JUSTIFICATION: Before God or Before Man? Examining James chapter 2

[mailmandan]

Titus said:
Matthew 7:21, - but he that DOETH the will of my Father in heaven

John 6:40 - For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. But apparently, that is not good enough for you because the object of our belief (Jesus Christ/His death, burial and resurrection) is not good enough for you. You want to DO IT YOURSELF and save. Let the boasting begin for Titus!

Acts 2:37-38,
- now when they heard this (the gospel message) they were pricked in their heart and said unto Peter and the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren what shall we  do

Acts 9:6,
- and Saul trembling and astonished said, Lord what wilt thou have me to do

Acts 10:6,
- he lodgeth with one Simon a tanner whose house is by the sea side he shall tell thee what thou oughtest to do

Acts 16:30,
- and brought them out and said Sirs what must I do to be a saved

Peter's and Paul's response to all these folks question was...

"What? Dont you know you dont have to do anything!!! Jesus did it all, why aren't you trusting in Jesus?" "Just believe alone and nothing you can do can save you."

That is NOT what the apostles told folks on how to be saved!!!
Dan, your gospel is not found in the Bible.

In Acts 16:31, we read - “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.” That is not simply doing nothing. In Acts 10:43, we read - Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.” There it is again. When will you believe? When will you let go of your works and receive Christ through faith?

This makes no sense.
These comments are evidence that you do not understand the Scriptures.

You were the one who brought up evil works. I understand the Scriptures better than you think.

You do not differentiate of what kind of works are being discussed in each passage.
This is why you dont understand because you lump all works into merit instead of having the knowledge to know the context.

Works, are works, are works, Titus. Your saved by "these" works and just not "those" works argument is bogus. Roman Catholics use the same argument in order to "get around" the truth and uphold their works-based false gospel as well.

Paul taught the gospel to the Ephesians in Acts 19:1-7.
He did not teach them do nothing just have faith alone.
Therefore your use of Ephesians 2:8-9 does not prove works are not in Jesus' gospel.

In Acts 19:2, Paul asked them if they had received the Holy Spirit when they believed (assuming they may have believed) and their answer in verse 3 reveals that they were not yet believers. They had received the baptism of John but did not realize that Jesus Christ was the One to whom John's baptism pointed. Paul gave them instructions about Jesus and after they believed Paul's presentation of the gospel and came to saving faith in Christ, (faith alone) they were then (afterwards) baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Paul laid hands on them to receive the Holy Spirit (which was not the case in Acts 2 and Acts 10, so this is the exception, not the rule, just as it was in Acts 8). There is nothing In Acts 19:1-7 about the gospel of baptism, neither is baptism mentioned in the gospel in (Acts 15:7-9; Romans 1:16; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4) Water baptism is not mentioned in the gospel. (1 Corinthians 1:17) That is in harmony with Ephesians 2:8,9.

When you learn what works are being discussed by Paul in context. Only then will you understand Paul's teaching.

You are obsessed with works (with a heavy emphasis on water baptism). So are Roman Catholics and Mormons.

Ephesians 2:8-9,
- for by grace are ye saved through the faith (gospel) and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God not of works least any man boast

What happened to baptism here?

Paul is teaching that we are saved by Grace not by works that men could boast about saving themselves through keeping the law of Moses.

Did Paul say we are saved by good works or FOR good works in Ephesians 2:10? Also, when it comes to the moral aspect of the law, we cannot dissect good works from the law. In James 2:15-16, the example of a "work" that James gives is: "If a brother or sister is naked and destitute of daily food, and one of you says to them, "Depart in peace, be warmed and filled," but you do not give them the things which are needed for the body, what does it profit?" To give a brother or sister these things needed for the body would certainly be a "good work" yet to neglect such a brother or sister and not give them the things needed for the body is to break the second great commandment "love your neighbor as yourself" (Matthew 22:39) as found written in the law of Moses. (Leviticus 19:18)

In Matthew 22:37-40, we read: Jesus said to him, 'You shall love the Lord your God with all your heart, with all your soul, and with all your mind.' This is the first and great commandment. And the second is like it: 'You shall love your neighbor as yourself.' On these two commandments hang all the Law and the Prophets. Now please explain to me which good works could a Christian accomplish which are "completely detached" from these two great commandments which are found in the law of Moses? (Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18) *NOWHERE does the Bible teach we are saved by faith plus works of any kind. (Romans 4:5-6; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9 etc..).

 

[mailmandan]

First you must learn that the Greek uses THE before faith.
This means Paul is not teaching personal belief.
Paul is teaching the system of faith or the gospel of Jesus Christ.

Salvation through faith is not a system of works salvation. You are teaching a "different" gospel. (Galatians 1:6-9)

So understood correctly Paul is saying.,

- For by grace are you saved through the gospel and that not of yourselves...

Paul is NOT teaching we are saved by grace through our belief alone. That is a perversion of the text.

What list of things did Paul say we are saved through in Ephesians 2:8? Paul said we are saved by grace (God's part) through faith (man's part). No works mentioned which would be a perversion of the text. Hence, faith alone.

Next,
- by grace are you saved through the faith, and that not of yourselves

Not of yourselves means you are saved by Gods grace not any works of merit. Jews thought they could work the laws in the law of Moses and be saved. That is meriting salvation through works not grace. Paul condemns this belief over and over.

The law of Moses covers the moral aspect of the law as well so you cannot dissect good works from the law. (James 2:15-16; Deuteronomy 6:5; Leviticus 19:18; Matthew 22:37-40) Are you ready to stop fighting against the truth and place your faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation yet?

- For by grace are ye saved through the faith and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God
A free gift cannot be earned!!! Proof Paul is condemning meritorious works here. Not all works!!! Just the idea of earning salvation.

Any works that you add to salvation through faith would be meritorious works because then they (in addition to faith) would be the basis or means by which we obtain salvation, in contradiction to Romans 4:5-6 and Ephesians 2:8,9. Your logic is flawed.

- For by grace you have been saved through the faith and that not of yourselves it is the gift of God Not of works lest any man should boast

Paul once again is teaching the Ephesians that they were saved by Gods grace not by boastful works.

What are boastful works?
Any work that would earn salvation.
If man could work his way into heaven he could boast about the work he done to earn salvation.

That would include works in general. Either Christ did it all (faith) or else we did some of it (works). You can't have it both ways, Titus.

The Jews had this belief and Paul had to correct them of this false doctrine over and over.

This is what Paul is teaching in Romans chapter 4. Romans 4 and Ephesians 2:8-9 are the same works under discussion.

