Baptist Thread

Where can I find history of Baptists?

I’m Baptist, but I’m no longer anti-Apostolic. I see them as our allies against Freemasonic f*ckery, since the only demons left that don’t ordain women and promote faggotry are apostolics, Southern Baptist, and Missouri Synod Lutheran. That’s it, every one else has fallen.

Stop calling them "apostolic"

baptisthistory.org

I don't hate them either, I just don't agree with their theology. As a former apostolic, I'd say that converting them isn't too hard if you can manage to reach through the arguments from tradition they like to make and show them the truth of scripture compared to their traditions.

I disagree as well. I just want them to know we’re not rabid.

Do you see muslims as our "allies" too?
wew that ignorance

*Denoms, sorry.
And what ignorance? Those are the only denominations left that don't ordain women.
As for the Muslim comparison, I don't know if you've noticed but they are fellow Nicene Trinitarians.

There are almost no Evangelical denominations that ordain women, and evangelicalism is the majority practice in the US

WELS
PCA
OPC
ELDONA
BMA
Free Will Baptists

Just off the top of my head

Attached: 1553017832081.jpg (1024x862, 95.59K)

T H E O P N E U S T O S

What are the rewards in heaven that God promised his ardent believers?

this still sounds like work based salvation to me.I believe in salvation by faith alone and nothing else. You dont even have to do works or repent from sin. All you have to do is accept jesus christ as your lord and savior to be saved, anything else is works based salvatioin

"Faith without works is dead," dubsman.

I agree that it's our faith in Jesus as our Lord and savior that saves us. However, we may know that we are saved when we see the fruits of our salvation, which are good works. "You shall know them by their fruits", after all. The faith saves, but the good works that come after salvation are a sign that the faith is not a dead one, as said.

If any non papists pulled a fraction of the shitposting that papists pull in protestant/orthodox threads we would be banned in a heartbeat.

Papists are more prideful than anyone else, shitpost more than anyone else, ruin more threads than anyone else, and still act like they're the victim even though the mods are blatantly on their side.

Remember the baptist caricature spambot somebody made? The screenshot might still be in the meta thread, but I’m not sure.

Finally went soul winning last night and saw a couple people get saved. 10/10 would recommend.
If an anxiety ridden dummy like me can do it, anyone can. Dont ignore the great commission brothers and sisters.

Hallelujah!

May our paths be lightened by the Lord.

That's great! I'll have to step up my game sometime and try my hand at soul winning, I've never done it but I know a ton of people who need Jesus.

Your attitude is uncharitable and unChrist-like. It's almost as if you're attempting to drive potential converts away from Christ.

I've never seen conversion. Only gainsaying. That's why I don't bother "soul winning".

Didn't know that bowing down to God instead of a statue is worshiping a book. Crazy.

I can see that, but you have to realize that some of these people literally don't know the gospel, they only see the lies that the world tells them about Christianity. It's up to us, as followers of Christ to spread the word and try our best to help other people find the love that He has for them.

It seems to be pretty well spread now. If people wanted the gospel, they could literally google it.

What's the great commission?

That's just the problem though, people don't know how great the gospel truly is. They see lies about it and eat them up without thinking critically at all and doing their own research. They don't look up the gospel because they don't think they need it, so it's our job to help them find out how much they need it.

If someone's not going to listen, they're not going to. And that's what I've only ever seen. So I'm saving my breath.

Joel 2:13-14
And rend your heart, and not your garments, and turn unto the LORD your God: for he is gracious and merciful, slow to anger, and of great kindness, and repenteth him of the evil.
Who knoweth if he will return and repent, and leave a blessing behind him; even a meat offering and a drink offering unto the LORD your God?

Repenting of your sins is works, because you are doing the work. If you have to stop lying to got to heaven, you are putting forth effort to do something, eg works.

You go to heaven by believing that Jesus Christ’s death, burial and resurrection saved you forever and asking God the Father to save you in belief. You receive Christ as a gift, you don’t work for a gift.

This guy gets it.

The formula most christians use is completely wrong.

Because if you remove works than supposedly you also remove salvation. Because faith without works is dead…right? wrong That formula is LITERALLY works based salvation and 100000% wrong.

Faith = salvation
No works needed.

What are the best biblical verses that help somebody overcome feelings of envy?

What are some good study Bibles with commentary/footnotes/etc. from a Baptist or general Protestant point of view?

In a similar vein, my Mom has neck and back problems that make reading a medium to hefty sized bible problematic. Is there a complete, non-pocket Bible that's small and light enough to be less taxing for her? One that also possibly has footnotes/commentary, or is a lack of commentary/footnotes a compromise that's simply unavoidable for a lighter physical weight and size Bible?

Wouldn't it be better to get her a lectern or something similar that can keep a bible at an angle and height that doesn't put strain on her?

Audio bible or a pocket kjv.

1 Cor 13:4

Depends on your persuasion
Macarthur study bible if you're very reformed
Jerry Vines has a study bible, "Vines Expository Bible"
If your mom is a hardcore traditional (non-calvinist) baptist, esp. southern baptist, there is a W. A. Criswell and Paige Patterson study Bible "Baptist Study Edition"
If you're not familiar with any of those names or their teachings don't go with them.

ESV study bible is very popular, lots of "new calvinist" types involved (Mohler, Piper)
I have "The Open Bible" by Nelson publishers in NKJV, happy with it
The CSB is effectively the southern baptist translation, and Holman has a well recommended study bible called the CSB study bible.

honestly migrate this thread to >>>/christianity/ , we're enabling the overbearing mods here with our traffic

What about feelings of envy if a guy was/is fornicating with a woman I had a crush on?

