Wondering About Faith (Ephesians 2)

[Mountain_Climber]

I can understand your point of view, but consider the fact that in the Greek word "pneuma," translated in some passages as "spirit" is also translated elsewhere as "life." Accurately translated, it means "breath of life."

Actually it means, “force of life”, which just gets compared to the breath is what carries it into man. And because the idea is about the invisible force which a spirit exerts, it can be applied to many aspects of what makes up the personality of a man, thus constituting him a person.

Before God put into Adam his spirit, Adam's body was just an empty shell. With that spirit embodying it, it became "a living soul." But when the spirit leaves the body at death, the body once again becomes an empty shell. It's "dead."

Without a personality a person is not a person. God breathe into Adam a force which made his body alive and which Adam could use through his power of choice to shape his personalty, proving the person he would be.

Correct me if I'm mistaken, but I feel as if our primary disagreement concerns what happens to the spirit at death. You appear to be saying that it, along with the body, [it] dies.

No, it does not die as it was never had a life of it's own. It's life was given to it as an abstract highly contagious demeanor which marks the man for who he is as a person and which has the power to influence and help shape the personality of yet others who associate either directly with him or indirectly through the spirit of his personality which remains on the word he leaves after him. This is the meaning of John 3:34; 6:63, 68 and much else that Jesus spoke. But you are not yet equipped to understand it as you have had your eyes tinted by the great apostasy of the huge part of the religious world.

If that were the case, then it would be accurate to interpret the passage which says that "the dead know nothing at all" the way you do. If, however, you believed that the spirit simply leaves the body at death but continues to live, it makes sense to see "the dead know nothing at all" as I do, meaning that the dead body knows nothing. It is not animated by spirit, and is unaware of anything.

If that were true then God would not have needed to hear Abel's blood cry out to him from the ground, for Abel's consciously living spirit would have been with God doing all the talking: Genesis 4:10 “And he said, What hast thou done? the voice of thy brother's blood crieth unto me from the ground.”

So, what about 1 Peter 3:18-20?

18 “For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
19 By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.”

You have missed the point entirely. Verse 19 is speaking past tense all the way back to Noah's day. Our translators have rendered it ambiguous for their failure to understand what was being said, no doubt influenced by popular belief even as you and even as Jehovah's Witnesses.

Peter is speaking about it being beforehand the Jesus who said he was before Abraham was, there in the same spirit that he returned to, being literally the one commanding Noah, as God's mouthpiece or Word, to build the ark. This ark that we are commanded to build today for our salvation was commanded of same Jesus who now returned to that same spirit Jesus was when he commanded Noah to build the Ark and at that time preached to those disobedient spirits who are now imprisoned of God.

I mean don't you think it is a bit strange that we are unable to find support for the idea you speak anywhere else in the scriptures? Yet there is abundant evidence that Jesus in his prior life as a spirit being was the one God used most often to communicate with men and angels. And that text of 1 Peter can clearly be translated as meaning that this preaching was in Noah's day. Noah himself was called a preacher of righteousness and surely the Word of God was directing him.

That will be a difficult one for you to understand because you have so great a tint on your eyes caused of having believed bits of the great body of error that exists today. You will have to care enough to fight to clear your eyes of all prior belief before you can see what is really being told you. I know because it was difficult for me. But it is well worth being fearless and letting go of what we think we see so that we can finally actually see.

Here is my exegesis of that text:

18 “For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened to the [same] spirit
19 by which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
20 which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.”

The KJV has the word Spirit there in verse 18 capitalized and reads as though this spirit is what quickened Jesus, but that is flat out a wrong translation of the text, which literally reads, “having been made alive but to spirit.” This compares to 1 Corinthians 15:45 “And so it is written, The first man Adam was made a living soul; the last Adam a quickening spirit”; “quickening, meaning as Jesus told us at Revelation 1:18 “I am he that liveth, and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of death.”

<><><><>

I feel very much for you as I know this will not at all be easy for you. I know that from my own experience in coming to grips with it.

The word. “spirit”, is used some seven different ways in the scriptures:

But the vast majority of the times the word is used it quite clearly refers to the driving force of a person's personality: by which they feel the strength or empowerment to exert themselves for either good or bad:

Genesis 41:7-8; Genesis 45:27; Numbers 5:14, 30; Deuteronomy 2:30; Deuteronomy 34:9; Joshua 5:1; Judges 15:19; 1 Samuel 1:15; 1 Samuel 30:12; 1 Kings 10:4-6; 1 Kings 21:5; and you can collect hundreds more if you are but willing to use a concordance to ponder this use of the word, “spirit.”