Romans 4:2,
- for if Abraham were justified by works he hath whereof to  boast but not before God

Paul is teaching the law of Moses cannot bring salvation no matter how much works of the law one keeps. But also Paul is teaching against the ADDITION of man made laws that the Jews invented themselves and binding them on others. The Jews put their made up heresies into Gods law and demanded that they were equal to Gods commandments. Working these laws only got you damned into hell.

What a desperate attempt to get around the truth. Abraham was before the law of Moses. Works in general Titus. When will you finally get that through your head? We are not saved by works in general, whether works of the law, which does not negate the moral aspect of the law which includes good works, works of righteousness, our works etc.. (Romans 4:2-6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9)

Abraham was not under the law of Moses. This is why Paul is using Abraham as proof that no one is justified by keeping the law of Moses.
Abraham was justified by an obedient faith in God not by merit is Paul's point in Romans chapter 4.

Abraham was not under the law of Moses so your not saved by works under the law of Moses but saved by other works argument is bogus. Roman Catholics make that same bogus argument. Did Paul say "obedient faith" (implication faith and works) in Romans 4:2-3? No. He simply said his faith was accounted to him for righteousness and went even further to say God imputes righteousness apart from works in Romans 4:6. The truth is crystal-clear Titus, but you blatantly refuse to see it. Put down your shoehorn and BELIEVE!

Acts 13:39,
- and by Jesus all that believe are justified from all things from which you could not be justified by the law of Moses

Paul had to beat it out of the jews heads that the did not recieve justification by working the law of Moses. They erred in their belief that salvation was merited.

They took this false belief and tried to force gentiles who became christians into keeping the law of Moses like for example circumcision. Telling the gentiles that one could not be saved without the work of circumcision.

Galatians 6:13,
- for neither they themselves who are circumcised(jews) keep the law(law of Moses) but desire to have you circumcised that they may  boast in your flesh

Boastful works aka works of merit are the kind of works Paul taught against.

Paul never taught all works have no part in Jesus' gospel unto salvation as Dan and his faith only religion teaches.

You seem determined to boast in your personal definition of non-boastful works. The Jews were hung up on specific works under the law of Moses, but that still does not rule out works in general. We are not saved by works, whether of the law, which include the moral aspect of the law/good works, works of righteousness which we have done, our works etc.. (Romans 4:2-6; Ephesians 2:8-10; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9) Why don't you show me where Paul said we are saved by grace through faith and works of any kind in Scripture, Titus. Or show me where Paul said we are justified by faith and works in Scripture. I'll be waiting.

They are coming from a place of ignorance with regard to the Scriptures and this is why they do not understand the gospel and how it saves.

Your pride is really beginning to show.

Did you know that Jesus' commandments are good?
Paul preached to obey Jesus to be saved.
Not to work the laws of Moses.

Which acts of obedience save according to Paul? The act of obeying the gospel by choosing to believe the gospel. (Romans 1:16; 10:16)

1John 3:23-24,
- and this is Gods commandment that we should believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ and love one another as He gave us commandment

Amen!

It is is direct command to believe in Jesus.
Therefore faith itself is an act of faith.
It is a work that must be obeyed,
John 6:28-29.

You are really hung up on works, Titus. Faith is an act of faith? A work just like any other work? So, saved through faith, not works, should read saved through work, not works? I already covered John 6:28-29 in post #40 and cleared up your confusion.

 

[Titus]

John 6:40 - For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. But apparently, that is not good enough for you because the object of our belief (Jesus Christ/His death, burial and resurrection) is not good enough for you. You want to DO IT YOURSELF and save. Let the boasting begin for Titus

Faith alone gospel is created by cherry picking verses that mention faith or believe and ignoring passages that contradict their no obedience to God for salvation heresy.

John taught exactly as I do.
That is that faith has action.
That action is obedience to what God tells us to do.
John never once taught belief and no works to be saved.
Faith onlyist's pervert the message of John, Peter, Paul, etc. And even Jesus Himself.

Notice their sugar stick:
John 3:16,
- for God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth(this word means you keep on believing so it is not a one time event in a person's life)
on Him should not perish but have everlasting life

Sounds like John teaches belief alone doesn't it?
Yes, if you pull one verse out of John's message and ignore what he taught in before verse 16 and after verse 16.

Let's examine chapter 3 of John.
Let's see if John is a faith onlyist.
Does Dan really teach the same gospel as John?

John teaches Jesus' gospel is water immersion to get access into the kingdom of God.

Note: water in upcoming verses is said to be a women's birthing fluid by some.
This teaching is only as old as John Calvin as he is the one who invented this interpretation.
Prior to John Calvin water that is spoken of by Jesus is the baptism that is taking place in this chapter.
It fits the time period(Jews were being baptized by John)
It fits the context of chapter 3(verses 22;23 of John.
John chapter 4 verses 1-2 continues on baptizing Jews in water for the forgiveness of sins so that they might enter in to the kingdom of God as Jesus told Nicodemus.

John 3:3;5,
- Jesus answered and said unto him(Nicodemus) Verily, Verily I say unto thee, except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Jesus is NOT teaching about being physically born of a women as Nicodemus misunderstood Jesus.
So no pregnant women's birthing fluid has anything to do with what Jesus is about to tell Nicodemus.

This is not being physically born.
Jesus is teaching on being born AGAIN!!! Spiritual rebirth!! No birthing fluid needed in spiritual rebirth folks.

John 3:4
- Nicodemus saith unto Jesus how can a man be born(physical birth) when he is old
Can he enter the second time into his mothers womb and be born

Nicodemus did not understand what Jesus is teaching.
John Calvin did not either.
Calvin makes the exact same interpretation as Nicodemus that is that Jesus is teaching natural physical birth from a women.
This is why Calvin teaches the water is from a women.

JESUS IS TEACHING OF SPIRITUAL REBIRTH ONLY

John 3:5,
- Jesus answered,
Verily, Verily I say unto thee except a man be born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God

The utter foolishness of claiming this water is birthing fluid is this:
Jesus is teaching His gospel to Nicodemus.

Why would Jesus tell Nicodemus something so obvious that it goes without saying?
John Calvin's interpretation makes Jesus sound stupid.

Proof,
When someone goes to teach the gospel to another person do they start by saying...
First to enter into Gods kingdom you must be physically born. If you are not physically born you wont be able to enter into Gods kingdom.

DUH,
Does anyone need to learn this? Does that need to be taught when you teach someone how to be saved?

How many of you tell folks you must be physically born to be saved?
I know NO ONE TEACHES THAT WHEN THEY ARE TEACHING THE GOSPEL BECAUSE ITS SO STUPIDLY OBVIOUS THAT IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE TAUGHT.

Jesus said to Nicodemus that he must be born of water in reference to John's baptism as this is what is taking place in John chapter 3 and of the Spirit to enter Gods kingdom.
Any other interpretation is wrong. Dead wrong.
Dont make Jesus sound stupid please!!!

