should not obey the truth?


Philippians 2:12 (KJV)
12  Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.

2 Thessalonians 1:8 (KJV)
8  In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

Hebrews 5:9 (KJV)
9  And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;

1 Peter 1:21-23 (KJV)
21  Who by him do believe in God, that raised him up from the dead, and gave him glory; that your faith and hope might be in God.
22  Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:
23  Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

1 Peter 4:17 (KJV)
17  For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?

Acts 2:38-40 (KJV)
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.
39  For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
40  And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.

WE have gotten to debating each other so much we are afraid to to speak as the bible does because some has labeled obeying as a works base salvation when the bible actually teaches quite the opposite.

So just how is one to obey the gospel of Christ? How is one to work out there salvation Philippians 2:12 (KJV)
12  Wherefore, my beloved, as ye have always obeyed, not as in my presence only, but now much more in my absence, work out your own salvation with fear and trembling.