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


Author Topic: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....  (Read 5359 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline soterion

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5126
  • Manna: 235
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #350 on: Fri Sep 13, 2019 - 12:12:36 »
I am just going to throw this out there....I will start a thread on the blood because this one is getting too long and hard to read back.

"Behold, The Lamb of God who takes away the sin of the world."

The blood on the door saved the whole house. Ex. 12:22-23.

Am I the only one that noticed that the blood was not applied for God to save them with any of the other plagues...Just the death plague.

grace,

Lambs were offered throughout the sacrificial system during the Old Covenant, as prescribed by God for the cleansing of the sins of the people.

In Exodus 29:38-46, we find the twice daily lamb offering that was to be performed in the tabernacle/temple on behalf of the nation. Jesus fulfilled that in His crucifixion, being nailed to the cross during the offering of the first lamb and dying on the cross during the offering of the second lamb (Mark 15:25; Luke 23:44-46).

Obviously the lamb had a special place in various offerings, just as did the cow and goat (yearly Day of Atonement), in providing this temporary restitution between man and God until Christ came and fulfilled it all in His sacrifice.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #350 on: Fri Sep 13, 2019 - 12:12:36 »

Offline grace

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4771
  • Manna: 144
  • Gender: Female
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #351 on: Fri Sep 13, 2019 - 12:29:52 »
grace,

Lambs were offered throughout the sacrificial system during the Old Covenant, as prescribed by God for the cleansing of the sins of the people.

In Exodus 29:38-46, we find the twice daily lamb offering that was to be performed in the tabernacle/temple on behalf of the nation. Jesus fulfilled that in His crucifixion, being nailed to the cross during the offering of the first lamb and dying on the cross during the offering of the second lamb (Mark 15:25; Luke 23:44-46).

Obviously the lamb had a special place in various offerings, just as did the cow and goat (yearly Day of Atonement), in providing this temporary restitution between man and God until Christ came and fulfilled it all in His sacrifice.
I agree what you said about the Lamb and the offerings...but that does not take away of what it represented in the Passover.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #351 on: Fri Sep 13, 2019 - 12:29:52 »

Offline Texas Conservative

  • If you talk about baptism more than Jesus, you're confused.
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8961
  • Manna: 361
  • My church is 100% right, Your church is 100% wrong
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #352 on: Fri Sep 13, 2019 - 15:29:33 »
Nah, no overstating. My opinion of course. Which is adequately and clearly disagreed with by some. But I chose to go with the NT being sufficient to answer the issues discussed on this thread. AND that the OT will NOT contradict.

And TC, this debate can be decided without Naaman, though Naaman does show that it isn’t the water that’s special, but God’s chosen mode matters. Thanks for reminding me.

Chosen mode, or faith demonstrated through obedience to the chosen mode?

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #352 on: Fri Sep 13, 2019 - 15:29:33 »

Online Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 34713
  • Manna: 760
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #353 on: Fri Sep 13, 2019 - 16:34:54 »
Both, but God could have chosen anything. Like in baptism, the water is irrelevant other than God chose it.

Though from reading the story I’m not sure how much faith Naaman had in the chosen mode. He was awfully reluctant about the chosen mode. But he eventually reluctantly obeyed.
« Last Edit: Fri Sep 13, 2019 - 20:00:18 by Jaime »

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #353 on: Fri Sep 13, 2019 - 16:34:54 »
Pinterest: GraceCentered.com

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1431
  • Manna: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #354 on: Fri Sep 13, 2019 - 22:30:47 »
The NT adequately answers the ORDER of baptism and the remission of sin and the gift of the Indwelling Spirit and in which baptism that occurs. Acts 10 clearly ratifies that baptism in Christ’s name is in water. And it clearly ratifies that the Spirit upon is for a witness or testimony to someone or something.
One little comment here because it involves a common argument I have heard often and have used myself.
If getting baptized earned remission of sins and the gift of the HS, then the order would be very important. "You don't get this unless and until you do this" If remission of sins and the gift of the HS is truly a gift because of faith, then the order in which they and baptism occurred would not matter much. God promises remission of sins and the HS to those who are baptized, but that doesn't mean it is a tit for tat transaction.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #354 on: Fri Sep 13, 2019 - 22:30:47 »