- Verily, Verily I say unto thee Except a man be born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God

John 3:22-23 : John 4:1-2,
- after these things came Jesus and His disciples into the land of Judea and there He tarried with them and baptized
- John also was baptizing in Aenon near Salim because there was much water there and they came and were baptized by John

Nicodemus was one of them who was baptized in water.
We know he was a believer in Christ.
He is later mentioned in the gospel.

John 19:38-42,
- he came and took the body away, He(Joseph of Airimathea) was accompanied by Nicodemus the man who earlier accompanied Jesus by night( John 3:1-5)

So did John teach Jesus' gospel was do nothing just believe alone?
No, he did not.

But also, notice before John 3:16 read John 3:15.

John 3:13-15
- just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness so the Son of man must be lifted up, that everyone that believes in Jesus may have eternal life

John is teaching about the snakes that bit the jews.
God told Moses that in order for the Jews to be saved they must do something.
They were to look at the serpent on the pole and they would live.

John is using this story to show us that whoever believes in Jesus does as God commands to be saved.
Exactly what I'm teaching.
True Biblical faith according to John saves when you obey God like Moses and the Israelites looking at the serpent on the pole.

Numbers 21:9,
- and Moses made a serpent of brass and put it on a pole and it came to pass that if a serpent had bitten any man when he beheld(looked at) the serpent of brass he  lived

Did God tell Moses to tell His people to believe alone to be saved from the snake bite?
Or did they have to have faith that trusted in God when He commanded them to look at the brass serpent they would be saved?

Does John sound like he teaches faith only salvation?
John and Danthemailman teach two different gospels.

Last verse of John chapter 3.
36,
- he that BELIEVETH on the Son hath everlasting life
and he that OBEYETH not the Son shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him

John teaches believing is obeying God for salvation.
Dan's faith is believing only and no doing Gods commandments to be saved.

If Dan's religion was there during the snake bite with Moses.
They would tell Moses,
"Stop trusting in your works thinking looking at a serpent on a pole will save you. You all are full of pride thinking you can save yourself by doing works.
Just have faith alone in God".
That's not Biblical faith according to John chapter 3.

 

[Titus]

In Acts 16:31, we read - “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.” That is not simply doing nothing

Right, so you contradict your man made doctrine once again by admitting there is something man must do to be saved.
You're making a mess out of the Scriptures and digging yourself deeper and deeper into a hole

Acts 16:30-33,
- and brought them out and said Sirs what must I do to be saved
- and they said Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved and thy house
- and they spake the word of the Lord to him and to his house

Remember Dan's religion only exists by cherry picking verses and leaving out the rest that doesn't fit their faith and no obedience doctrine.

Paul tells the Philippian Jailer to believe on Jesus and the very next verse Paul teaches the gospel to him and his household.

You will never hear a faith onlyist include the next verse in their gospel.

What was it that Paul spake the word of the Lord Jesus to the Jailer?
Keep reading,
Acts 16:30-33,
- and they took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes and was baptized(John 3:5 ; Acts 2:38) he and all his household

The Jailers believing in God according to Luke was not belief alone.
It was faith that obeyed the word of the Lord
Acts 16:34,
- and when he had brought them into his house he set meat before them and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house

The believing included obedience to the word of the Lord(gospel) by being baptized.
Paul preached the gospel of faith and obedience to Gods commandments

John 3:5; Mark 16:15-16,
- go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature,
he that believeth and is baptized will be saved, he that believeth not will be condemned

 

[Titus]

What list of things did Paul say we are saved through in Ephesians 2:8? Paul said we are saved by grace (God's part) through faith (man's part)

Here again you contradict yourself by admitting there is something man must do to be saved.
You condemn anything man has to do.
You demand Jesus does it all and we are not trusting in Jesus if we have to do something to be saved.
Jesus' work on the cross paid it all.
Nothing else needs to be added to His work in order to receive His grace.

But God never taught you will receive Christs perfect sacrifice, His cleansing blood if you dont obey His gospel.

Faith is a work in itself.
Does this work earn salvation? No
Does God require it?
Yes.

Therefore to be saved by Gods grace requires some works of obedience.
They are not meritorious.

That is not good enough for you because you want to DO something and add it to Christ's finished work of redemption in order to help Jesus save you and take credit. (1 Corinthians 1:18-21)

You are doing something you already admitted it.
But in your confusion you try and claim their is nothing we do.

 

[mailmandan]

Faith alone gospel is created by cherry picking verses that mention faith or believe and ignoring passages that contradict their no obedience to God for salvation heresy.

Salvation by works is heresy (Romans 4:2-6; 11:6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9) and is no salvation at all. You confuse obedience that results in salvation with obedience that comes after salvation. Campbell soup theology.

John taught exactly as I do.
That is that faith has action.
That action is obedience to what God tells us to do.
John never once taught belief and no works to be saved.
Faith onlyist's pervert the message of John, Peter, Paul, etc. And even Jesus Himself.

Faith results in action/works. Faith is faith and obedience which follows is works and we are saved through faith, not works. (Ephesians 2:8,9) Do read read that we are saved by works or by faith/believing in Jesus in John 6:40? Now put down your shoehorn and BELIEVE.

Notice their sugar stick:
John 3:16,
- for God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth (this word means you keep on believing so it is not a one time event in a person's life)
on Him should not perish but have everlasting life

Why would it only mean temporarily believe? Saving belief/faith continues to believe and is not some shallow, temporary belief that has no root, produces no fruit and withers away. For works-salvationists, continuing to believe must sound like an extremely difficult burden.

Sounds like John teaches belief alone doesn't it?

What else did John mention along with believes in John 3:16? What happened to baptism or other works? I rest my case.

Yes, if you pull one verse out of John's message and ignore what he taught in before verse 16 and after verse 16.

Let's examine chapter 3 of John.
Let's see if John is a faith onlyist.
Does Dan really teach the same gospel as John?

Dan teaches the same gospel as John. Titus does not.

John teaches Jesus' gospel is water immersion to get access into the kingdom of God.

False. That misinterpretation is based on your eisegesis and not on Scripture.

Note: water in upcoming verses is said to be a women's birthing fluid by some.
This teaching is only as old as John Calvin as he is the one who invented this interpretation.
Prior to John Calvin water that is spoken of by Jesus is the baptism that is taking place in this chapter.
It fits the time period (Jews were being baptized by John)
It fits the context of chapter 3 (verses 22;23 of John.
John chapter 4 verses 1-2 continues on baptizing Jews in water for the forgiveness of sins so that they might enter in to the kingdom of God as Jesus told Nicodemus.