I know that you at present cannot appreciate what I am telling you, for you see this subject by the tint of your beliefs. But many of the places where you attribute it as something mysteriously alive in it's own right it is not, but is the mere abstract of which I speak. For I know you are not yet able to accurately understand scriptures like 2 Kings 2:9, 15 “And it came to pass, when they were gone over, that Elijah said unto Elisha, Ask what I shall do for thee, before I be taken away from thee. And Elisha said, I pray thee, let a double portion of thy spirit be upon me. ….. And when the sons of the prophets which were to view at Jericho saw him, they said, The spirit of Elijah doth rest on Elisha. And they came to meet him, and bowed themselves to the ground before him.”

Wage the fight to see and you will never regret it for your understanding and the depth into which you will become able to see things will have you constantly on your knees thanking God.

 

[e.r.m.]

Thank you.


I have a lot to think about and I think that I am done with this topic.


In my heart, I still have the difficulty of knowing that I was saved through "God's special prerogative", like the Thief on the cross or Isaiah's coal ... So to deny that it is at least possible feels like a betrayal of the very evidence of grace that convinced me to turn from atheism to Christianity in the first place.

I discussed that I think it is possible to be saved outside of baptism, if I understand correctly. I don't deny it. God's grace is intact. Paul is a good example of having been baptized for atonement of sins, and having been impacted greatly by God's grace. It was all about grace. Even his baptism was about grace.


Hear the things Paul said.


1 Corinthians 15:9-10 For I am the least of the apostles and do not even deserve to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. [10] But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me was not without effect. No, I worked harder than all of them---yet not I, but the grace of God that was with me.


Getting baptized was the way in, but Paul remembered his trip on the road when he was in front of Jesus whom he was persecuting and Jesus spared him and allowed him to be used. It was God's grace and mercy who saved him and what motivated him. Baptism was just a part of all that.


Romans 6:1-4 What shall we say, then? Shall we go on sinning so that grace may increase? [2] By no means! We are those who have died to sin; how can we live in it any longer? [3] Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? [4] We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.


Don't sin, because we were baptized into his Death. Don't take Him for granted.


It's unfortunate that baptism has to be given so much attention in today's day and age, but it's God's grace that is the source of everything. Baptism plays a part, but it's God's love that compels us 2 Corinthians 5:14.

However, in my head, you and Katiemygirl have presented a very strong scriptural case for both the necessity and purpose of baptism. Certainly a strong enough case to warrant going back and rereading the verses, examining the context and looking up some of the critical words to see for myself if I need to adjust my opinions.


I am reminded of the motto of the Moravian Church: "In essentials, unity; in nonessentials, liberty; and in all things, love".


So now I need to see if baptism needs to be moved from the Liberty column to the Unity column.

The paradigm may shift, but God's love doesn't change.

Only God and I can answer that for me.


Anyway, Thank You,


Arthur

I agree, amen.

 

[e.r.m.]

atpollard,
I'm praying for you.

 

[katiemygirl]

Thanks for the reply, Katie. Yes, I agree guns are not THE cause of gunshot wounds, but I'm thinking they are A cause.

You see? I think a means to an end IS a cause of that end result. So yes, I see how faith might be a means to the end of salvation, but I think the word means is just a synonym for a cause. Hence faith is a cause--but not the primary cause--of salvation.

An example: When I was a child I complained to my father--who was helping me do my homework--that I hated mathmatics. He said to me he didn't like it, either, but he nevertheless used it as a means to the end of getting something he did like--a good paying job as an engineer. What he was telling me was that learning mathmatics would cause me to get a better job when I grew up. It was a means to--or a cause of--the end of getting such a job.

Now it would be accurate to say that I myself was the primary cause of getting a good job. But it would be inaccurate to say my learning mathmatics to that end was not a secondary cause of getting a good job. For I would not cause the obtaining of a good job if I didn't have the means of getting such a job! Both me and my knowledge of mathmatics would cause me to get a good job, I think.

So that which is a means to an end is a cause, and faith being an end actually makes it a cause, I think. know what I mean?

Semantics!

