[Marc]

Hello,

Water baptism is not necessary for salvation. Cornelius and those accompanying him were saved the very moment they believed the truth claims presented to them by Peter concerning the Lordship/resurrection of Jesus Christ (Acts 10:36, 39, 40). These two conditions are necessary for salvation (Romans 10:9).

Notice what occurred before they were baptized:

1. In Acts 10:44 the Holy Spirit is said to have "fell upon them". The Greek word for fell is "epipipto". Luke always uses this term for an actual possession of something (Luke 1:12; 15:20; Acts 8:16; 10:10; 11:15; 13:11; 19:17; 20:10, 37).

2. In Acts 10:45 the Holy Spirit is said to have been "poured out upon the Gentiles". The Greek word for poured is "ekcheo". Luke always uses this term for an actual dispersion/bestowal of something (Acts 2:17, 18, 33; 22:20).

3. In Acts 10:47 the Holy spirit is said to have been already "received". The Greek word for receive is "lambano". Luke always uses this term for an actual reception of something (Luke 5:5, 26; 6:4; 7:16; 9:16, 39; 11:10; 13:21; 19:12; 20:21, 28, 29, 30, 31, 47; 22:17, 19; 24:30, 43; Acts 1:8, 20, 25; 2:23, 33, 38; 3:5; 7:53; 8:15, 17, 19; 9:19, 25; 10:43, 47; 15:14; 16:3, 24; 17:9, 15; 19:2; 20:24, 35; 24:27; 25:16; 26:10, 18; 27:35; 28:15).

The "gift of the Holy Spirit" in Acts 10:45 is the same "gift of the Holy Spirit" in Acts 2:38:

1. The same phrase. Peter states that it is the "same gift" (Acts 11:17).

2. The same author (Luke).

3. The same speaker (Peter).

4. The same book (Acts).

5. The same context (the them of Christ's Lordship/resurrection to unsaved people).

6. The same response (acceptance).

Not only is it true that these Gentiles were saved before their baptism but the same holds true for Paul as well. Ananias' encounter with Paul (Acts 9:17) encapsulates all four of the other passages in Acts where the laying on of hands is employed.

a. Paul's reception of the Spirit (as with the other apostles before him, the receiving and being filled with the Holy Spirit are used synonymously; Acts 1:5 and 2:4), like those in Acts 8:17 and 19:6, occurred the moment Ananias laid his hands on him.

b. Paul's commission, like those in Acts 6:6 and 13:3, occurred the moment Ananias laid his hands on him. Nor can it be argued that it always took an apostle to bestow the Spirit. The same can be argued then that it always took an apostle to heal through the bestowal of their hands. As the Lord allowed Ananias to bypass one so too with the other.

Based on this evidence it is clear that Paul was saved before his baptism.

God the Holy Spirit dwells in only those who are saved (Romans 8:8, 15-17 and 1 John 4:13).

This dwelling is forever (eternal security).

a. The Holy Spirit is said to be with us forever (John 14:16).

b. The Holy Spirit seals us to the day of redemption (Ephesians 1:13; 4:30).

c. "He who has bathed (saved) need only to wash his feet (Christian walk) (John 13:10).

[jim]

Total confusion resides in this man's thinking -- he picks up facts from different places and tries to put them all together without any respect for the contexts. They are supposed to fit together because he says so. I would not deal with every passage he uses but point out his basic fallacies in reasoning and the misuse of scriptures.

[m273p15c]

Marc,

I apologize for the excessive delay. We have been overwhelmed with inquiries and responses, and since we do not use automatically generated responses, it takes longer than one might would expect. Again, I apologize, but I hope this note will still prove to be profitable to you in your efforts to be found well-pleasing to the Lord.

Your diligence is clear in the organization of your thoughts and questions, which is always appreciated. Since I believe that the Bible teaches that baptism is commanded for the remission of sins, it may not surprise you that I would disagree with some of your conclusions. My efforts will be to quote your original points and then follow each section with a response. I would expect some of these responses to generate more questions from you. I would be glad to exchange thoughts as we both have time, and hopefully we can have a mutually profitable study, as the Lord would expect from His servants (Proverbs 27:17; Acts 17:11).

Thanks again for your comments. I look forward to hearing your response, and pray that this study will lead to us having a better understanding and drawing closer to the Lord.

=======================================================

Quoted original with comments:

[Marc]

It has been awhile since I wrote that letter to you which I do keep saved. I have made several changes to it. I don't intend to throw you off by having you adequately answer something I do not hold to any more. Sorry about that.