Online 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 9699
  • Manna: 274
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #355 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 05:34:17 »
One little comment here because it involves a common argument I have heard often and have used myself.
If getting baptized earned remission of sins and the gift of the HS, then the order would be very important. "You don't get this unless and until you do this" If remission of sins and the gift of the HS is truly a gift because of faith, then the order in which they and baptism occurred would not matter much. God promises remission of sins and the HS to those who are baptized, but that doesn't mean it is a tit for tat transaction.
It is a tit for tat transaction to the one who believed and repented.  There are conditions for receiving remission of sins and the fit of the Holy Spirit.  Faith is only one of the conditions.  It is the preeminent condition, but still only one of the conditions.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #355 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 05:34:17 »

Online Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 34713
  • Manna: 760
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #356 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 06:17:14 »
Norton, I would say baptism in no way earns remission of sin and the gift of the Holy spirit. It is just where God chose to do those things FOR us. Getting wet doesn’t do it but believing, confessing Christ is Lord, and repentance of our sin along with submission to God in baptism, ALL as our collective faith response to God’s grace results in HIM remitting our sins by the blood of Christ and giving us the gift of the Holy Spirit. Because of this God saves us by His grace through our faith in Christ as scripture says. God DOES prescribe how we demonstrate our faith by our faith response. Earning implies a work and our faith responses are not works “earning” anything.
« Last Edit: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 06:52:38 by Jaime »

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1431
  • Manna: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #357 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 08:47:08 »
It is a tit for tat transaction to the one who believed and repented.  There are conditions for receiving remission of sins and the fit of the Holy Spirit.  Faith is only one of the conditions.  It is the preeminent condition, but still only one of the conditions.
Yes, the NT teaches that faith/repentance for salvation and the HS is a tit for tat transaction. Faith/repentance is essential, there is no other way. The other conditions, hearing, confession, and baptism, the actions we take, the deeds we do, for salvation are instrumental. Perhaps reading can be substituted for hearing, a thumbs up for confession with the mouth, and a sinners prayer for baptism. And perhaps they can be done "out of order". Its not that I am all for those substitutes, but if we bind certain specific actions on people as essential for salvation, we are bordering on teaching earning salvation by what we do.

Offline yogi bear

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12246
  • Manna: 744
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #358 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 08:59:35 »
Yes but if we let the scriptures speak and repeat what the teach then we are teaching the oracles of God. We have to teach what has been recorded if it is against our itchy ears then so be it we can not make it say what it does not say just to please our itchy ears if we do we deceive our self and all those we teach ans will answer for it come judgement day.

Christian Forums and Message Board

Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #358 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 08:59:35 »

Online 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 9699
  • Manna: 274
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #359 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 09:31:31 »
.....if we bind certain specific actions on people as essential for salvation, we are bordering on teaching earning salvation by what we do.
That is a very typical way of looking at that.  But it is wrong.  God's imposing some conditions upon which salvation is given does not mean that by meeting those conditions salvation has been earned.  In fact nothing could be further from the true.  The point made over and over in God's word is that there is no way to do enough to actually earn salvation.

That was demonstrated by the giving of the law.  Had anyone actually kept the law perfectly, then he would have earned salvation by the very fact that in perfectly keeping all of God's demands, no sin would have been committed and no salvation would be needed.  But in failing to keep even one of the very least of those demands, then the necessary perfection has been lost.  There is nothing from that point on that one can do to earn salvation.