Here's a biblical concept to meditate on: you should expect your wife to be a virgin for you. You shouldn't be envious because you shouldn't want a harlot.

These are not feelings that I want. How do I overcome this situation.

real talk you just tough it out
when you fall for a girl she gets deep in your mind until you find a better one who you actually become romantic with, and even then you'll have sporadic longing thoughts of what could have been.

I appreciate this, but I don't like the idea that these feelings won't go away permanently…

Thank you both for the excellent suggestions! I find myself drawn to the CSB Study Bible in particular, and think that the Everyday Study Bible version of the CSB might be the perfect marriage of size/weight and footnotes/commentary for my Mom.

I'll also try to check out the other suggestions in the future as time permits (as well as finances, since the "Baptist Study Edition" is a bit on the pricey side due to being out of print.)

Thank you for the suggestion, but she already has a similar style reading stand, and still finds the current size and weight of the Bible, that she got from a family member, discouraging to use. (Plus the footnotes/commentary in that one aren't particularly good, as we've both noted.)

Honestly, from experience, such feelings won't last forever, especially as you get older and mature. Ultimately, getting over a crush is a classic case of the passage of time, focusing on other things in your life, and "out of sight, out of mind" (i.e. if you have a crush on her, don't try to be "just friends", otherwise those feelings will continue to linger longer than they should, based on a false hope that will just torture and prolong the process of moving on.)

Also, overall, you should center your life around God and his mission for your, primarily, rather than centering your life around getting a woman. I don't know for sure if you have this particular problem, but 9 times of of 10, when a guy has a hard time getting over a crush, it's because he at least subconsciously puts getting romantically involved with a woman on a pedestal, and makes it the focus of his life to a unhealthy degree.

The Criswell one I always see in used bookstores, it's gone by a couple different names too

I'll keep it an eye out for it then, thanks!

What other names has it gone by, btw?

"Criswell study Bible" and "holy Bible: Baptist study edition"

Thanks again!

I am a Baptist and I saw these in the last thread. Why are all the early Christians proto papists?

Attached: Screenshot_20190112-103742_Adobe Acrobat.jpg (1075x1200 521.25 KB, 553.54K)

Dont forget this

Does 1Peter 3:21 mean Baptism is merely a symbol or public profession of faith?

Let’s find out, starting with its Greek.

καὶὑμᾶς ἀντίτυπον νῦνσῴζει βάπτισμα, οὐ σαρκὸς ἀπόθεσις ῥύπου ἀλλὰ συνειδήσεως ἀγαθῆς ἐπερώτημα εἰς θεόν, δι’ ἀναστάσεως Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ

Although the verb ἐπερωτάω is common enough in the New Testament and wider literature, the passive cognate noun ἐπερώτημα is very rare. However based on early papyri that we got(i.e such as in P.Oxy. 9.1200, the registration of a deed dated to 266 CE,and in P.Oxy. 9.1208, the public acknowledgement of a contract of sale in 291 CE) it carries the sense of a contract or covenant, perhaps also equivalent to the Latin applicatio ad patronum, whereby one entered into a client–patron relationship.

Also at issue is how one should take the genitive συνειδήσεως.If objective, then it would refer to the pledge of a Christian to maintain a good conscience, but if subjective, it would be the good conscience from which a Christian makes a commitment to God in baptism. The present consensus seems to be in favor of an objective genitive, with the ἐπερώτημα understood as consisting of the commitment or ‘pledge’ made at baptism to preserve a good conscience, that is, mindfulness of God or proper conduct, in one’s subsequent life.

For instance see:

Achtemeier, 1 Peter,pp.271–72; Elliott, 1 Peter,p.681. Also taking it as an objective genitive, referring to the baptizand’s pledge to maintain a good conscience, are Reicke, Disobedient Spirits,p .185; J. N. D. Kelly, A Commentary on the Epistles of Peter and of Jude (BNTC; London: Black, 1969), p. 162; Roger Omanson, ‘Suffering for Righteousness’ Sake (1 Pet 3:13–4:11)’, RevExp 79 (1982), p. 444; Leonhard Goppelt, A Commentary on 1 Peter, trans. John E. Alsup (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1993), p. 258; R. T. France, ‘Exegesis in Practice: Two Samples’, in I. H. Marshall (ed.), New Testament Interpretation: Essays on Principles and Methods (Grand Rapids, MI: Eerdmans, 1977), p. 275. However, Michaels, 1 Peter,p.216, holds out for a subjective genitive.

On this reading the συνείδησις ἀγαθή refers to the content of the ‘pledge’ undertaken at baptism. Hence, the view of baptism as a formal and public contract with subsequent binding force on the parties involved

So wait a minute here, Baptism is like signing a deal to enter into a relationship with God? Isnt that different from views that see baptism as something done after this relationship is entered into?

Baptists are false prophets against Scripture

Why Galatians disproves Once Saved Always Saved?

1)What is Once Saved Always Saved?

Once Saved Always Saved, or OSAS is the view of some Protestants, usually Baptists, that once someone confesses Christ as Lord and Saviour, there is nothing that person can do to lose his salvation. In fact as the Independent Fundamentalist Baptist pastor Steven Anderson states in his sermon on OSAS, even if you try to sin and disbelieve, you are still saved. This possibility is also acknowledged in his sermon “Shall we continue in Sin” where he states that:

“Now here’s the thing, If I don’t talk to my wife and my wife doesn’t talk to me we are not going to have a good relationship. But are we still married? Yes we are, see what I mean? So if I don’t talk to God through prayer and He doesn’t talk to me through his work, we’re not going to have a good relationship (though I’m still saved).”