Took a break from forum. Good to be back! Praying you are well. Did you find the movie "Bill and Ted's Most Excellent Adventure?"

 

[katiemygirl]

="atpollard, post: 4277467, member: 56780"][First things first:
Take your time, this is just iron sharpening iron ... family comes first (well, second after God, but you know what I mean) ... "Jesus, be with the family of e.r.m.; pour out your love, cover them with your mercy, grant them your healing and peace. Be who you are. Show yourself strong. Let your people see your power displayed before all the world. And to God the Father, Jesus the Son and the gracious Holy Spirit may all glory, honor and praise be given. Amen." ... In the Pentecostal church where I worship, they get lots of theology a little sloppy, but one thing that they get absolutely right is the truth that if you have a problem ... you take it straight to God, ASAP ... now we have at least TWO agreeing on a thing. ]

Make that three! Beautiful prayer atp!

I noted three cases from my real-life experiences that I encounter on at least an annual basis:

So what is the answer to the question: So what happens if one believes (accompanied by faith in Jesus and repentance) but is not baptized?

I would ask why they weren't baptized if they had faith? How can you or they say they have faith if they haven't made Jesus Lord of their life? What does making Jesus Lord of your life entail? Doesn't it mean you do what He tells you to do?

Imho, and maybe I'm being too harsh here, but I lay the blame solely on preachers who leave baptism out of the salvation equation, teaching that it is not necessary.

I am criticized for reading too much, or the wrong thing into verses that do not address this question directly (like the thief on the cross, or Cornelius' house receiving the Holy Spirit) but I can find no verse that directly answers this question.
How can I find an answer if no scripture is a perfect match and I am not to 'interpret' anything, but just go from what is written?

Taking Mark 16:16 ("Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved") just on what is written, should we be warning the dying converts, those from churches that sprinkle, and those who answer an altar call at a revival tent ...
"You are still un-saved until you get immersed - try not to die before you can fix that." ... while scripturally sound, it seems a little light on grace ... but if it is TRUE, then Love demands that we do nothing less.
This is too important to screw up ... what is the answer?

About the thief....Do you know for a fact the thief was not baptized? I can't say he was or wasn't. Are we to look to the thief as our model for salvation? When did Jesus institute baptism, before or after His DB&R? Are we to disregard Jesus command to baptize? Should we ignore His statement, "He who believes and is baptized shall be saved?"

You assume Cornelius was saved before he was immersed. You base that on the Holy Spirit coming upon him and him speaking in tongues. Yet, it can be shown in Scripture that the Holy Spirit came upon unsaved people, and even a little donkey spoke in tongues. Cornelius was still commanded to be immersed immediately.

Speaking of immediately, do you ever wonder why baptism was done immediately in the examples we've been goven in the NT? Why would Ananias say to Paul, And now why do you wait? Arise and be baptized and wash away your sins calling on the name of the Lord.

Look at the Philipian jailer. He was baptized at midnight, within the hour of his believing. Why not wait until morning, or the next day, week or month?

You could come up with a million what if's. What if he died before he got to the water? My answer is to leave it in God's hands. Don't use it as a reason to say baptism isn't necessary.

As for death bed confessions.....none of us can speak to that. We don't know how God will deal with those situations. But don't use those situations to discount baptism and the fact that Jesus said DO IT.

[As I have said before, I was baptized and I do not believe that baptism in unnecessary ... Jesus DOES command it, so that is reason enough to obey ... and it is beneficial.
However, I see too many possible 'special cases' where what I know of God's grace suggests that Jesus can save without water baptism (going directly to the "baptism with fire") and therefore fulfilling the requirements of every command to 'repent and be baptized'.]

I couldn't agree more! Jesus will save who He wants to save based on His criteria, not ours. But I believe it is very wrong to leave baptism out of any gospel sermon. It should be included in every invitation. Shame on preachers who don't offer it. The examples we have in the NT show converts being baptized immediately. We need to follow those examples.

Before I am willing to begin laying a heavy yolk on the dying, those seeking a new fellowship, and new believers still stumbling their way to the cross, I want to be VERY sure that they will be damned if they do not comply, before I am willing to tell them "You will be damned unless you are immersed".
So, IS that what we should be telling them?
Is that the TRUTH?
Is Mark 16:16 the scripture that requires no interpretation for us to know this is what we need to tell them?