God, thus knowing that man will not keep all demands perfectly, nevertheless has provided a means of salvation. In spite of not being able to earn salvation, God has provided a way. The way provided include some conditions, the signature condition being to believe in Jesus as the messiah and God who sent Him.  Other conditions are also given.  I find it interesting that of all the conditions, i.e., hearing, believing, repenting, confessing, being baptized, etc, the condition most people object to, namely being baptized, is by far the easiest condition of all to meet.  All the others are much more difficult to actually do.
« Last Edit: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 09:33:48 by 4WD »

Offline yogi bear

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12246
  • Manna: 744
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #360 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 09:35:41 »
 ::thumbup::

Offline soterion

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5126
  • Manna: 235
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #361 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 09:37:37 »
...but if we bind certain specific actions on people as essential for salvation, we are bordering on teaching earning salvation by what we do.

Well, Paul wrote in Romans 6:3-7 that baptism is how we are crucified together with Christ so that our old man is sin is done away and we are set free from sin and justified.

If you can find any other scripture that specifically teaches how else we can be crucified together with Christ so as to be set free from sin, show me. In the meantime, you can go on about how Paul is bordering on teaching earning salvation by what we do, since this is your thinking.

Offline yogi bear

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12246
  • Manna: 744
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #362 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 09:43:17 »
 ::thumbup::

Online GB

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 772
  • Manna: 3
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #363 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 09:44:22 »
Yes, the NT teaches that faith/repentance for salvation and the HS is a tit for tat transaction. Faith/repentance is essential, there is no other way. The other conditions, hearing, confession, and baptism, the actions we take, the deeds we do, for salvation are instrumental. Perhaps reading can be substituted for hearing, a thumbs up for confession with the mouth, and a sinners prayer for baptism. And perhaps they can be done "out of order". Its not that I am all for those substitutes, but if we bind certain specific actions on people as essential for salvation, we are bordering on teaching earning salvation by what we do.

But Salvation is only given to those who "DO" certain things. Not because I say so, or a religious franchise I belong to says so, but because the Christ of the Bible says so from the beginning to the end.

Gen.4:7 If thou doest well, shalt thou not be accepted? and if thou doest not well, sin lieth at the door. And unto thee shall be his desire, and thou shalt rule over him.

Ex. 20:6 And shewing mercy unto thousands of them that love me, and keep my commandments.

Jer. 6:16 Thus saith the LORD, Stand ye in the ways, and see, and ask for the old paths, where is the good way, and walk therein, and ye shall find rest for your souls. But they said, We will not walk therein.

Matt. 7:21 Not every one that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of heaven; but he that doeth the will of my Father which is in heaven.

24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

John 14:21 He that hath my commandments, and keepeth them, he it is that loveth me: and he that loveth me shall be loved of my Father, and I will love him, and will manifest myself to him.

Acts 5:29 Then Peter and the other apostles answered and said, We ought to obey God rather than men.

32 And we are his witnesses of these things; and so is also the Holy Ghost, whom God hath given to them that obey him.

Rom. 2:13 (For not the hearers of the law are just before God, but the doers of the law shall be justified.

1 Cor. 3:9 For we are labourers together with God: ye are God's husbandry, ye are God's building.

Eph. 2:10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

James. 1:22 But be ye doers of the word, and not hearers only, deceiving your own selves.

Rev. 14:12 Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Like Yogi Bear said "Let the Scriptures speak". Then we choose whether we will submit to them, or "another voice" as did Eve.

Offline Texas Conservative

  • If you talk about baptism more than Jesus, you're confused.
  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 8961
  • Manna: 361
  • My church is 100% right, Your church is 100% wrong
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #364 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 14:14:13 »
Well, Paul wrote in Romans 6:3-7 that baptism is how we are crucified together with Christ so that our old man is sin is done away and we are set free from sin and justified.

If you can find any other scripture that specifically teaches how else we can be crucified together with Christ so as to be set free from sin, show me. In the meantime, you can go on about how Paul is bordering on teaching earning salvation by what we do, since this is your thinking.