In regard to water baptism in John 3:22, by this time Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus is over with and He has moved on. John 3:22 -After these things Jesus and His disciples came into the land of Judea, and there He was spending time with them and baptizing... You are leaving the context. What still is more in context with verse 5 is verses 14-18. John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

John 3:3;5,
- Jesus answered and said unto him(Nicodemus) Verily, Verily I say unto thee, except a man be born again he cannot see the kingdom of God.

Jesus is NOT teaching about being physically born of a women as Nicodemus misunderstood Jesus.
So no pregnant women's birthing fluid has anything to do with what Jesus is about to tell Nicodemus.

This is not being physically born.
Jesus is teaching on being born AGAIN!!! Spiritual rebirth!! No birthing fluid needed in spiritual rebirth folks.

John 3:4
- Nicodemus saith unto Jesus how can a man be born(physical birth) when he is old
Can he enter the second time into his mothers womb and be born

Nicodemus did not understand what Jesus is teaching.
John Calvin did not either.
Calvin makes the exact same interpretation as Nicodemus that is that Jesus is teaching natural physical birth from a women.
This is why Calvin teaches the water is from a women.

JESUS IS TEACHING OF SPIRITUAL REBIRTH ONLY

John 3:5,
- Jesus answered,
Verily, Verily I say unto thee except a man be born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God

The utter foolishness of claiming this water is birthing fluid is this:
Jesus is teaching His gospel to Nicodemus.

Why would Jesus tell Nicodemus something so obvious that it goes without saying?
John Calvin's interpretation makes Jesus sound stupid.

Proof,
When someone goes to teach the gospel to another person do they start by saying...
First to enter into Gods kingdom you must be physically born. If you are not physically born you wont be able to enter into Gods kingdom.

In John 3:5, Jesus said born of water and the Spirit. He did not say born of baptism and the Spirit and He also did not say unless one is water baptized, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. In the very next chapter, Jesus mentions "living water" in John 4:10, 14 and and He connects living water with eternal life in John 4:14. Also, in John 7:38-39, we read - "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this He spoke concerning the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the source of living water (which reaches the heart) and spiritual cleansing.

If "water" is arbitrarily defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again.

Also "water" is used in the Bible as an emblem of the word of God, and in such uses it is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26) When we are born again, the Holy Spirit begets new life, so that we are said to become "partakers of the divine nature." (2 Peter 1:4) The new birth is brought to pass through "incorruptible seed, by the word of God, which lives and abides forever" (I Peter 1:23) and the Holy Spirit accomplishes the miracle of regeneration. (Titus 3:5)

So, to automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted.

DUH,
Does anyone need to learn this? Does that need to be taught when you teach someone how to be saved?

You still have a lot to learn, Titus and only the Holy Spirit can teach you. (1 Corinthians 2:11-14)

How many of you tell folks you must be physically born to be saved?
I know NO ONE TEACHES THAT WHEN THEY ARE TEACHING THE GOSPEL BECAUSE ITS SO STUPIDLY OBVIOUS THAT IT DOES NOT NEED TO BE TAUGHT.

Jesus said to Nicodemus that he must be born of water in reference to John's baptism as this is what is taking place in John chapter 3 and of the Spirit to enter Gods kingdom.
Any other interpretation is wrong. Dead wrong.
Dont make Jesus sound stupid please!!!

You are making this out to be very personal. Neither of us is out to try and make Jesus look stupid. I already gave the proper interpretation after properly harmonizing Scripture with Scripture. *Hermeneutics. You only seem concerned with accommodating your biased church doctrine that upholds your false gospel.

- Verily, Verily I say unto thee Except a man be born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God

Have you even considered living water? Jesus connects this living water with eternal life. (John 4:10,14; 7:37-39) You need to get out of the natural and into the spiritual.

John 3:22-23 : John 4:1-2,
- after these things came Jesus and His disciples into the land of Judea and there He tarried with them and baptized
- John also was baptizing in Aenon near Salim because there was much water there and they came and were baptized by John

You are leaving the context. Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus is over at this point and He has moved on.

Nicodemus was one of them who was baptized in water.
We know he was a believer in Christ.
He is later mentioned in the gospel.

John 19:38-42,
- he came and took the body away, He(Joseph of Airimathea) was accompanied by Nicodemus the man who earlier accompanied Jesus by night( John 3:1-5)

So did John teach Jesus' gospel was do nothing just believe alone?
No, he did not.

Oh, how you love to ramble. The word believe still stands alone "apart from additions or modifications" in John 3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26) Just deal with it.

 

[mailmandan]

But also, notice before John 3:16 read John 3:15.

John 3:13-15
- just as Moses lifted up the snake in the wilderness so the Son of man must be lifted up, that everyone that believes in Jesus may have eternal life

John is teaching about the snakes that bit the jews.
God told Moses that in order for the Jews to be saved they must do something.
They were to look at the serpent on the pole and they would live.

They were told to look at the snakes in faith for healing just as we look at the Son in faith (believing in Him) for salvation. So, now you are trying to turn looking into salvation by works? You are so determined to boast in works for salvation!

John is using this story to show us that whoever believes in Jesus does as God commands to be saved.
Exactly what I'm teaching.
True Biblical faith according to John saves when you obey God like Moses and the Israelites looking at the serpent on the pole.

Looking takes a lot of hard work.

Numbers 21:9,
- and Moses made a serpent of brass and put it on a pole and it came to pass that if a serpent had bitten any man when he beheld(looked at) the serpent of brass he  lived

Did God tell Moses to tell His people to believe alone to be saved from the snake bite?
Or did they have to have faith that trusted in God when He commanded them to look at the brass serpent they would be saved?

That is still not salvation by works is neither is John 3:16. You are so determined to take credit for salvation by works (pride) that you refuse to believe in Jesus Christ alone for salvation (faith).

Does John sound like he teaches faith only salvation?
John and Danthemailman teach two different gospels.

Faith only per James 2:24 (empty profession of faith/dead faith that produces no works) is not to be confused with believing in/having faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. (John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5-6; 5;1 etc..) I teach the same gospel as John. Titus teaches a "different" gospel that culminates in works righteousness.

Last verse of John chapter 3.
36,
- he that BELIEVETH on the Son hath everlasting life
and he that OBEYETH not the Son shall not see life but the wrath of God abideth on him

John teaches believing is obeying God for salvation.
Dan's faith is believing only and no doing Gods commandments to be saved.

More confusion on Titus' part. I often hear works-salvationists (especially Roman Catholics) cite John 3:36 in the NASB and "stress" the word "obey" to imply that we are saved "by" obedience/works in addition to believing in the Son. In regard to "does not obey the Son" in the New American Standard translation of the Bible, this does not mean that receiving eternal life is received based on the merits of our obedience/works which "follow" believing in the Son but obey by choosing to believe in the Son.

