Is Getting Baptised Needed?

Is it logical to spit in a mans face and cause him to see again? Its logical for a man to walk on water? It it logical to speak to a mountain and have it be removed? Is it logical to speak to a dead man and cause him to live again? God on purpose choose that the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God, and that the Wisdom of God is foolishness with man. Why? So no flesh is going to stand in his presence. The Word of God is illogical to the human mind.

1Co 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
 
CCW95A said:
Is it logical to spit in a mans face and cause him to see again? Its logical for a man to walk on water? It it logical to speak to a mountain and have it be removed? Is it logical to speak to a dead man and cause him to live again? God on purpose choose that the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God, and that the Wisdom of God is foolishness with man. Why? So no flesh is going to stand in his presence. The Word of God is illogical to the human mind.

1Co 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
Click to expand...

I guess we should come in agreement on the definition of "logic" before we continue debating about if God is logical or not. I think people are debating about logic, but are talking about completely different definitions of it.
 
CCW95A said:
Is it logical to spit in a mans face and cause him to see again? Its logical for a man to walk on water? It it logical to speak to a mountain and have it be removed? Is it logical to speak to a dead man and cause him to live again? God on purpose choose that the wisdom of this world is foolishness with God, and that the Wisdom of God is foolishness with man. Why? So no flesh is going to stand in his presence. The Word of God is illogical to the human mind.

1Co 2:14 The natural person does not accept the things of the Spirit of God, for they are folly to him, and he is not able to understand them because they are spiritually discerned.
Click to expand...

This is exactly what I was talking about. Thank you for putting it so well.
 
Where is the Messiah said:
I guess we should come in agreement on the definition of "logic" before we continue debating about if God is logical or not. I think people are debating about logic, but are talking about completely different definitions of it.
Click to expand...

Logic is anything man in his natural brain, that is in his head can come up with in an attempt to understand scripture. Also known as...
Col 2:8 See to it that no one carries you off as spoil or makes you yourselves captive by his so-called philosophy and intellectualism and vain deceit (idle fancies and plain nonsense), following human tradition (men's ideas of the material rather than the spiritual world), just crude notions following the rudimentary and elemental teachings of the universe and disregarding [the teachings of] Christ (the Messiah).(AMP)
 
LysanderShapiro said:
I agree -- Salvation by GRACE ALONE. But we obtain grace by faith. And with that, faith without works is dead. If one doesn't have faith, does he still have grace?
Click to expand...

We do not obtain grace by faith we access it. The grace of God has been given unto all men so he can be saved, even though that person does not believe, grace is still available to him. As long as that person is physically alive grace is always available, and present.
 
CCW95A said:
We do not obtain grace by faith we access it. The grace of God has been given unto all men so he can be saved, even though that person does not believe, grace is still available to him. As long as that person is physically alive grace is always available, and present.
Click to expand...

We can word it that way if you prefer -- obtain or access, I mean precisely what I said, which isn't any different from what you said.

Let's try to bring the question back around because semantics keep blocking it. If man is saved by Grace alone (which I say he is) but one must ACCESS it first (which I also agree with) what was it that made Judas not able to access it?
 
LysanderShapiro said:
We can word it that way if you prefer -- obtain or access, I mean precisely what I said, which isn't any different from what you said.

Let's try to bring the question back around because semantics keep blocking it. If man is saved by Grace alone (which I say he is) but one must ACCESS it first (which I also agree with) what was it that made Judas not able to access it?
Click to expand...
Hey all Israel marched around as children of Abraham, but many did not have the faith of Abraham. So they were not children of promise. They had "evil" hearts of unbelief. "without faith its impossible to please God"
 
Mitspa said:
Hey all Israel marched around as children of Abraham, but many did not have the faith of Abraham. So they were not children of promise. They had "evil" hearts of unbelief. "without faith its impossible to please God"
Click to expand...

I agree. I never suggested one can reach salvation without faith. I'm calling into question faith ALONE.
 
Mitspa said:
I have not seen anyone on this thread that has suggested a "dead" faith? So not sure where the question is? Maybe I missed a post?
Click to expand...

You may have--this thread has jumped around quite a lot. But there were posts expressing that only faith is required to accessing faith (not my wording).
 
LysanderShapiro said:
You may have--this thread has jumped around quite a lot. But there were posts expressing that only faith is required to accessing faith (not my wording).
Click to expand...
Maybe someone has gotten the words mixed up, or having a hard time expressing what they are trying to say? Because that don't make a whole lot of biblical sense.
 
Mitspa said:
Maybe someone has gotten the words mixed up, or having a hard time expressing what they are trying to say? Because that don't make a whole lot of biblical sense.
Click to expand...
The confusion comes scripture that expresses the necessity of faith--which I for a minute wouldn't argue against--but they've misread it as saying "oh. Faith. We need faith...Only faith." More formally, this is what Martin Luther proposed, which is why he added te word "ALONE" to Romans 3:28 and tried to remove James.
 
LysanderShapiro said:
The confusion comes scripture that expresses the necessity of faith--which I for a minute wouldn't argue against--but they've misread it as saying "oh. Faith. We need faith...Only faith."
Click to expand...
Well there is "works" according to the "law of faith" its still "faith"....in that someone sees that as faith without works...which is almost always the issue, in this discussion. The real issue here is the "law of works" which are very different than works of faith. Good works come from God, working in the justified and spirit filled believer. God gets the glory!
 
LysanderShapiro said:
The confusion comes scripture that expresses the necessity of faith--which I for a minute wouldn't argue against--but they've misread it as saying "oh. Faith. We need faith...Only faith." More formally, this is what Martin Luther proposed, which is why he added te word "ALONE" to Romans 3:28 and tried to remove James.
Click to expand...
I see you added to your post.....Ok then the issue is "the works of the law" James is NOT teaching "works of the law" he is teaching works of faith and uses Rahab and Abraham as the express examples of the type of works he is speaking of, both were not justified by the works of the law, but by a faith that acts according to what one believes.
 
It is so hard to catch up with a thread with an interesting topic, but having 8 pages of responses already :) So I will respond to the OP alone.. Will take some time to go through all the posts..

Is water baptism needed - Yes
Is water baptism needed for salvation - No

If the answer to first question is Yes, then there is no need to even consider point #2. If we know it is needed, then why complicate by linking it with salvation?

Also, why it is not needed for baptism? Because none of our "own" works can gain us anything w.r.t salvation. The driving factor behind an action matters a lot.. Like Paul says, everything should be for glory of God.. Even an unbeliever can get baptized in water.. Does that mean anything? I don't think so.. When a saved person, convicted by Holy Spirit, takes baptism to publicly confess his redemption, it does matter a lot.. Works coming out of faith is what matters.. Faith without works is dead faith.. Because real faith will bring out works that will glorify God.. Works without real faith is nothing but our own works.. And faith without work that glorifies God is dead faith..

And a person is justified by faith alone.. Reason being, a person could confess and accept Christ in deadbed, minutes before his death.. He will still get into heaven.. God can show mercy to a person even so late.. He may not have had enough time to exercise the real faith resulting in works which glorify God.. That is why Paul says, justification is by faith alone.. And James says, real faith will always be followed by wokrs (which glorify God)
 
Mitspa said:
I see you added to your post.....Ok then the issue is "the works of the law" James is NOT teaching "works of the law" he is teaching works of faith and uses Rahab and Abraham as the express examples of the type of works he is speaking of, both were not justified by the works of the law, but by a faith that acts according to what one believes.
Click to expand...

Expand on that.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top