Norton is not saying Paul is bordering on teaching Works Based Salvation and you know it.  I understand he is alleging that some Cofcers come close. 

I would say some close, and some outright teach it.  Seen it with me own eyes.
« Last Edit: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 14:16:47 by Texas Conservative »

Online Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 34713
  • Manna: 760
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #365 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 15:41:24 »
Absolutely some cofcers do. That’s why they are shrinking rapidly into the oblivion of obscurity. Honestly I wasn’t sure how to take Norton’s post or his overall stance for that matter. Great guy though. I just put him in the pretty liberal camp, that coming from an accused liberal apostate Baptist wannabe myself.

Offline soterion

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5126
  • Manna: 235
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #366 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 16:13:56 »
Norton is not saying Paul is bordering on teaching Works Based Salvation and you know it.  I understand he is alleging that some Cofcers come close. 

I would say some close, and some outright teach it.  Seen it with me own eyes.

No, I don't know it.

He basically eliminated baptism as a necessity when he said, "Perhaps reading can be substituted for hearing, a thumbs up for confession with the mouth, and a sinners prayer for baptism."

Then he says, "Its not that I am all for those substitutes, but if we bind certain specific actions on people as essential for salvation, we are bordering on teaching earning salvation by what we do."

I just pointed out that Paul made baptism a necessary specific action for salvation. Norton is using the typical liberal response to such scriptures by implying they are "works" salvation.

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1431
  • Manna: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #367 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 16:20:32 »
Absolutely some cofcers do. That’s why they are shrinking rapidly into the oblivion of obscurity. Honestly I wasn’t sure how to take Norton’s post or his overall stance for that matter. Great guy though. I just put him in the pretty liberal camp, that coming from an accused liberal apostate Baptist wannabe myself.
I suppose both of us would be considered very liberal with traditional cofc doctrines. But I think both of us are pretty conservative when it comes to interpreting the Scriptures.









scripture.

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1431
  • Manna: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #368 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 18:13:30 »
And I assume that you are also outraged that I suggested that reading the gospel might be substituted for hearing the gospel. If not, why not?

Offline yogi bear

  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 12246
  • Manna: 744
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #369 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 18:33:26 »
Norton I just want you to clarify something for me so I understand what you said. You said " a sinners prayer for baptism."

Am I to understand that a sinners prayer can replace the need of baptism? Is that what you are teaching? That even though it is not recorded it is still acceptable before God?

Online Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 34713
  • Manna: 760
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #370 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 19:42:44 »
Norton, in West Texas, the old time cofc that we grew up with is all dead except some very isolated pockets. Granted I do go  to one of the more progressive cofc’s in the region. We are way more like Max Lucado’s church than any old cofc I am aware of. In fact I think we plaguerized their Belief Statement.
« Last Edit: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 19:54:16 by Jaime »

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1431
  • Manna: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #371 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 20:16:08 »
Norton I just want you to clarify something for me so I understand what you said. You said " a sinners prayer for baptism."

Am I to understand that a sinners prayer can replace the need of baptism? Is that what you are teaching? That even though it is not recorded it is still acceptable before God?
Yogi, I said perhaps it can. I don't know for sure. I understand baptism as a visible and tangible promise that God forgives our sins so that our conscience before Him is cleansed. We can't see God writing our names in the Book of Life, but we know that when we are baptized, God does write our names in the Book of Life, because as the Bible says, baptism is for salvation and remitting sins. If the purpose of baptism is, to wash away sins from a person's conscience so that they can worship God in gratitude and faith, as I Peter 3:21, Heb 10: 23, and Acts 22:16, when taken together, seem to teach; then perhaps the sinners prayer could serve the same purpose. I ,in no way, teach or recommend substituting the sinners prayer for baptism. The point I was trying to make in the post, was that only an extreme legalist would focus on and insist on the very act of hearing as an essential condition of salvation, and reject the act of reading the gospel for salvation, when they serve the same purpose. No, hearing, confession,and baptism all serve a purpose in bringing us into a relationship of faith with Christ. They are neither mystical magic, nor essential works of obedience we do to earn salvation.