Rather than telling them they will be damned if they are not baptized, tell them they will be forgiven if they are. There is nothing more comforting than having the assurance that your sins have been washed away. And if a person is dying, there is no reason they cannot be immersed. Why not put them in the tub?

Currently, I prefer to tell them:
Jesus commands you to be baptized, so if you want to be obedient, you should get baptized as soon as you get a chance ... remember, he said "If you brag on me before men, then I will brag on you before God".
Do what you want, but I intend to shout "I BELONG TO JESUS" and I don't care who knows it ... but that is your call.

Amen! I love it! Good for you Arthur!

 

[Katzpur]

That will be a difficult one for you to understand because you have so great a tint on your eyes caused of having believed bits of the great body of error that exists today. You will have to care enough to fight to clear your eyes of all prior belief before you can see what is really being told you. I know because it was difficult for me. But it is well worth being fearless and letting go of what we think we see so that we can finally actually see.

I feel very much for you as I know this will not at all be easy for you. I know that from my own experience in coming to grips with it.

I know that you at present cannot appreciate what I am telling you, for you see this subject by the tint of your beliefs.

Wage the fight to see and you will never regret it for your understanding and the depth into which you will become able to see things will have you constantly on your knees thanking God.

Don't take that condescending attitude towards me, Mountain Climber. We merely interpret the scriptures differently from one another. Your expressing pity at my supposed lack of understanding is not going to change that. I could turn this around and say exactly the same things to you as you have said to me, but I won't. We will both continue to believe what we believe, because we both have very strong convictions. How about we agree to disagree and work on being friends despite our differences?

 

[e.r.m.]

Make that three! Beautiful prayer atp!

I would ask why they weren't baptized if they had faith? How can you or they say they have faith if they haven't made Jesus Lord of their life? What does making Jesus Lord of your life entail? Doesn't it mean you do what He tells you to do?

Imho, and maybe I'm being too harsh here, but I lay the blame solely on preachers who leave baptism out of the salvation equation, teaching that it is not necessary.


About the thief....Do you know for a fact the thief was not baptized? I can't say he was or wasn't. Are we to look to the thief as our model for salvation? When did Jesus institute baptism, before or after His DB&R? Are we to disregard Jesus command to baptize? Should we ignore His statement, "He who believes and is baptized shall be saved?"

You assume Cornelius was saved before he was immersed. You base that on the Holy Spirit coming upon him and him speaking in tongues. Yet, it can be shown in Scripture that the Holy Spirit came upon unsaved people, and even a little donkey spoke in tongues. Cornelius was still commanded to be immersed immediately.

Speaking of immediately, do you ever wonder why baptism was done immediately in the examples we've been goven in the NT? Why would Ananias say to Paul, And now why do you wait? Arise and be baptized and wash away your sins calling on the name of the Lord.

Look at the Philipian jailer. He was baptized at midnight, within the hour of his believing. Why not wait until morning, or the next day, week or month?

You could come up with a million what if's. What if he died before he got to the water? My answer is to leave it in God's hands. Don't use it as a reason to say baptism isn't necessary.

As for death bed confessions.....none of us can speak to that. We don't know how God will deal with those situations. But don't use those situations to discount baptism and the fact that Jesus said DO IT.

I couldn't agree more! Jesus will save who He wants to save based on His criteria, not ours. But I believe it is very wrong to leave baptism out of any gospel sermon. It should be included in every invitation. Shame on preachers who don't offer it. The examples we have in the NT show converts being baptized immediately. We need to follow those examples.


Rather than telling them they will be damned if they are not baptized, tell them they will be forgiven if they are. There is nothing more comforting than having the assurance that your sins have been washed away. And if a person is dying, there is no reason they cannot be immersed. Why not put them in the tub?


Amen! I love it! Good for you Arthur!

Great commentary. And thank you for seconds on the prayer. I take exception to one thing. We don't offer baptism with each invitation because of Luke 14:28-33. We invite people to study the Bible so they can understand salvation well, count the costs before they make their decision, the cross, and some other important Biblical principles.

 

[katiemygirl]

Great commentary. And thank you for seconds on the prayer. I take exception to one thing. We don't offer baptism with each invitation because of Luke 14:28-33. We invite people to study the Bible so they can understand salvation well, count the costs before they make their decision, the cross, and some other important Biblical principles.