If John wanted to make obedience the central theme in salvation here, he would have said: "He who believes and obeys the Son has eternal life," but that is not what John said. To obey the Son here is to choose to believe in the Son.

The King James Version renders this same verse as: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that "believeth not the Son" shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. The NIV says "rejects the Son" and the HCSB says, "refuses to believe in the Son." To refuse to believe in the Son is to disobey, rebel, be disloyal and refuse conformity. Strong’s definition of apeitheo is "to disbelieve willfully and perversely." *In the context of 3:36, to "not obey the Son" means to reject the Son by refusing to believe in the Son.

If Dan's religion was there during the snake bite with Moses.
They would tell Moses,
"Stop trusting in your works thinking looking at a serpent on a pole will save you. You all are full of pride thinking you can save yourself by doing works.
Just have faith alone in God".
That's not Biblical faith according to John chapter 3.

Straw man argument. Titus remains confused about what it truly means to "believe in Him" (John 3:16) for salvation (trust in Him as the ALL-sufficient means of your salvation) and he also doesn't seem to understand the difference between faith and works. He thinks faith is works. His church has really done a number on him.

 

[mailmandan]

Right, so you contradict your man made doctrine once again by admitting there is something man must do to be saved.
You're making a mess out of the Scriptures and digging yourself deeper and deeper into a hole

LOL! Keep dreaming.

Acts 16:30-33,
- and brought them out and said Sirs what must I do to be saved
- and they said Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved and thy house
- and they spake the word of the Lord to him and to his house

Remember Dan's religion only exists by cherry picking verses and leaving out the rest that doesn't fit their faith and no obedience doctrine.

Paul tells the Philippian Jailer to believe on Jesus and the very next verse Paul teaches the gospel to him and his household.

You will never hear a faith onlyist include the next verse in their gospel.

The clear concise answer to Sirs what must I do to be saved was Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved, you and your household (if they believe as well). Notice that Paul did not say Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and get baptized and you will be saved. So, baptism was not part of the gospel message here. It followed after they believed and were saved just as it did in Acts 10:43-47.

What was it that Paul spake the word of the Lord Jesus to the Jailer?
Keep reading,
Acts 16:30-33,
- and they took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes and was baptized (John 3:5 ; Acts 2:38) he and all his household

This happened AFTER they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ and were saved. Jesus did not say baptism in John 3:5 but He had a lot to say about living water and connects it with salvation in John 4:10,14; 7:37-39. In regard to Acts 2:38, faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:7-9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

The Jailers believing in God according to Luke was not belief alone.

In Acts 16:31, believe is "apart from additions or modifications" hence, belief alone.

It was faith that obeyed the word of the Lord
Acts 16:34,
- and when he had brought them into his house he set meat before them and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house

It was faith that obeyed the command to believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved. They believed in God with all his house before, during and after baptism. Water baptism followed their conversion.

The believing included obedience to the word of the Lord (gospel) by being baptized.

False. Baptism was not the gospel message in Acts 16:31 or in Romans 1:16 or in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. Just deal with it.

Paul preached the gospel of faith and obedience to Gods commandments

I must have missed that in Acts 16:31 and in Romans 1:16 and in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4. Maybe you are reading the eisegesis translation.

John 3:5; Mark 16:15-16,
- go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature,
he that believeth and is baptized will be saved, he that believeth not will be condemned

Again, John 3:5 simply says water and not baptism. The second clause in Mark 16:16 clarifies the first clause with but he who does not believe will be condemned so "baptized or condemned" is not the gospel message. That is your false gospel.

 

[mailmandan]

Here again you contradict yourself by admitting there is something man must do to be saved.
You condemn anything man has to do.
You demand Jesus does it all and we are not trusting in Jesus if we have to do something to be saved.
Jesus' work on the cross paid it all.
Nothing else needs to be added to His work in order to receive His grace.

But God never taught you will receive Christs perfect sacrifice, His cleansing blood if you dont obey His gospel.

Faith is a work in itself.
Does this work earn salvation? No
Does God require it?
Yes.

Therefore to be saved by Gods grace requires some works of obedience.
They are not meritorious.

You are doing something you already admitted it.
But in your confusion you try and claim their is nothing we do.

In your desperate effort to obtain salvation by works based on your personal definition of non-boastful works, you continue to cling to your works-based false gospel and stubbornly refuse to believe the gospel. Until you receive a new pair of bifocals you will remain in a state of confusion, relying on faulty human logic and legalism rather than the Spirit to understand Scripture. (1 Corinthians 2:11-14) There is more involved in coming to saving faith in Christ than merely paper, ink and human intelligence.

 

[Titus]

Again, John 3:5 simply says water and not baptism. The second clause in Mark 16:16 clarifies the first clause with but he who does not believe will be condemned so "baptized or condemned" is not the gospel message. That is your false gospel

Alright, you think Jesus and John the Baptizer taught no water baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

That's your religions attempt to get all,works out of salvation.
Cant be done as faith itself is a work, John 6:28-29

Mark 1:4,
- John did baptize in the wilderness and preach the baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins

So here we learn the purpose of John's water baptism.

In John chapter 3 John the Baptist is baptizing jews.

Therefore when Jesus' disciples are also being baptized in water in John chapter 3,
This baptism is a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.

Try and disprove this Dan.
Your interpretation of John 3:5 is a perversion.

I already know you are going to say the baptism of John did not save them even though that is exactly what the purpose of their baptism was for.

So, then you need to answer if the jews could have had their sins forgiven if they did not get baptized by John?

Mark says, John the Baptist's baptism is for the forgiveness of sins, Mark 1:4.
John chapter 3 they are being baptized by John in water.

Jesus says to Nicodemus to be born again one must be born of water and of Spirit to enter the kingdom.

Therefore it is clear the baptism of John forgives their sins, thus putting them into Gods kingdom.

John 3:5 ;22-23,
- except a man be born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God
- after these things came Jesus and His disciples into the land of Judea and there He tarried with them and baptized
- and John also was baptizing in Aenon near Salim because there was much water there and they came and were baptized

Mark 1:4,
- John did baptize in the wilderness and preach the baptism of repentance for(strongs lexicon: the Greek preposition eis, is primarily used to denote motion or direction towards a place, person or thing.
it implies movement into A CHANGE OF CONDITION. It is used to exprees the end goal of an action

- John did baptize in the wilderness and preach the baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins

- these Jews were sinless when they came up out of the water.

John 3:5, Jesus told Nicodemus he must be born again.

Being born again is only possible if your sins are forgiven.

Try as you might Dan, you are not teaching what John is teaching in John chapter 3.