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1431
  • Manna: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #372 on: Sat Sep 14, 2019 - 22:10:24 »
Jaime
My church has not completely left the old paths and departed from the faith like yours.  ::smile::
We are a "middle of the road" CofC with a very well educated preacher, both Biblically and academically. He never preaches the sectarian sermons we used to hear weekly thirty years ago. I sometimes substitute as a class teacher or preacher when he is absent, so you can see what a mess we are in, and how we are headed down the same broad path that your church has taken.


Offline grace

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4771
  • Manna: 144
  • Gender: Female
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #373 on: Sun Sep 15, 2019 - 01:46:40 »
I have heard many times the OT is the NT concealed, and the NT is the OT revealed. I do believe the OT answers many questions that are not plain in the NT.

Like:
NT...
Why did Jesus only pick 12 disciples instead of 20 etc.?
Why did Jesus only pick 70 to heal the sick and cast out devils?
Why just 120 in the Upper Room in Acts?
Why 3,000 converted on the Day of Pentecost?

OT...
Jacob had 12 sons who formed a new nation called Israel, Jesus chose 12 disciples who would form a spiritual nation.
There were 70 members of the Jewish judicial court called the Sanhedrin, and Christ chose 70 disciples to carry His Word and set people free from sickness and demonic power.
In Nehemiah's time, he formed the Great Synagogue which eventually consisted of 120 members. On the Day of Pentecost, there were 120 believer who helped birth the church so to speak.
On the first Pentecost, 3,000 men were slain for worshiping the golden calf. On the Day of Pentecost 3, 000 men were saved.

God is very much in to detail. When we ignore the details...we could miss out on a deeper meaning.


Offline grace

  • Hero
  • *****
  • Posts: 4771
  • Manna: 144
  • Gender: Female
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #374 on: Sun Sep 15, 2019 - 02:10:55 »
For "whatsoever things were written aforetime (Old Testament) were written for our learning, that we through
patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope." (Rom.15:4) Furthermore "brethren (saints, men and women)  I would not that ye should be ignorant how...all these things (that happened to the children of Israel) happened unto them for "ensamples."1 (i.e. "types"- models, sketchy outlines. Strong's Greek)

So we can take the journey from Egypt- Canaan and get a model of our salvation.

The blood was not applied in the Red Sea!
If the Red Sea is an ensample of baptism...their enemies were destroyed there.


Online Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 34713
  • Manna: 760
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #375 on: Sun Sep 15, 2019 - 08:26:12 »
Salvation is deliverance just as it was with the Israelites at the Red Sea. They were delivered BY God through the water as we are delivered by God through the water. The parallel is uncanny. It’s not what the Israelites do or what we do, but what God does through the the Red Sea and through baptism.

God could have taken the Israelites north and avoided the Red Sea. HE chose the route, just as he chose baptism for his purposes. Jaime woulda chose something else.
« Last Edit: Sun Sep 15, 2019 - 08:38:11 by Jaime »

Offline Norton

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1431
  • Manna: 36
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #376 on: Sun Sep 15, 2019 - 09:04:07 »
For "whatsoever things were written aforetime (Old Testament) were written for our learning, that we through
patience and comfort of the scriptures might have hope." (Rom.15:4) Furthermore "brethren (saints, men and women)  I would not that ye should be ignorant how...all these things (that happened to the children of Israel) happened unto them for "ensamples."1 (i.e. "types"- models, sketchy outlines. Strong's Greek)

So we can take the journey from Egypt- Canaan and get a model of our salvation.

The blood was not applied in the Red Sea!
If the Red Sea is an ensample of baptism...their enemies were destroyed there.
God openly, visibly, and dramatically proclaimed the Israelites as His own chosen people at the Red Sea. He does the same for us today at baptism, although it is done one individual at a time.