Notice that if one doesnt pray to God after one is saved, then he is still considered saved, although he wont have a “good relationship” with God. It means clearly this person isnt going to suffer Hell for this and other intentionally sinful actions.

Of course unfortunately for OSAS believers, Scripture proves them wrong and here we will look at Paul’s Epistle to the Galatians to see why such is the case.

2)Galatians 1

In the opening of the epistle to the Galatians, Paul already post statements that would not make sense if OSAS is true as the following verses demonstrate:

6 I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.

8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.

9 As we said before, so say I now again, if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Here Paul announces that he his “marvelled” at how the Galatians were “so soon removed” from the Grace of Christ. Anderson tries to avoid the implication of this statement by stating in his sermon on Galatians 1 that these Galatians arent Saved. But this view already makes Anderson inconsistent with himself. As him and many OSAS advocates believe, baptism comes after one is saved. It does not have any salvific significance, as Anderson mentions in his sermon “Easter: Fact and Fiction”,

You get saved, then you get baptized

Unfortunately for Anderson, he forgotten Galatians 3:27 which says:

27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

OSAS advocates will have little wiggle room here, as even in the plain english used, “have” is used, indicating that the act of Baptism was accomplished. Had Paul wanted to emphasize this as a future act, he would had instead said “for as many of you as will be baptized”. Should v27 really entail water Baptism or even just the so called spirit Baptism of many Baptists and Evangelicals, it entails Anderson as guilty of painting Paul as inconsistent as only the Saved get both of these. Hence the only way to make his eisegesis consistent is to admit that OSAS is false and Salvation may be lost, as Galatians 1:6 would address Galatians who bewitched by the Judaizers and false brethren, had fallen away or are on the verge of doing so. We now analyse Galatians 3:27 first to show why this is such.

Galatians 3:27 on Baptism

The context of this verse is one within the grand argument of Paul explaining how believers are to be justified by faith and not of the Law. He links believers(also his audience as the intended reader) to the blessings of Abraham and God’s promise to him where the gentiles shall participate in through faith in Jesus Christ. The Law, meant to function as a schoolmaster or pedagogue who disciplines the Israelites before the advent of Christ. These are connected to our main verse mentioning Baptism where we put on Christ, indicated by the use of “for” which serves as the connector.

This connection would also entail something about Baptism, that it is connected to the process of justification by faith, in this case being an explanation of why believers are called “Sons of God” in the preceding v.26. The motif here echoes the use of Baptism in other areas of the Pauline corpus, notably Romans 6:3 and Colossians 2:12 in which Baptism is used in conjunction with the benefits of union with Christ. It would also be part of one being grafted into Christ formally under this implication.

OSAS believers, Baptists and Evangelicals may simply push the view of the so called Baptism of the Spirit to avoid the implications of this. While conceding for the sake of showing Anderson’s and typical OSAS believers inconsistency would aid this refutation, an argument for why Galatians refer to water Baptism would be given, to further demonstrate the flaws in their eisegesis. For one, the updated form of Strong’s concordance and lexicon, the Bauer Lexicon opposes this in outlining the Scriptural usages of Baptism. One of the definitions for Baptism it gives is the “Christian sacrament of initiation after Jesus’ death”.

Amongst the verses listed to use this definition of Baptism are the ones mentioned here. OSAS, Baptists or Evangelicals may object to this, stating that “it isnt the Bible”, but this only makes them inconsistent when they appeal to the dated Strong’s on Biblehub whenever they want to get the Greek.

Perhaps even despite these, OSAS believers would simply say that it is simply a statement about how one believes and then gets Baptized after one is Saved. Even here, other verses tell us to militate against this. We use Galatians 4:8-11 as one proof of this.

Galatians 4:8-11

8 Howbeit then, when ye knew not God, ye did service unto them which by nature are no gods.

9 But now, after that ye have known God, or rather are known of God, how turn ye again to the weak and beggarly elements, whereunto ye desire again to be in bondage?

10 Ye observe days, and months, and times, and years.

11 I am afraid of you, lest I have bestowed upon you labour in vain.

To prevent this from showing OSAS and his views of the Galatians salvific status as false, Anderson claims in his sermon on Galatians 4 that it simply means that Paul simply thought they were saved when they in fact are not. So he doubts their salvation. This interpretation does not make sense as it does not match the very structure of the verse. Had Paul wanted to convey the idea that he now doubts whether they had even been Saved, he wouldnt had said that they known God or rather known by Him but rather express himself closely with his interpretation. But as the text in its english form shows, this is hardly the case.

Should this plain meaning be insufficient, a more in depth analysis of these verses will be given. First off we begin at the word “know” in reference to being known by God. This term in Biblical usage typically refers to one’s relationship with God(eg, 1John 2:3, 4, 14, 3:6, Hebrews 8:11). When used in the context of “known by God”, the same sense of intimacy is the case, alongside election(eg, Genesis 18:19, Amos 3:2).

“Turn ye again” in v9 or the Greek,epistrephete(ἐπιστρεφετε) is a verb that denotes a “change of mind or action for better or worse” according to the Bauer Lexicon. Indeed this term in Matthew 13:15 refers to conversion positively. In light of these positive connotations, it could be possible that Paul’s use here have an ironic sense, where the Galatians having a close intimate relationship with God but now seek after the works of the Mosaic Law. As the tense here is present in the Greek, this would indicate that the Galatians are in the process of turning and if they turn completely, Christ shall have no affect upon them. This makes the security and salvation of the Galatians conditional on their faith and in some sense even their actions, opposing the OSAS view.