 

[Titus]

personal definition of non-boastful works,

Personal definition?
It's not my fault you are ignorant of faith and works in the Bible.
These accusations are from a position of ignorance not knowledge.

 

[Titus]

You confuse obedience that results in salvation with obedience that comes after salvation. Campbell soup theology.

I'm not confused at all on Biblical faith.
Saving faith is an action. Dan's faith is dead. It has no obdient works.

Hebrews 3:18-19,
- and to whom sware he that they should not enter into His rest but to those who did not obey
- so we see they could not enter in because of unbelief

What is unbelief in these two verses called?
Disobedience is called unbelief.

Therefore belief is obedience.

And obedience is an action.

Dan tries to get obedience out of faith but it is error.

Dan tries to say all Jesus desires as far as obedience goes is personal belief with no works.

Jesus Himself commanded baptism and belief.
Dan refuses to recognize obedience is more than belief alone.

Dan's gospel has people saved by dis-obeying Jesus' direct commands.

Dan believes no one must obey Jesus' commandment to be baptized in order to be saved.
Therefore the only logical conclusion is we can be saved by disobedience to Jesus' direct commandments.

Mark 16:15-16; Matthew 28:19-20

Dan only believes in the verses that say to believe are required to be saved.
While ignoring that Jesus commanded those who become His disciples must keep all of His commandments.

Matthew 28:19-20,
- Go therefore and make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit
- teaching them to observe ALL things I have commanded you and lo I am with you always even to the end of the age

Matthew 7:21; 23
- not everyone who says Lord, Lord, shall enter the Kingdom of heaven but he who does the will of My Father in heaven
- but I will reply, I never knew you, get away from Me you who break Gods laws


Dan's religion teaches God only requires you to believe but the rest of His law can be disobeyed and you will not be lost.

Proof?
Dan, can I not be baptized which is a direct commandment of Jesus, Mark 16:15-16; Acts 10:47-48 and go to heaven?

- and Peter commanded them to be baptized...
Acts 10:47-48

 

[Titus]

Have you even considered living water? Jesus connects this living water with eternal life. (John 4:10,14; 7:37-39) You need to get out of the natural and into the spiritual

Dan here is attempting to teach me that water baptism of John is natural not spiritual.
Also baptism in the name of Jesus Acts 2:38 would also be natural baptism not spiritual baptism.

This shows Dan's ignorance of the Scriptures.
This is why, a major reason why, he thinks water baptism does not play a part in salvation.

He is wrong, dead wrong!!!

Matthew 21:25,
- the baptism of John whence was it from heaven or of men

 

[mailmandan]

Alright, you think Jesus and John the Baptizer taught no water baptism for the forgiveness of sins.

Neither Jesus nor John the Baptist taught that water baptism is the basis or means by which we obtain forgiveness of sins.

That's your religions attempt to get all, works out of salvation.

The apostle Paul already took care of that. (Romans 3:24-28; 4:2-6; 11:6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9)

Can't be done as faith itself is a work, John 6:28-29

Don't let Jesus' play on words here in response to the Jews who were taking a legalistic approach when they asked, "What shall we do, so that we may work the works of God?" Jesus was not implying that believing is just "another" work in a series of works in a quest to obtain salvation by works. Also, through believing, we are completely trusting in "Another's work," (Christ's finished work of redemption - Romans 3:24-28). There is a distinction between faith AND works. (Romans 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9)

Mark 1:4,
- John did baptize in the wilderness and preach the baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins

So here we learn the purpose of John's water baptism.

In John chapter 3 John the Baptist is baptizing jews.

Therefore when Jesus' disciples are also being baptized in water in John chapter 3,
This baptism is a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.

Once again, by the time baptism is mentioned in John chapter 3, Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus is over with and He has moved on. John 3:22 -After these things Jesus and His disciples came into the land of Judea, and there He was spending time with them and baptizing... You are leaving the context. John 3:15,16,18 are within context and baptism is not mentioned along with believes.

In regard to John's baptism in Mark 1:4, was this baptism of repentance for "in order to obtain" remission of sins or was it for "in regard to/on the basis of" the forgiveness of sins received upon repentance? *Be careful. John's baptism took place BEFORE the death of Jesus. I know about your thief on the cross being baptized under the OT mandate argument, in which the CoC teaches that baptism was not necessary for salvation under the OT mandate, before the death of Jesus, but is necessary for salvation AFTER the death of Jesus.

*Also, in Matthew 3:11, we read - I baptize you with water "for" repentance.. *Now was this baptism for "in order to obtain" repentance? OR was this baptism for "in regard to/on the basis of" repentance? Getting water baptized in order to obtain repentance makes no sense at all. Repentance precedes water baptism. This was also BEFORE the death of Jesus. You can't have it both ways. By teaching that John's "baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins" means that baptism obtains the forgiveness of sins you contradict your argument about the thief on the cross who was clearly saved through faith "apart from water baptism."

Try and disprove this Dan.

I just did.

Your interpretation of John 3:5 is a perversion.

It's your interpretation of John 3:5 that is a perversion but if it makes you feel any better, Roman Catholics will agree with your interpretation, and they go so far as to teach the heretical doctrine of baptismal regeneration. You are not in good company! My interpretation of John 3:5 is in perfect harmony with (John 3:15,16,18; 4:10,14; 7:37-39). You are drinking the wrong water.

I already know you are going to say the baptism of John did not save them even though that is exactly what the purpose of their baptism was for.

So, you are saying that the baptism of John (prior to the death of Jesus) saved them? Interesting. I've heard numerous folks who attend the CoC say that the thief on the cross died unto the OT mandate, so baptism was not necessary for salvation for the thief on the cross but after the death of Christ, baptism is now necessary for salvation. Some CoC folks will even sneak in the comment, "how do we know that the thief on the cross was not baptized?" Perhaps, just to cover all the bases. Just in case, right? Here is a statement below that was once quoted to me by someone who attends the CoC.

The terms for forgiveness and salvation were not the same under the old covenant as they are under the new. The Law of Moses did not require the Israelites to be baptized in order to be saved. In fact, the terms the Israelites were required to meet under the Law of Moses were different from the terms of the law of Christ. The Old Law was done way with and replaced with the new covenant, but only after Jesus died on the cross. When it comes to what one must do to be saved today, whether the thief was baptized makes as much difference as whether Moses, David, or Elijah were baptized, since, like them, he lived under the Law of Moses.

Hmm..

 

[mailmandan]

So, then you need to answer if the jews could have had their sins forgiven if they did not get baptized by John?