And let me say this for the benefit of my cofc friends. the Israelites were not chosen because they complied with the command of Moses and walked across the Sea. They were chosen because they were descendents of Abraham. And we today are not chosen because we comply with the ordinance to be baptized. We are chosen because we believe.
« Last Edit: Sun Sep 15, 2019 - 09:25:13 by Norton »

Online GB

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 772
  • Manna: 3
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #377 on: Sun Sep 15, 2019 - 09:20:14 »
Salvation is deliverance just as it was with the Israelites at the Red Sea. They were delivered BY God through the water as we are delivered by God through the water. The parallel is uncanny. It’s not what the Israelites do or what we do, but what God does through the the Red Sea and through baptism.

God could have taken the Israelites north and avoided the Red Sea. HE chose the route, just as he chose baptism for his purposes. Jaime woulda chose something else.

1 Cor. 10:1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant, how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea;

2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

3 And did all eat the same spiritual meat;

4 And did all drink the same spiritual drink: for they drank of that spiritual Rock that followed them: and that Rock was Christ.

5 But with many of them God was not well pleased: for they were overthrown in the wilderness.

6 Now these things were our examples, to the intent we should not lust after evil things, as they also lusted.

Baptism didn't save "many" of them because of what "they did" afterwards, not because of what God did.

I think this part of the story is omitted from much of todays religious discussions. But the Authors of the Bible certainly didn't loose track of why some made it, and "many" did not.

Heb. 12:1 Wherefore seeing we also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us,

2 Looking unto Jesus the author and finisher of our faith; who for the joy that was set before him endured the cross, despising the shame, and is set down at the right hand of the throne of God.

3 For consider him that endured such contradiction of sinners against himself, lest ye be wearied and faint in your minds.

4 Ye have not yet resisted unto blood, striving against sin.

Isn't that the real reason why some made it After baptism, and some didn't? Those who "strive against" Transgression of God's Laws after baptism were used as examples of Faith we are to rise to.

Those who didn't strive against Transgression of God's Laws after baptism were overthrown in the wilderness. The Baptism didn't save them.

Jesus confirms this line of thought, in my view.

Matt. 7:22 Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works?

23 And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (Lawlessness)

24 Therefore whosoever heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them, I will liken him unto a wise man, which built his house upon a rock:

25 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell not: for it was founded upon a rock.

26 And every one that heareth these sayings of mine, and doeth them not, shall be likened unto a foolish man, which built his house upon the sand:

27 And the rain descended, and the floods came, and the winds blew, and beat upon that house; and it fell: and great was the fall of it.

It just seems that the Baptism facilitated their escape from the bondage of sin, but it was their obedience or disobedience after the baptism that determined their fate.




Online Jaime

  • (Pronounced Hi-Me, not Ja-Me)
  • Global Moderator
  • *****
  • Posts: 34713
  • Manna: 760
  • Gender: Male
  • I AM A DEPLORABLE
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #378 on: Sun Sep 15, 2019 - 09:41:44 »
For sure even we can shipwreck our faith. The Israelites were no different. Salvation was given them, yet not all made it in the end.

Offline NorrinRadd

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1989
  • Manna: 100
  • Gender: Male
  • Everybody is somebody's heretic
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #379 on: Tue Sep 17, 2019 - 03:27:25 »
Norton I just want you to clarify something for me so I understand what you said. You said " a sinners prayer for baptism."

Am I to understand that a sinners prayer can replace the need of baptism? Is that what you are teaching? That even though it is not recorded it is still acceptable before God?

It's a matter of interpretation.  Many would be inclined to interpret Acts 2:21 and Rom. 10:13 are examples of salvation by means of "sinner's prayer."