To understand further the gravity of this statement, we must turn a chapter back, to Galatians 3:1-5

Galatians 3:1-5

3 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?

Anderson’s eisegesis here proves deficient. In his sermon on Galatians 3, his overall view can be expressed as: the Apostles preached the Gospel to the Galatians and ministered to them, they didnt follow and not Saved at all, they return to the Law.

By analysing these verses deeper, we will start to see how Anderson’s understanding of them doesnt conform to their flow.

The opening verse tells us the reason for the Galatians’ foolishness. Given the use of “bewitched”, it may be possible that their succumbing to the Judaizers could be due to an “evil spiritual influence”. Bauer’s Lexicon defines the Greek for bewitched(βασκαίνω) as to “exert an evil influence through the eye”. Usage here is metaphorical, no doubt referring to the influence of the Judaizing group. Yet this is foolishness as the Gospel was preached to them. The visual reference to Christ used here may indicate that Paul utilizes the rhetorical technique of ekphrasis which focuses on vivid imagery. This poses a problem for Anderson and those that are iconoclastic, as Paul is essentially admitting to preaching the Gospel in a manner that uses “word pictures” which create mental images. Given the main topic at hand, further explorations on this issue will be for a later time.

Next, Paul asks the question of how the Galatians received the Spirit. This unfortunately for Anderson blows his case out of the water, as such indicates that Paul presuppose that the Galatians actually received the Holy Spirit. Oddly for Anderson, he doesnt mention anything about the Spirit in v2, possibly due to this. Still, it must be clarified that this reception of the Spirit is through faith, or in this case, believing the Gospel preached and given what is stated in v27, Baptism as part of this.

Moving to v3, we see more confirmations that advice against taking the OSAS viewpoint. The phrase “having begun” is an aorist participle ἐναρξάμενοι(enarxamenoi) which its only other reference is Philippians 1:6 which refers to the very work God will do in the believer. Bauer’s lexicon notes that in both contexts, what is referred to here is the beginning of the Christian’s life. The two verses even parallel each other, with Galatians being more ironic given its pastoral situation. This detail is left out of Anderson’s own sermon on this chapter and it is quite obvious why, once this is considered, it would entail the Galatians as actually receiving a beginning from God who works in them and having received the Spirit. These are defeaters to his interpretation that the Galatians were never Saved in the first place.

On v4, the “suffering” could invoke the sense that the Galatians went through some persecution, perhaps even due to the incursions of the Judaizers. In Anderson’s sermon, nothing of this is implied. In this verse, the particle γέ is used, as shown in the Greek render below:

τοσαῦτα ἐπάθετε εἰκῇ; εἴ γε καὶ εἰκῇ

This particle is meant to place focus on a single idea or place according to the Bauer lexicon. Thus this would suggest the Galatian’s experiences of “sufferings” to be the idea in focus. With v5 focusing on miracles and the ministering of the Spirit and the preceding v3 referring to the work of the Spirit in the Galatians, it is most likely that they also experienced the Spirit that aid them in these sufferings. Should they turn away now, all these would had be in vain. The tone of these experiences being in vain is one that may express a hope that they will reject the Judaizers in light of these experiences.

This again, nullifies the OSAS position, as the way Paul addresses the situation is one where he sees the Galatians in a real danger of making all their experiences of being Saved as being in vain. The danger of this situation with the Judaizers expressed in Galatians 2:4:

4 And that because of false brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into bondage

Had OSAS be what Paul had in mind, this and all we covered wouldnt be what we find when analysing the verses and letting them speak for themselves. Yet when we do, a contradictory picture of the OSAS eisegesis emerges. The context shows Paul persuading the Galatians through appeal to their spiritual experiences. Even if a baptism of the spirit is presupposed, we are still dealing with people whom by Anderson’s own beliefs would had been Saved but yet he preaches otherwise. We are left only with an inerrant Scripture contradicting itself. Yet when we look at the verses in their own proper order and context, we see a consistent Paul against the notion of OSAS

Thus, we see that Galatians in fact speaks against OSAS.

occurrences of πιστεύω as a participial identifier for Christians in the authentic letters include: Rom 1:16; 3:22; 4:5, 11, 24; 9:33; 10:4, 11; 1 Cor 1:21;14:22 (twice); Gal 3:22. The aorist participle is found in 2 Thess 1:10; 2:12. Wallace points out the NT writers opted more requentl or the present part c ple w th the aspectual orce n ew. He wr tes: “the present was the tense of choice most likely because the NT writers by and large saw continual belief as a necessary cond t on o sal at on” (Daniel B. Wallace, Greek Grammar Beyond the Basics [Grand Rapids: Zondervan, 1996], 621, n.22).

This kills the OSAS

Well done for promoting works based salvation and destroying OSAS!

Baptist contradiction 101

Jeez, who let the papist in here?
Even though i'm a proud gay man, I trust Jesus' final and last sacrifice to save me. Thats what it means to have faith, bud.
Read the bible more.

Attached: images (7).jpg (300x299, 27.65K)

Isnt it odd how the Bible opposes you?

I'll pray for you.

Nope. Let's use 1Thesselonians as an example.
Throughout this letter, Paul speaks of faith in such a way that reveals it as vibrantly active in nature. For example, at the outset of the letter Paul’s prase to the Thessalonians is not simply because of some generic declaration of faith. Rather, it is specifically because their faith generated action through good works.