Only belief is necessary for salvation. Cornelius received the Spirit before saying anything. However those who truly belive will confess and those trulyuely confess will be baptized but the initial point of justification is belief (1 John 5:1). Acts 2:38 and 22:16 baptism is for the remission of sins. This command is only given to the Jews never to the Gentiles as Cornelius demonstrates. This special sin of the Jews had to do with crucifying their Messiah. Water baptism was necessary for them to have these sins washed away. Gentiles, like us, do not fall in this category. The reception of the Spirit occurs with belief. Cornelius demonstrates this.

All the examples you gave me (Annanias, Balaam and his donkey, King Saul etc) all occurred before Christ was glorified. During this time the Spirit came upon men to empower them for some form of service. Afterwards to have the Spirit meant that you are saved (1 John 4:13). Furthermoremore, Cornelius spoke in tongues. This gift was given to those who were already believers not unbelievers (1 Corinthians 12:10). Concerning Paul I have changed my view about his receiving the Spirit. Like all Jews connected with either the ministry of John the Baptist/Jesus he would not receive the Spirit until he was baptized (see above).

Sincerely

Marc

[jim]

I had a discussion with a fellow one time who took the same position. I will bring you a file tonight that might help you understand where he is coming from.

The simplest reply to show the fallacy of his position is in the great commission -- the gospel is for all nations, into all the world, for every creature, and baptism is a an essential condition of that gospel for all men (Mt. 28:18-20; Mk. 16:15-16).

He seems to want to accept everything but the truth.

Jim

[m273p15c]

Thanks for clarifying your points. I am glad to hear that you are continuing to study and learn. Hopefully, these thoughts will be profitable to you as you continue your studies.

First, although I also believe that only those who truly believe will confess and be baptized, I do not believe that justification occurs at the point of belief. More clearly stated and of more practical concern, belief alone is not enough to save. The only verse that contains the phrase "faith only" in the entire Bible reads:

[Marc]

James 2 is talking about the fruit of justification and not its root. Throughout the passage it reads "see" "show" and "say". Our already existing faith is to be demonstrated to others. Notice his use of Abraham when he offered up Isaac on the altar. His works demonstrated that his faith was real. However Paul informs us that he was declared justified years before this event (Romans 4). Like confession and baptism if there are no works then the faith was not real to begin with. But 1 John 5:1 makes it clear that belief is its starting point. You quote Romans 6 but notice carefully it says in verse 3 that believers are "baptized into Jesus Christ". This same expression "baptized into" is also used of Moses in 1 Corinthians 10:2. Here the Israelites publicly identified with Moses but, and very importantly, they had already accepted his leadership (Exodus 12:21, 28, 35, 50). That is exactly what Christians do today. They accept Christs' leadership then and only then are they baptized.

I agree Cornelius is the exceptioon but that for the Gentiles.....us. Luke gives no other account of how a pure Gentile receives the Spirit so Cornelius is the norm. In terms of Epheseinas 4:5 it is one baptism of two components of an inward element and an outward seal.

The Jews at that time are saved like everyone...by faith. However their means of attaining the Holy Spirit was delayed until they were baptized. They were justified like everyone else before baptism but God withheld the Holy Spirit until they were baptized. Taking a closer look at Acts 2 we see that the Jews gladly received the message Peter spoke to them. What was the climax of the message? It was that Jesus is both the Lord and Christ. That they accepted He was the Christ they were already regenerated (1 John 5:1). "Born of God" only describes saved people. Finally, by his confession we know that the eunuch abided in God (1 John 4:15). To abide in God always describes a saved person and such was the eunuch's spiritual status before he was baptized.

Sincerely

Marc

[m273p15c]

Marc,

Thanks for again responding. Given the length of the note, I found it easiest just to reference and respond to the individual ideas of your note, which are provided below. I look forward to hearing from you again.

BTW, at some point, you might find it profitable to go through some of our online correspondence studies. I think going through the first 6 would help bring to light more fundamental concepts, which would be good for us to discuss. Although several people help, because of our previous correspondence, I would be the one to examine and reply to your answers. However, I would prefer to finish this study first.

May God bless you in your pursuit of truth

=======================================================

[Marc]

Paul is not combating an all works righteousness as compared to faith alone. He combats every bit of works. Romans 11:6 declares that no works are involved whatsoever. James is combating those who would simply say they believe without any fruit - such is impossible.

Those who do believe will confess and love otherwise they didn't believe to begin with. Belief though is when one is justified (1 John 5:1).

Acts 8 are not pure Gentiles. They are a mix.

I have already answered you concerning Acts 2:38.