Offline NorrinRadd

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1989
  • Manna: 100
  • Gender: Male
  • Everybody is somebody's heretic
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #380 on: Tue Sep 17, 2019 - 03:31:00 »
... I find it interesting that of all the conditions, i.e., hearing, believing, repenting, confessing, being baptized, etc, the condition most people object to, namely being baptized, is by far the easiest condition of all to meet.  All the others are much more difficult to actually do.

Except in the case of infant baptism, how is baptism the "easiest"?

Offline NorrinRadd

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1989
  • Manna: 100
  • Gender: Male
  • Everybody is somebody's heretic
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #381 on: Tue Sep 17, 2019 - 03:38:30 »
...
I just pointed out that Paul made baptism a necessary specific action for salvation. ...

I'm not seeing it there (Rom. 6:3-4).  That verse *can* be interpreted that way, but I don't think it's any more clear-cut than saying 10:13 of the same book teaches that "calling on the name of the Lord" is, in and of itself, sufficient to save.

Online 4WD

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 9699
  • Manna: 274
  • (T)ogether (E)veryone (A)chieves (M)ore
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #382 on: Tue Sep 17, 2019 - 05:44:28 »
Except in the case of infant baptism, how is baptism the "easiest"?
Because it isn't even required.

Offline NorrinRadd

  • Senior Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 1989
  • Manna: 100
  • Gender: Male
  • Everybody is somebody's heretic
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #383 on: Tue Sep 17, 2019 - 06:16:13 »
I have heard many times the OT is the NT concealed, and the NT is the OT revealed. I do believe the OT answers many questions that are not plain in the NT.

Like:
NT...
Why did Jesus only pick 12 disciples instead of 20 etc.?
Why did Jesus only pick 70 to heal the sick and cast out devils?
Why just 120 in the Upper Room in Acts?
Why 3,000 converted on the Day of Pentecost?

OT...
Jacob had 12 sons who formed a new nation called Israel, Jesus chose 12 disciples who would form a spiritual nation.
There were 70 members of the Jewish judicial court called the Sanhedrin, and Christ chose 70 disciples to carry His Word and set people free from sickness and demonic power.
In Nehemiah's time, he formed the Great Synagogue which eventually consisted of 120 members. On the Day of Pentecost, there were 120 believer who helped birth the church so to speak.
On the first Pentecost, 3,000 men were slain for worshiping the golden calf. On the Day of Pentecost 3, 000 men were saved.

God is very much in to detail. When we ignore the details...we could miss out on a deeper meaning.

The 12 Apostles as a reminder of the 12 Patriarchs is probably right.

The 70 as a parallel to the Sanhedrin could be right, or it could be an echo of the seventy elders in Ex. 24.  Or something else.  Or nothing.

I never heard of that Nehemiah thing, nor have I ever heard any reason for the 120 number.  If our theological OCD demands we find one, I suggest 2 Chr. 5:12.

The 3000 thing does make a nice reversal.

Ultimately all of this is speculation, which is why it is silly to obsess over such details.  God is concerned about details -- sometimes.  And when He is, He spells them out, like in the construction of the Tabernacle, and the garments of the priests.

Offline soterion

  • Legendary Member
  • ******
  • Posts: 5126
  • Manna: 235
  • Gender: Male
Re: Old Testament law vs. New Testament concerning certain practices.....
« Reply #384 on: Tue Sep 17, 2019 - 07:42:59 »
I'm not seeing it there (Rom. 6:3-4).  That verse *can* be interpreted that way, but I don't think it's any more clear-cut than saying 10:13 of the same book teaches that "calling on the name of the Lord" is, in and of itself, sufficient to save.

Well, you stop at verse 4, and I have been consistently taking this point to verse 7. Paul unambiguously points out that baptism is how we are crucified together with Christ so that the body of sin might be removed and we be set free from sin. That is salvation. There is nothing to interpret...it is what the passage.

One definite thing about reading the Bible, we suspend our normal abilities to read plain words and basic sentence structures, and some of the clearest and plainest texts become an "interpretation." ::frown::

 

     
anything