I see nothing in the statements that imply that we are saved by baptism. (Luke 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26) If the Jews were genuine believers, then they would not have refused John's baptism, but John's baptism was for "in regard to/on the basis of" forgiveness of sins received upon repentance. Believe the gospel/faith is implied or assumed because it's the new direction of this change of mind in repentance. (Mark 1:15; Acts 20:21) Two sides to the same coin.

Mark says, John the Baptist's baptism is for the forgiveness of sins, Mark 1:4.

Again, I ask, was John's baptism for "in order to obtain" repentance? OR was his baptism for "in regard to/on the basis of" repentance? Matthew 3:11 - “As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance.. Getting water baptized in order to obtain repentance makes no sense at all. Repentance precedes water baptism. John's baptism was for "in regard to/on the basis of' the forgiveness of sins received upon repentance. You can't have it both ways. That is in harmony with Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; 5:31.

John chapter 3 they are being baptized by John in water.

John 3:22 After these things (after Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus was over and He moved on) Jesus and His disciples came into the land of Judea; and there He was spending time with them and baptizing. 23 Now John also was baptizing in Aenon, near Salim, because there was an abundance of water there; and people were coming and being baptized. Out of context with John 3:5.

Jesus says to Nicodemus to be born again one must be born of water and of Spirit to enter the kingdom.

What did Jesus say in John 4:10,14; 7:37-39. Did Jesus connect "living water" with eternal life? Living water is not plain H20.

Therefore, it is clear the baptism of John forgives their sins, thus putting them into Gods kingdom.

It may be clear to CoC folks, Roman Catholics and Mormons, but it's not clear to genuine believers. Your eisegesis also contradicts your argument about the thief on the cross. When are you finally going to stop fighting against the truth? You have kept this flap jack on the griddle long enough. It's time for you to repent (change your mind) and believe the gospel. (Romans 1:16)

John 3:5 ;22-23,
- except a man be born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter the kingdom of God
- after these things came Jesus and His disciples into the land of Judea and there He tarried with them and baptized
- and John also was baptizing in Aenon near Salim because there was much water there and they came and were baptized

After these things. After Jesus' conversation with Nicodemus was over and He moved on. Your argument is waterlogged.

Mark 1:4,
- John did baptize in the wilderness and preach the baptism of repentance for(strongs lexicon: the Greek preposition eis, is primarily used to denote motion or direction towards a place, person or thing.
it implies movement into A CHANGE OF CONDITION. It is used to exprees the end goal of an action

- John did baptize in the wilderness and preach the baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins

I already thoroughly covered this. In regard to "eis" compare Mark 1:4 with Matthew 3:11. Your absolute obsession with water baptism is reaching the point of nauseam. You need to place your faith in the Savior God and not the water god.

- these Jews were sinless when they came up out of the water.

That sounds like the heretical doctrine of baptismal regeneration that Roman Catholics teach.

John 3:5, Jesus told Nicodemus he must be born again.

Being born again is only possible if your sins are forgiven.

Water is used in the Bible as an emblem of the word of God, and in such uses it is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26) When we are born again, the Holy Spirit begets new life, so that we are said to become "partakers of the divine nature." (2 Peter 1:4) The new birth is brought to pass through "incorruptible seed, by the word of God, which lives and abides forever" (I Peter 1:23) and the Holy Spirit accomplishes the miracle of regeneration. (Titus 3:5)

So, once again, to automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted.

Acts 10:43 - All the prophets testify of Him, that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins. Acts 26:18 -to open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me.

Try as you might Dan, you are not teaching what John is teaching in John chapter 3.

Oh, the irony. It's a real shame to see so much zeal wasted on unbelief.

 

[mailmandan]

Personal definition?
It's not my fault you are ignorant of faith and works in the Bible.
These accusations are from a position of ignorance not knowledge.

Your ignorance of faith and works in the Bible stems from being spiritual discerned. (1 Corinthians 2:14)

Just like the Jews in Romans 10:1-4, (difference in style but same in substance) you have a zeal for God, but not according to knowledge, being ignorant of God’s righteousness, and seeking to establish your own righteousness (based on your works-based false gospel) you have not submitted to the righteousness of God. (Romans 4:5-6) Christ is the end of the law (and the end of your works-based false gospel) for righteousness to everyone who believes. (See Romans 1:16; 1 Corinthians 1:18-21; 2 Corinthians 4:3,4)

 

[Titus]

I see nothing in the statements that imply that we are saved by baptism. (Luke 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26) If the Jews were genuine believers, then they would not have refused John's baptism, but John's baptism was for "in regard to/on the basis of" forgiveness of sins received upon repentance. Believe the gospel/faith is implied or assumed because it's the new direction of this change of mind in repentance. (Mark 1:15; Acts 20:21) Two sides to the same coin

If they did not get baptized by John then did they repent?
You cant separate the Jews repentance from John's baptism.
No repentance no forgiveness of sins.
Refusal of being baptized was an unrepentant heart.

Since you separate the Jews salvation from John's water baptism that means those who refused to be baptized by John could be saved.

The only way a jew had true repentance is if he submitted to John's baptism which proves baptism was essential.

- John came preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins

You teach no one needed this baptism to recieve forgiveness of sins.

So the unrepentant could be saved according to you.

 

[Titus]

So, you are saying that the baptism of John (prior to the death of Jesus) saved them? Interesting. I've heard numerous folks who attend the CoC say that the thief on the cross died unto the OT mandate, so baptism was not necessary for salvation for the thief on the cross but after the death of Christ, baptism is now necessary for salvation. Some CoC folks will even sneak in the comment, "how do we know that the thief on the cross was not baptized?" Perhaps, just to cover all the bases. Just in case, right? Here is a statement below that was once quoted to me by someone who attends the CoC

No, this is not my belief so you dont know what you are talking about.

 

[mailmandan]

I'm not confused at all on Biblical faith.

Saving faith is an action. Dan's faith is dead. It has no obdient works.

Saving faith trusts in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. Actions which follow are works. How is my faith dead when I have been made alive together with Christ, saved by grace through faith, not works, created in Christ Jesus unto/for good works. (Ephesians 2:5-10) After my conversion I have performed multiple obedient works, including receiving water baptism. I'm just not trusting in my works for salvation. I am trusting in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. (Romans 4:5-6) Titus' faith is in works for salvation and is not in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. (Romans 11:6) That is the huge difference between us.

Hebrews 3:18-19,
- and to whom sware he that they should not enter into His rest but to those who did not obey
- so we see they could not enter in because of unbelief

What is unbelief in these two verses called?
Disobedience is called unbelief.

Therefore belief is obedience.

And obedience is an action.