I can't disagree with you here. One should always count the cost before committing. I was making the point that you don't hear Baptist and other preachers including baptism in the salvation plan.

 

[e.r.m.]

I can't disagree with you here. One should always count the cost before committing. I was making the point that you don't hear Baptist and other preachers including baptism in the salvation plan.

Agreed, which makes Mark 16:16 so powerful. Jesus did!

 

[paarsurrey]

we are saved from hell by grace alone through faith alone

Did Jesus say it?
Regards

 

[katiemygirl]

Did Jesus say it?
Regards

Nope!

 

[e.r.m.]

Nope!

Ditto. No one in the Bible did. That's a purely reformation protestant creation. Sola Fide

 

[Mountain_Climber]

Don't take that condescending attitude towards me, Mountain Climber. We merely interpret the scriptures differently from one another. Your expressing pity at my supposed lack of understanding is not going to change that. I could turn this around and say exactly the same things to you as you have said to me, but I won't. We will both continue to believe what we believe, because we both have very strong convictions. How about we agree to disagree and work on being friends despite our differences?

I'm sorry.

I did not mean to seem condescending.

I am a bit of a course speak

 

[e.r.m.]

Did Jesus say it?
Regards

When we're allowed to use the Bible and the Bible only, we get a closer look at what first century Christianity really looked like, and what was added afterward. Perfect example is being saved by grace alone, through faith alone. If we're allowed to use only the Bible, then we can't teach that. The cut and dry written text by itself paints a very different picture than what people say about the Bible. People aren't aware of how much percentage of what they believe is actually outside influence and commentaries.
No one in the Bible ever used slogans like "I accept you Jesus as my personal savior" or "I trust in Jesus's finished work on the cross for my salvation."

 

[katiemygirl]

When we're allowed to use the Bible and the Bible only, we get a closer look at what first century Christianity really looked like, and what was added afterward. Perfect example is being saved by grace alone, through faith alone. If we're allowed to use only the Bible, then we can't teach that. The cut and dry written text by itself paints a very different picture than what people say about the Bible. People aren't aware of how much percentage of what they believe is actually outside influence and commentaries.
No one in the Bible ever used slogans like "I accept you Jesus as my personal savior" or "I trust in Jesus's finished work on the cross for my salvation."

This is why I left catholicism. I wanted the Bible only.

 

[e.r.m.]

This is why I left catholicism. I wanted the Bible only.

It's unfortunate. Catholics see the church as the final authority instead of the Bible.

 

[Katzpur]

It's unfortunate. Catholics see the church as the final authority instead of the Bible.

The Bible is no more the final authority than the Church is. The final authority is God, however He may wish to communicate.

 

[katiemygirl]

It's unfortunate. Catholics see the church as the final authority instead of the Bible.

Many claim their church (Pope, Watchtower GB,) to be the final authority. That leaves lots of room for men to bind their rules on others. Jesus repeatedly rebuked the Pharisees for putting the fraditions of men on par with the word of God. This believer's standard of truth is the Bible and the Bible alone. It's what attracted me to identify with the group I worship with. I could never again be caught up in the traditions of men.

 

[e.r.m.]

Many claim their church (Pope, Watchtower GB,) to be the final authority. That leaves lots of room for men to bind their rules on others. Jesus repeatedly rebuked the Pharisees for putting the fraditions of men on par with the word of God. This believer's standard of truth is the Bible and the Bible alone. It's what attracted me to identify with the group I worship with. I could never again be caught up in the traditions of men.

I agree, but our group is also not invulnerable to traditions of men. We must from within the church scrutinize ourselves with the scriptures, root out any unscriptural traditions that may have slipped in, and prevent new ones from forming. There's always the potential and we're in most danger when we say we've arrived.

 

[katiemygirl]

I agree, but our group is also not invulnerable to traditions of men. We must from within the church scrutinize ourselves with the scriptures, root any traditions that don't line up with scriptures, and prevent new ones from forming. There's always the potential and we're in most danger when we say we've arrived.

You are so right! And I know of no one who is more aware of this than myself. I am constantly on guard and will challenge anyone who tries to make their opinions God's truth, or who try to bind their own rules on others. It's not always a popular position to take, but I will never again be caught up in the teachings of men. I have been very blessed to have been with only two groups of christians for nearly forty years, one back home and one here in FL. Both have been very true to Scripture. I'd be gone if they weren't.