If faith is the locus in the human from which work arises, it is clear that faith is not simply a one-off cognitive assent to certain truth claims. On the contrary, faith is essentially active and productive; good works are yielded as its fruit. The active nature of faith is also revealed in the participle ἱ πιστεύ ντες (1:7; 2:10, 13), which in the present tense emphasises the ongoing nature of faith. Wallace points out that although the aorist participle was sometimes used, the New Testament writers opted more frequently for the present participle with the aspectual force of continual belief in view.

The activity of faith is evident as well when Paul rejoices that their faith spread to Macedonia, Achaia, and all places (1:7-8). The intriguing statement, ἐν παντὶ τόπῳ ἡ πίστις ὑμῶν ἡ π ὸς τὸν θεὸν ἐξελήλυθεν s expla ned b the act t that Paul summarises in the surrounding verses: 1) they became examples to believers in Macedonia and Achaia; 2) the word of the Lord sounded forth from them (v.7); 3) reports about their welcoming spirit to the apostles (v.9); 4) turning to God from idols (v.9); 5) serving a living and true God (v.9); 6) waiting for the return of Jesus (v.10). The importance of an active faith is evident in many ways throughout the letter

Dont forget also that the statement that baptism saves through the resurrection of Jesus Christ in 3:21 holds together many expressions about transitions from life to death, from the old to the new reflected in other parts of the letter. In 1:3–10 salvation is something which the believers wait for, together with the revelation of Christ in his glory (1:7). The new birth to a living hope is based on the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1:3). Even if these expressions are not explicitly identified with baptism, they are associated with baptism as the main act in this process. Baptism is so to speak the crystallizing point for all the other ways to speak of this transition.26 It can have this function because it unites the baptised with the resurrected Christ and brings them into contact with God and the saving power of God manifested in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1:3; 3:21). This association between baptism and resurrection is similar to that in Paul and the Pauline tradition, where baptism meant to be included “in Christ,” that is in the crucified and resurrected Christ (Rom 6:4–5, 8–11; 1 Cor 15:20–28, 29–34; Col 2:12).

So…what you are saying is that if I do no work than I have no salvation?

Literally yes. Because if you are not doing anything but laying passive, you are either a puppet stone moved by something else, some advance automaton(Calvinism) or you are just looking for a get out of jail free card, which ISNT the Biblical definition of faith.

Dont like it? Then stop being a Christian or grow some courage to accept God at his own WORD

People are still reposting that?

It's like you don't understand how there can be saved and unsaved people in the same church

Repenting from sins is one kind of repentance. There are other methods of repentance. We know this because the majority of times the Bible uses the term it refers to God repenting of something.

John 6:29.

Thanks for stopping by.

Attached: 7d7da62ae.PNG (673x617, 154.56K)

Except that explanation makes NO SENSE at all when Paul NEVER make any distinctions in his audience. It's addressed to the Galatians AS A WHOLE. So the Baptist explanation here fails.

Second, repentance in Scripture is about turning away from sin. The only reason why God "repents" is only because changing one's mind on something is within the semantic range of "repent", not because of your eisegesis tier explanations.

It's also been shown how Paul conceives of faith. Not as passive belief but ACTIVE. Believing is also DOING.

You're conflating issues of salvation with issues of Christian living. The Baptist likewise affirms the active faith, to the point of being notoriously evangelistic.

Except of course, this is not even true. Because of the fact the NT consistently appeals to FINAL VINDICATION and JUDGEMENT. The Baptist view only makes Christian living not necessary but only some optional thing for those saved which makes NO SENSE in light of all judgement passages. This also ignores the basic Greek use of "faith" throughout the NT which refers to CONTINUAL faith as the requirement. That makes active faith a NECESSITY, not AN OPTIONAL DLC and thus either Baptists are to be Calvinists on this issue(and contradict the warning passages and the description of the dangers of falling away), consider the Saved as just some passive puppet moved by the Spirit, or admit your own incoherence.

Here, one explicit example destroying the Baptist view from Matthew. Expectation of the final judgment is a central theme in Matthew, and the function of this motif within the narrative is primarily to inspire moral behavior in light of the coming judgment. The ethical motivation of Matthew’s judgment motif can be seen especially in Jesus’ speeches, where Jesus regularly teaches his disciples to live in the present in light of the reality of hell and the final day of judgment, when the righteous will be separated from the unrighteous (Matt 5:12, 21-30; 6:1-21; 7:13-14, 21-27; 10:40-42; 13:24-30, 36-43, 47-50; 16:27; 18:8-9, 23-35; 19:27-30).

Throughout the narrative of Matthew, the practice of righteousness, including sharing resources with the needy, is grounded in the expectation that everyone will be rewarded or punished at the final judgement based on how they have lived in the present, one example is the parable of talents in The parable of the Talents (Matthew 25:14-30) which

stresses the importance of servants acting responsibly while the “Lord” of the household is away; the servant who is not faithful with the talent entrusted to him has his talent taken away and is thrown into “the outer darkness, where there will be weeping and gnashing of teeth”

But this is made even more evident in Matthew 25:31-46. The sheeps are rewarded because they have provided for the king himself by feeding the hungry, provisioning the thirsty with water, welcoming the stranger, clothing the naked, caring for the sick, and visiting those in prison (vv. 34-40). When the righteous express their ignorance regarding their performance of these merciful deeds, inquiring about when they have done the things for which they are rewarded (vv. 37-39), the king responds, “Truly I tell you, just as you did it to one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did it to me” (v. 40).43 So closely linked are Jesus and his followers that showing material kindness to Jesus’ disciples is to do the same for Jesus himself. In a very real way, then, by caring for fellow disciples, the sheep embody the secret performance of merciful deeds advocated in Matt 6:2-4, for the righteous are not even aware of the extent to which their ἐλεημοσύνη has ministered to Christ.