Here we go. More confusion on your part. This is what happens when you read Scripture through the lens of works salvation. Their disobedience was a manifestation of their unbelief and obedience is a manifestation of belief. Now don't confuse the obedient act of choosing to believe the gospel (Romans 10:16) with multiple acts of obedience/works which follow. Titus so desperately wants to believe that faith in essence "is" multiple acts of obedience/works so he can justify his works-based false gospel.

Dan tries to get obedience out of faith but it is error.

Obedience/works are the fruit of faith but not the essence of faith. Titus wants to turn obedience/works which "follow" faith into faith itself but that is in error.

Dan tries to say all Jesus desires as far as obedience goes is personal belief with no works.

I do not disregard multiple acts of obedience/works in the Christian life. I simply put them in their proper place. Subsequent to salvation through faith. (Ephesians 2:8-10) Titus does not understand the difference between genuine belief that results in producing works and a bare profession of belief that produces no works.

Jesus Himself commanded baptism and belief.

Jesus clarified the first clause in Mark 16:16 with the second - but he who does not believe will be condemned. Jesus also connected receiving eternal life with believing "apart from water baptism" in (John 3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26)

Dan refuses to recognize obedience is more than belief alone.

Titus fails to recognize the difference between the obedient act of choosing to believe the gospel (Romans 1:16; 10:16) and multiple acts of obedience/works which "follow." Titus simply infuses it all together to create salvation by faith AND works.

Dan's gospel has people saved by dis-obeying Jesus' direct commands.

Dan's gospel has people saved by obeying the gospel by choosing to trust in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation. (Romans 1:16; 1 Corinthians 15:1-4) I have not disobeyed Jesus' direct commands. I truly believe in Jesus as the ALL-sufficient means of my salvation. (John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 15:7-9; Romans 4:5-6; 1 John 5:13 etc..). Titus' gospel has people obeying his biased church doctrine and not Jesus.

Dan believes no one must obey Jesus' commandment to be baptized in order to be saved.

Show me where Jesus said, "whoever is not baptized will not be saved." I'll be waiting. John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. So much for your theories.

Therefore the only logical conclusion is we can be saved by disobedience to Jesus' direct commandments.

Mark 16:15-16; Matthew 28:19-20

Straw man argument. But he who does not believe will be condemned clarifies the first clause of Mark 16:16, which is in harmony with (John 3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26)

Dan only believes in the verses that say to believe are required to be saved.

Apparently, you don't believe in those verses. (John 1:12; 3:15,16,18, 36; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 4:5-6; 10:4; 1 John 5:13 etc..). You have your shoehorn ready around every turn along with your works. Believing is not enough for you because the object of our belief (Jesus Christ) is not enough for you, so you turn to supplements. Yet Christ's finished work of redemption is sufficient and complete to save believers. (Romans 3:24-28) No supplements needed.

While ignoring that Jesus commanded those who become His disciples must keep all of His commandments.

Oh, so you interpret Matthew 28:19,20 as a flawlessly obey all of His commandments 24/7. Do you claim to be sinless, 100% of the time?

Matthew 28:19-20,
- Go therefore and make disciples of all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit
- teaching them to observe ALL things I have commanded you and lo I am with you always even to the end of the age

Yes, go and make disciples of all nations, which is done by preaching the gospel unto all nations, then baptize converts, and teach them to observe all that Jesus has commanded you. Nothing here about baptism being absolutely necessary for salvation or salvation by works.

Matthew 7:21; 23
- not everyone who says Lord, Lord, shall enter the Kingdom of heaven but he who does the will of My Father in heaven
- but I will reply, I never knew you, get away from Me you who break Gods laws

John 6:40 - For my Father’s will is that everyone who looks to the Son and believes in him shall have eternal life, and I will raise them up at the last day. These many people in verse 22 had the wrong foundation. They were trusting in their works for salvation and not in Christ alone. (sound familiar?) Jesus clearly states, "I never knew you" which means they were never saved, so they did not have saving faith in Christ. Their hearts were not right with God, so their "attempted external obedience" (apart from the righteousness of God which is by faith and the blood of Christ - Romans 3:24-28; Philippians 3:9) was still stained with sin. Their faith, practices, and their works are condemned. Their sins remain. Hence, you who "practice lawlessness."

Dan's religion teaches God only requires you to believe but the rest of His law can be disobeyed and you will not be lost.

Straw man argument.

Proof?
Dan, can I not be baptized which is a direct commandment of Jesus, Mark 16:15-16; Acts 10:47-48 and go to heaven?

What did Jesus say is the cause of condemnation in Mark 16:16 and John 3:18? How did Peter say that one receives forgiveness of sins in Acts 10:43? I gladly received water baptism after my conversion, and I can't name one Christian I know who has refused to be water baptized. But if someone is on their deathbed when they come to believe in Jesus for salvation without the opportunity to be water baptized before death, they will still be saved because they believe, which is in harmony with (Mark 16:16(b); John 3:18; Acts 10:43) You prove over and over again that you believe in/have faith in your baptism for salvation and not in Jesus Christ alone.

- and Peter commanded them to be baptized...
Acts 10:47-48

AFTER, they believed, received remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 10:43-47) which is ONLY for the body of Christ. (1 Corinthians 12) Checkmate! Let me know when you are ready to BELIEVE, Titus.

 

[mailmandan]

Dan here is attempting to teach me that water baptism of John is natural not spiritual.
Also baptism in the name of Jesus Acts 2:38 would also be natural baptism not spiritual baptism.

Matthew 3:11 - As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. Was that natural H20 that John baptized people in? Do you understand the difference between being baptized with water and being baptized with the Holy Spirit?

This shows Dan's ignorance of the Scriptures.

Your repetitious straw man arguments, insults and nonsense are getting old.

This is why, a major reason why, he thinks water baptism does not play a part in salvation.

Show me just one verse in Scripture that specifically says, "whoever is not baptized will be condemned." I'll be waiting. In the meantime read John 3:18 - John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

He is wrong, dead wrong!!!

You seem to have more faith in water baptism to save you than you do in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ! Your church should be labeled a "water baptism cult." When I had temporarily attended the CoC several years, it seemed like water baptism was just about the only thing they talked about! Reminds me of the Jews obsession with circumcision.

Matthew 21:25,
- the baptism of John whence was it from heaven or of men

This question was in regard to John's authority to baptize. John was widely revered by the people and the Chief priests and elders of the people could not deny John's legitimacy without an unpopular response from the people. They quickly came to realize that Jesus has put them in a no-win situation. If they said John's authority and message was from heaven, Jesus can accuse them of ignoring the messenger of God. The alternative, to claim John was a fraudulent teacher, of men, would be very unpopular and go against their real motive of maintaining power. (Matthew 21:26) What seemed like an easy way to trap Jesus ended up becoming a snare for these men. Praise Jesus!

BTW That question had nothing to do with salvation by water baptism.