Romans 6 we publicly identify ourselves with Christ just like the Israelites publicly identified with Moses. Both groups though have already accepted their leadership. Now if they fall away they are either back slidden or were never true followers to begin with. Simon went through all the formalities but Peter stated that he was in the "gall of bitterness".

Cornelius had the Holy Spirit before he was baptized. To have the Holy Spirit means that one is saved (1 John 4:13). Therefore Cornelius was saved before he was baptized.

There aren't any individuals indwelt by God the Holy Spirit who are at the same time children of the Devil (unThis). This is impossible.

The same is true for the eunuch, by conffesing Jesus is the Son of God, 1 John 4:15 states that he abided in God and God abided in him (1 John 4:15).

Sincerely

Marc

[jim]

He is searching but not for truth. He is searching for some way to get around baptism being for the remission of sins. His adopting the position that baptism was for the remission of sins for the Jews but not for the Gentiles takes issue with his own arguments relating to justification by faith without obedience. If Jews were saved by being baptized, then that annuls his whole systems of arguments that man cannot be saved by works, since baptism, in his mind is a work. But, according to him, you have some people (Jews) who were saved by baptism. He doesn’t seem to realize that if God saved the Jews by baptism (and to him that is a work), then, according to his concept about justification by works, God stands opposed to himself. He argues as one who is very deficient in Bible knowledge but who is committed to a position of justification by faith alone and is unaware of the dilemmas that presents. I predict that he will abandon the argument that the Jews were saved by baptism.

Without some kind of agreement with him about a specific proposition or topic to be discussed you will find that you keep chasing him all over creation. I would present to him a proposition to be discussed, if he wants to keep on discussing the Bible with you – for instance, let him affirm that “Man is justified at the point in time when he first mentally assents to the truth that Jesus is the Christ.” The specifics of that proposition will allow you to demonstrate and, hold his feet to the fire, that there are many who believe in Jesus who are not justified, then you can deal with him as to what the bible means by “faith.” Or, perhaps a discussion of what is involved in the meaning of “works” – you have already covered that adequately but you have to understand that his concept of the meaning of works is “anything man does” and when he thinks of works, he automatically conjures up in his mind “works that earn or merit” salvation. In pursuit of that subject, he will have problems with the conditions of repentance and confession and even faith itself that is called a “work” (Jno. 6:28-29). The ultimate consequence of a consistent application of what the bible means by “works” as “anything man does” will require him to take Calvin’s position that man cannot even believe by himself (since that is something man does) – God must give him the faith.

His observation, “Those who do believe will confess and love otherwise they didn’t believe to begin with. Belief though is when one is justified,” puts him in direct conflict with passages such as Jas. 2:19, “…the devils believe and tremble,” and Jno. 12:42, “Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess him, lest they should be put out of the synagogue…” He will have to adjust his statement to something like, “Those who REALLY believe” to maintain his position.

If you pursue answers to him in the present format, perhaps by using passages like Rom. 6:17-18; Heb. 5:8-9, in conjunction with the others you have used, you can get him to see that obedience to God-given conditions for receiving the remission of sins is not justification by our own, works of merit but by obeying conditions God gave.

Instead of asking him to explain verses like Gal. 3:26-27 and 1 Pet. 3:21, et al., I would ask specific questions about the verses. You have made some points on them previously that he has ignored and conveniently dismissed. Now, hold his feet to the fire. No I don’t think you are being too hard on him.

You did an excellent job on answering his argument on Jas. 2, and your analysis is quite correct.

CORNELIUS

I think your arguments have been good, though you feel that you are having a problem with his points here.

Maybe these suggestions will help you. There is a connection made by Peter in Acts 11:15-17, back to what happened to the apostles in Acts 2. For what reason? In Acts 2:16-ff Peter affirms that this was what Joel prophesied. One thing that Joel had prophesied was that God would pour out his Spirit “on all flesh.” On the day of Pentecost only Jews (the apostles) received the outpouring. The context of Joel 2, is designed, with other passages, to prove God’s acceptance of both Jew and Gentile (all flesh). The outpouring of the HS in Acts 10, on the house of Cornelius (Gentiles) was essential to fulfill that prophesy – by the outpouring, it proved once and for all that Gentiles were on equal footing with the Jews in relationship with God. It was this very thing that Peter used to prove to the Jewish brethren who called him in question that he had done no wrong in going in and eating with Gentiles and that Gentiles were to be saved as well. Those Jews who questioned Peter, upon hearing Peter’s evidence of God’s outpouring of His Spirit, concluded, “Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life,” (11:18). The outpouring (resulting in baptism of the HS) was not designed to save the house of Cornelius any more than the apostles being baptized by the HS on the day of Pentecost was designed for their salvation.