Conversely, the goats are sent away “into the eternal fire prepared for the devil and his angels” (v. 41), cursed and banished to eternal punishment (v. 46) because of their failure to perform merciful deeds for followers of Jesus who are hungry, thirsty, strangers, naked, sick, and imprisoned. Nothing is stated or implied about the motivations of those sheep who have acted mercifully on behalf of the destitute, although the motif of divine judgment on the basis of how individuals have cared for the marginalized strongly suggests that, here as elsewhere in Matthew’s Gospel, ethics are motivated by eschatology.

The scene of the Son of Man’s judgment of the righteous and unrighteous in Matt 25:31-46 offers a fitting and evocative climax of the motif of divine reward for merciful deeds or punishment for their absence in the Gospel of Matthew. Matthew’s Gospel envisions a universal judgment of all people—including followers of Jesus—on the basis of deeds performed in this life, and an important measure of one’s righteousness is care for needy disciples of Jesus.46 In this sense, merciful action toward needy disciples in Matthew’s Gospel is primarily meritorious in the sense that practices of merciful care for the poor result in heavenly reward at the final assize, when the works of all people will be judged.

At the same time, however, it could be argued that, because care for the poor in the Gospel of Matthew represents a significant element of Jesus’ proclamation, charity is broadly atoning in the sense that adherence to Jesus’ teaching of a better righteousness is one of several ways in which the alleviation of sin is narrated in the First Gospel. Certainly, Jesus’ identity as one who saves from sin is foundational in Matthew’s story. At a key moment in the narrative, after the record of the genealogy of “Jesus the Messiah, son of David, son of Abraham” (1:1-17), Jesus’ birth is foretold to Joseph by an angel of the Lord, and the angel’s prediction is punctuated by the declaration that Mary “will bear a son, and you are to name him Jesus, for he will save his people from their sins” (1:21). This statement in Matt 1:21, in which the main character of the story is named and his commission is identified, can be viewed as programmatic for the mission of Jesus in the Gospel of Matthew.47 But what does it mean, within the literary framework of Matthew’s Gospel, for Jesus to “save his people from their sins”?

One common answer to this question connects the prediction that Jesus will save his people from their sins in Matt 1:21 with references elsewhere in the Gospel to the death of Jesus as an event that accomplishes forgiveness. The Last Supper tradition in the Gospel of Matthew, for example, records Jesus’ statement, with reference to the cup, “Drink from it, all of you; for this is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many for the forgiveness of sins” (26:27b-28). There is no doubt that Matt 26:28 frames Jesus’ death as a liberating, vicarious sacrifice that accomplishes the forgiveness of sins.48 Yet forgiveness of sin in the narrative of Matthew’s Gospel (as in Mark’s) is also made available before the crucifixion of Jesus takes place and often occurs or is promoted apart from, or at least without any direct connection to, the cross: John’s practice of baptism of repentance is accompanied by the confession of sins (3:1-12); Jesus instructs his disciples to pray for forgiveness of their debts (ὀφειλήματα) and notes that if they forgive others their trespasses (τὰ παραπτώματα αὐτῶν), then the heavenly Father of the disciples will forgive them, but if the disciples do not forgive others, neither will they be forgiven by the Father (6:12, 14-15; cf. 12:31-32); Jesus himself offers forgiveness of sins to a paralytic man whom he heals, a proclamation of clemency that provokes the ire of scribes who observe the episode (9:2-8); and in response to a question from Peter, Jesus opines that a member of “the church” who sins against Peter should be forgiven seventy-seven times (18:21-22), a principle that is illustrated in the ensuing parable of the unforgiving servant (18:23-35). While the cross is the ultimate means of atonement in Matthew’s Gospel, it is not the only means by which forgiveness of sin is narrated.

To raise questions about the dynamics of forgiveness in Matthew’s Gospel is also to raise questions about the reasons that forgiveness is needed. Matthew’s Gospel reflects an understanding, common among Jews of the Second Temple period, of “sin” (ἁμαρτία) and “lawlessness” (ἀνομία) as failure to obey the teachings of Torah. In Matthew, moreover, Jesus is characterized as the authoritative teacher of Torah whose instruction intensifies (but does not mitigate or transcend) the law by summoning his followers, as participants in the kingdom of heaven, to a more faithful obedience to Torah and a surpassing righteousness than that of the scribes and Pharisees (5:17-20). In this sense, it might be argued that Jesus’ teaching “saves his people from their sins.” That is, those who follow Jesus and obey Torah as it is interpreted and, notably, summarized (22:34-39) by him are saved from their sins in the sense that adherents to Jesus’ teaching do not violate God’s will as it is revealed in Torah. In Matthew’s Gospel, Jesus’ mission of saving his people from their sins is both preventative, in that those who follow Jesus’ instruction are saved from committing future sins, and restorative, in that Jesus’ death on the cross is a sacrificial offering that brings forgiveness for transgressions of Torah that have been or will be committed.

What these would imply is that like it or not, good works do indeed factor into our Salvation in some manner at the very least. Judgement cannot merely be for just "bonus rewards" but indeed based on a person's conduct. But if this is so, Baptists are dead wrong

Matthew's Gospel is full of examples where we can see that reward for deeds, and

judgment according to works are very much in evidence. For example: `I tell you the

truth, anyone who gives you a cup of water in my name because you belong to Christ

will certainly not lose his reward' is very typical of the kind of sayings that are included

in Matthew's portrait of Jesus (e. g. Mk 9.41/Mt 10.42). But there is also a very clear

affirmation of the soteriological dimension of reward:

Then Jesus said to his disciples, "If anyone would come after me, he must deny

himself and take up his cross and follow me. For whoever wants to save his life will

lose it, but whoever loses his life for me will find it. What good will it be for a man if

he gains the whole world, yet forfeits his soul? Or what can a man give in exchange

for his soul? For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father's glory with his

angels, and then he will reward each person according to what he has done. (Mt

16.24-27)

In the quotation from Psalm 62.12 in Matt. 16.27 here, the reward is soteriological, just

as it is when the Psalm is quoted again in Romans 2.6. The saying here in Matt 16

follows straight on from Jesus' description of those wishing to save their lives, losing

them, and vice versa. The reward cannot be for individual deeds within the future

Kingdom. In Matt 25.31-46, deeds of hospitality or justice are certainly the criterion for

judgment, however much disagreement there may be on the other details of the

parable. On the other hand, election and grace are prominent in Matthew's Gospel:

salvation is a matter of revelation purely by divine initiative (11.25-27) and is impossible

for people without divine activity (19.25-26). `At the same time, Matthew still believed

that salvation was God's gift'.

Protestant scholar: Simon Gathercole

From the same on that same final judgement in John's Gospel

Despite the realised eschatology in John by comparison with the emphasis in the
Synoptics, there is still a good deal of reference to a `final' day. John 6 in particular
contains a Johannine `eschatological discourse' in which Jesus refers to a last day four
times. 283 There is also Martha's confession about Lazarus's final resurrection in 11.24,
and another saying of Jesus about a last day in 12.48. So there is still plenty of room for
a final judgment according to works, despite Bultmann's assertion that `the ecclesiastical
redactor has been busy in 5.26-30, specifically in 28-29, trying to conform John's
realised eschatology to the official eschatology of the church'. 284 In one of the clearest
statements in the NT about a resurrection for both believers and unbelievers, John's Jesus
exhorts the disciples:

Do not be astonished at this; for the hour is coming when all who are in their
graves will hear his voice and will come out-those who have done good, to the
resurrection of life, and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of
condemnation. (5.28-29)

This resembles what we will see in Josephus: the' souls of the good passing into new
bodies at the revolution of the ages, whereas the wicked are punished. The raw material
in the Jewish tradition which is the basis of both John's Jesus and Josephus is that the
criterion for whether one is punished or receives life at the eschaton is the `doing' of good
or evil.

So you believe in works based salvation?

By your logic, the Bible teaches works salvation.

You make it sound like it does. If I don't do work I have no faith but I only have salvation by faith alone? That doesn't make any sense.

What you preach is literally works based salvation.

More like what the Bible does. Come back when you can explain how the Greek pistis in the NT isnt used in a manner that demands activeness or enduring faith. If you cant, you oppose Scripture

It's like you don't understand how there can be saved and unsaved people in a church.
There are multiple methods of repentance. We know this because the majority of times the Bible uses the term it refers to God repenting of something.
Which specific passage are you referring to with this thought, I can't read your mind here.
Sorry where was someone espousing passive belief? Where are you getting your definition from, some false teacher? Also where was someone espousing antinomianism?

Your overuse of captialization is noted, user. But you clearly have an arminian view and it's obvious to me certainly, and others very likely. You talk down to all others as if they were antinomians when you haven't even accepted the basic premises of how God operates. See for instance:

Acts 13:48
And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.

Philippians 1:6
Being confident of this very thing, that he which hath begun a good work in you will perform it until the day of Jesus Christ:

2 Corinthians 1:21-22
Now he which stablisheth us with you in Christ, and hath anointed us, is God;
Who hath also sealed us, and given the earnest of the Spirit in our hearts.

See Matthew 19:26. It's like you left out the central message of all scripture and seek to lift up your works as the pinnacle of salvation instead of our Lord's righteousness.

2 Corinthians 5:21
For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Yes because all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Again, Matthew 19:26 please.

It's based on God's works so yes.

Attached: BibleKJV.jpg (320x240, 27.2K)

1)Again repeating the point which is already addressed. Nothing is shown in Galatians of Paul DISTINGUISHING between those Saved and Unsaved. They are LABELLED COLLECTIVELY.

2)again repeating the same point which is already addrressed. Repentance in Greek use refers to A CHANGE OF MIND. This is why God can 'repent'. Clearly how God 'repents' isnt the same thing as how sinners repent. Acts provide one example. The rebellious Israel are to TURN AWAY from their rebellion to God. That rebellion is definitely sin. period!

3)As long faith is active and NO CALVINISM is espoused, the Baptist view is inconsistent. Either one is some lifeless drone MOVED or one is an advanced determined automata. This opposes Galatians and Hebrews and so is contradictory but LESS than Baptists.

4)Just because Grace is not given based on merit does it entail DETERMINISM or CALVINISM. Philo is a good example of this. In fact Qumran which has NO SOLA FIDE or OSAS doctrine at all and is wholesale double predestination shows one can even have a determinist view WITHOUT the baggage of Baptist nonsense and Reformed thought at all. Hence using verses that emphasize God's agency is simply insufficient, especially when it is shown clearly Galatians entails the possibility of falling away(remains UNREFUTED) and the judgement according to works as Protestant CALVINIST scholar Simon Gathercole agrees with my point.