Your illustrations about God’s Spirit being in and inspiring those to speak who were not saved are accurate arguments to prove the point that what Cornelius received was not designed to save him. Clearly, Cornelius understood that it was a message of words that was designed to save him (11:14). And Peter commands them to be baptized in water – which necessarily implies in conjunction with other passages that he still needed to be saved. His answer to your points that this was before Jesus was glorified is a mere quibble that does not deal with argument.

1 JOHN 5:1 –

I think you have answered him adequately on this passage. He uses this passage as though John is addressing unbelievers about how to be saved. Everything John writes is addressed to those who are already believers. His argument here is that every Christian has been begotten by believing (actually, the idea of trusting in a savior which is inclusive of meeting God’s conditions – repentance, confession, baptism) therefore, every begotten person should love every other begotten person. To take this passage to the exclusion of other things John says in this book or other writers have said about being begotten is a grave injustice to scripture. Note 1 Pet. 1:22-23 – same figure, “Seeing you have purified your souls IN OBEYING THE TRUTH…being born again…” But he doesn’t want anything that relates to obedience to God’s commands. 1 John 5:2-3, continues addressing disciples with reference to their responsibilities of keeping his commandments. Note again Heb. 5:8-9.

I would try to get him to commit to discussing one specific proposition – I believe it is the only way you will make any progress with him.
Jim

[m273p15c]

Marc,

Again, would you please answer these verses?

In Galatians 3:26-27, Paul referenced that those Gentile Christians had been "baptized into Christ". If these Gentile Christians were added into Christ's body at the point of belief, then how did baptism get them "into Christ", if they were already "in Christ"?

In I Peter 3:21, Peter clearly states that "baptism doth now save us". How can baptism save us from anything, if one is already saved before baptism? Now you might ask, "Was not this book written to Jews?" Earlier you had stated that the Jews were required to be baptized to be saved, and that they received forgiveness of sins at baptism. This would seem to explain this verse; however, I would ask you to consider this follow-up question, "Were then the Jews saved by works?" Previously, you rejected the idea that Gentiles would need to be baptized, invoking the charge that such a requirement was characteristic of a salvation by works. Therefore, if you are right, then were not the Jews saved by a system of works? If they were not, then by whatever reasoning you use, can not that same reasoning be applied to the Gentiles? If the Jews were saved at baptism, yet still being saved by God's grace, then so can Gentiles be saved at baptism by God's grace. Was a gospel of grace preached to Gentiles and a gospel of works required for the Jews?

Again, Peter states it clearly, "Since you have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit, ... having been born again, ... through the word of God ..." (I Peter 1:22-23). All of these components are involved in the purifying process. How can the soul be purified in obedience of the truth, if it was already purified at the moment of belief?

Also, please examine Romans 6:1-10 more closely. Further discussion is provided below, along with your reference, but for now please consider, "How could a Roman Gentile have obeyed God in baptism, while he was still a "slave of sin"? If he was saved at belief, would he not have already been a "slave of righteousness" (Romans 6:17-18)? Now, again, if Romans was written exclusively to Jews, then how would Paul's arguments against a system of works have been in harmony with the requirement that they perform the work of baptism? Yet, it was written to Gentiles (Romans 11:11-13), so how would the Gentile have obeyed God, after belief, and still been a slave of sin, right up unto his obedience?

The writer of Hebrews speaks of Jesus, "Though He was a Son, He learned obedience by the things which He suffered." Without this obedience, Christ's work would have been incomplete, because the text continues, "And having been perfected ...". Although this speaks of Christ, the parallel is drawn, lining out the requirements of those who would be saved in His likeness, "He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him" (Hebrews 5:8-9). How can one be saved if they do not obey? If obedience is required, how can they be saved before they obey?

Ephesians 5:25-26 says that Jesus "loved the church and gave Himself for her, that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word." Now, if He cleansed the church with "the washing of water", then would not the Gentiles have been included in this church and have been "sanctified and cleansed with the washing of water by the word"? Or, is there one church for Gentiles and another for Jews (Hebrews 10:22)? There is only one faith, one baptism, and one body (Ephesians 4:4-6), so how can there be two different groups who believe two different systems (faith versus works), have two baptism for two different reasons, and are added to two different bodies?

In general, it seems as though you are focusing on a couple of verses, and denying the conflicts that are generated by an incorrect interpretation with the rest of the Bible. I say this frankly, but kindly, as we turn to the comments from your previous note.

[Marc]

Romans 6 and Galatains 3 baptism pictures what already occurred within our heart. In 1 Corinthi