5)As noted in 4) and even by Gathercole himself, a strong sense of God's agency doesnt negate final judgement or even works salvation. God enables the works to be done.

6) 2Corinthians cannot HELP you because thanks to Calvinists like Douglas Moo, one can say that INITIAL JUSTIFICATION is in view in instances like these where it describes the entry into the New Covenant. After entry, WORKS ARE REQUIRED TO VINDICATE GOD'S DECLARATION! This ironically requires that good works are Salvific. Especially as Wallace, A CALVINIST notes, Faith in the NT that is salvific is enduring!

7)none of what is posted about judgement according to works in Matthew is engaged with

NT Greek vs Baptist eisegesis on Repent

1)repentance, turning about, conversion
as a turning away μετάνοια ἀπὸ νεκρῶν ἔργων turning away from dead works Hb 6:1. Mostly of the positive side of repentance, as the beginning of a new relationship with God: ἡ εἰς θεὸυ μ. repentance that leads to God Ac 20:21. ἄξια τῆς μετανοίας ἔργα deeds that are consistent with repentance 26:20. Also καρπὸν ἄξιον τῆς μ. Mt 3:8; cp. Lk 3:8. βαπτίζειν εἰς μ. baptize for repentance Mt 3:11 (s. βαπτίζω 2a; also εἰς 10a). βάπτισμα μετανοίας Mk 1:4; Lk 3:3; cp. Ac 13:24; 19:4 (alt. λουτροῦ … τῆς μ. Just., D. 14, 1) χρείαν ἔχειν μετανοίας need repentance or conversion Lk 15:7. κηρύσσειν μ. εἰς ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν preach repentance that leads to the forgiveness of sins 24:47 (μετάνοιαν καὶ ἄφεσιν ἁμαρτιῶν διὰ … λουτροῦ παλλιγγενεσίας Theoph. Ant. 2, 16 [p. 140. 8f]); cp. 1 Cl 7:6. ἔχειν καιρὸν μετανοίας still have time for repentance 2 Cl 8:2. τόπον μετανοίας διδόναι give an opportunity for repentance (Wsd 12:10; cp. ἵνα μετάνοια δοθῇ Did., Gen. 169, 4; ἀφορμὴν μετανοίας καὶ ἐξομολογήσεως παράσχειν Theoph. Ant. 2, 29 [p. 170, 17]) 1 Cl 7:5. μετανοίας τόπον εὑρίσκειν Hb 12:17 (cp. μετανοίας τόπον ἔχειν Tat. 15:3). διδόναι τινὶ (τὴν) μ. (cp. Wsd 12:19; M. J. Brutus, Ep. 7) Ac 5:31; 11:18; 2 Ti 2:25; 16:9; cp. Hv 4, 1, 3; Hs 8, 6, 2; 8, 11, 1.

SO Baptists, can God, turn away from HIS DEAD WORKS? Can God repent to lead to HIMSELF? Can God turn to forgive HIMSELF of his SINS?

OF COURSE NOT! BUT THIS IS THE GOD BAPTISTS WORSHIP

This guy man. Just keeps bringing up all these non-biblical points.

See

You Baptists are non biblical

In Acts 2:38 and 3:19, Peter preaches repentance like the OT prophets calling Israel to return (see 3:19; cf. 5:31; 8:22). In the immediate context, the people of Israel must repent for their corporate responsibility for Jesus’s death (2:23); but in its fuller Lukan context, the summons to repentance is appropriate for all humanity (e.g., 17:30; 20:21; 26:20), though, in that moment, Peter and his companions do not yet recognise this point (11:18). The biblical prophets summoned Israel to “turn” or “return” to the Lord (e.g., Isa 55:7; Jer 3:12, 14, 22; 4:1; 25:5; 26:3; Ezek 14:6; 18:21, 23, 30; Hos 14:1; Joel 2:12–13; Mal 3:7), which could even be summarized as their message (Zech 1:3–4).1204 Individuals also needed to turn from wickedness to righteousness (Ezek 33:14–16, 19), that is, change their lifestyle, not merely indulge in guilty feelings. Luke 3:11; 18:22 both show this by radical sacrifice of possessions for the sake of others which forms part of the answer of how to be Saved which is also the context of repentance in Acts(2:44-45)

Occasionally the Septuagint uses μετανοέω to express turning to the Lord ( Jer 8:6; 38:19 lxx [31:19 ET]; Joel 2:13; Isa 46:8),though it uses ἀποστρέφω (cf. Acts 3:26) far more frequently.The noun μετάνοια appears even more rarely (five times, all but one in the Apocrypha), though it seems to have more of a consistent association with turning from sin, particularly in later sources(i.e Sir 44:16; Wis 11:23; 12:10, 19). Apparently, however, usage had shifted by the first century; ἀποστρέφω appears just nine times in the NT(only twice in Luke-Acts) whereas μετάνοια and μετανοέω together appear fifty-two times, with a fairly consistent range of usage, including in Luke-Acts. Notice how this opposes the Baptist view of repentance which is simply changing ones mind and not turning away from sin. Sorry Baptists. It is and it requires more than just a mere confession of Christ as Lord and Saviour and includes the act of turning away from sin and sacrifices.

discord?

I am going to give the gospel to my supervisor before she starts a new job. Pray for me to be emboldened by the Holy Spirit and to be able to reach her . Thank you

Have done, and will do.

I did it. I preached the gospel to her. She was already a believer but I was able to share the "Bible Way To Heaven" video by Anderson. I'm gonna miss her.