|
Born Again and Baptism
Subject: Re: Born again
Date: Mon, 07 Sept 1998 08:51:28 -0500
From: Mahlon <bible@tk7.net>
To: dokimos <dokimos@erols.com>
References: 1dokimos wrote:
Dear Mahlon,
Greetings in the name of Jesus Christ who gives forgiveness of all sins and eternal life to all who believe in His name. Thank you for taking time to reply to our pages. You have some good articles. We didn't get to read them all but you have some good comments on the church and the sabbath. We look forward to that sabbath day rest with Christ through faith in Him and in this way keep the sabbath and make it holy. Regarding your understanding of "born again". The text is very clear regarding the births being natural, then Spiritual. Would you be willing to rethink this. We cannot see how water birth can refer to Spiritual birth. We believe that your understanding is out of context on this one topic. We commend you for the work you've done to reveal the Holy Scriptures on your website.-Dokimos
See our pages starting with... http://www.erols.com/dokimos
PRAY TO GOD RIGHT NOW AND ASK JESUS TO BE YOUR SAVIOR!
Hi,
Thank you very much for your comments, and your interest in my material. In regards to the subject of "Born again", if you will check again I refer in the "spiritual birth" going from "spirit to spirit"; and not going from the "natural to the spirit" as you seemed to think. Also, I believe to be "born of water" is baptism, simply because this will "wash away" the Adamic sin (from God's point of view). You stated that (your quote)... "We cannot see how water birth can refer to Spiritual birth". Please reread the pamphlet carefully. I do agree with you; in that the "water birth" (as you put it)" is not referring to the "spiritual birth". I believe it is simply baptism, which makes it possible for the Spirit of God to conceive God's children "again". We live in a deceived "Christian" environment in which many theological subjects are being taught based on misunderstandings. Therefore we must unlearn most of what we grew up believing what was taught to us by the denominational Church system. We must become "child-like" in just simply believing the written text of scripture, which will go a long way in a correct understanding of the Bible. Thanks again for the message and hope to hear from you again.http://www.tk7.net/users/bibletruths
In His Service, Mahlon
-----Original Message-----
From: Mahlon <bible@tk7.net>
To: dokimos@erols.com <dokimos@erols.com>
Date: Sunday, August 30, 1998 10:53 PM
Subject: Born againSir,
In Regards to the doctrine of "Born Again". For what it's worth, please read the attached file "Ye Must Be Born Again". If you are not able to open and read this attached file please click on this link in my web page. Thank you kindly for your time.In His Service, Mahlon Wickey
http://www.tk7.net/users/bibletruths
Subject: Re: Born again
Date: Tue, 08 Sep 1998 22:22:26 -0500
From: Mahlon <bible@tk7.net>
To: dokimos <dokimos@erols.com>
References: 1dokimos wrote:
Mahlon,
We did not misunderstand your concept of "spirit to spirit". We just disagree with it. Water baptism is not a requirement for salvation. If this is what you believe you have stepped into believing a works salvation. Works cannot save, we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not by works.For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: Not of works, lest any man should boast. - Ephesians 2:8-9
Be careful of your doctrines regarding water baptism in this area. Water baptism is an outward sign of one's faith in Christ. Water baptism does not wash away original sin. Please read our page http://www.erols.com /dokimos/immersed.html more carefully. Our page http://www.erols.com/dokimos /bylove.html may also be helpful to you.
The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin. - 1 John 1:7b.
The belief of being "born of water" means water baptism is incorrect.
"That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." - John 3:6
This verse makes it clear that the first birth is water and the Spritual rebirth (born again) is the Spiritual birth.
Do you believe we are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone? Or do you believe there is more to it than Jesus doing the work to save us.
-Dokimos
See our pages starting with... http://www.erols.com/dokimos
Dokimos,
I sincerely wish you would take the time to read my booklet "Abraham's Covenant and Baptism" in my URL, and then show me where anything is biblically incorrect. In spite of what you have tried to explain to me, baptism does indeed "wash away" sins. Read it for yourself in Acts 22:16.Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. (KJV)
Your line of reasoning on baptism and works is what is commonly accepted and taught, and is the viewpoint of most of the denominational Churches. What is wrong with believing and accepting God's viewpoint on baptism, as was expressed in Acts 22:16? You stated that water baptism does not wash away "original sin". You fail to realize that "original sin" has to be "washed away" in order for the Spirit of God to come in the life of a believer. "Original sin" cannot be repented of, which is why baptism is needed (from God's point of view). However it can be legally said that the act of baptism is not what saves (as you have stated), but it will "clear the slate", so to speak, in order for God to not count sin against us. On the other hand, it can nevertheless also be legally said that baptism does indeed "save us". Read it for yourself in 1 Peter 3:21.
1 Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto [even] baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: (KJV)
If sincere people use your supposed logic on "works", then in their minds there would be no need for repentance. Repentance is stressed throughout the bible, especially in the New Testament. If you respond to me in attempting to explain away the need for repentance, then I must say in honesty that you have lost all credibility with me. No, I do not believe on a "works" salvation as you falsely assumed that I do. Using common sense and spiritual logic, no one is able to earn salvation by works. However if we choose to believe the apostle James (as we should), then faith without works is dead. Read it for yourself in James 2:20.
James 2:20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead? (KJV)
I choose to believe (as you should also) that James refers to the Christian faith as the faith being dead without works. Yes, proper works will demonstrate and prove the correct faith. I explain this simple concept in my pamphlet "Law and Grace" in the URL. If you would, please read it carefully and get back with me. By the way, Jesus Christ never stated that the "born of the flesh" is the first birth, or what you falsely assume is the "water birth". Why do you, as do many others, take it upon yourself to falsely assume and teach that the "born of the flesh" is the first birth for the children of God? You are not being honest with the bible! Christ only implies that flesh can only bring forth flesh, and in like manner, spirit can only bring forth spirit. This is how the basic Godly law of conception works (physical or spiritual), as you should know. I sincerely hope and pray this has been helpful, and that you will now better understand my position on these interesting topics. Keep in touch.
http://www.tk7.net/users/bibletruths
In Christian Love, Mahlon
10 Sep 1998 17:08:17 -0500
From: Mahlon <bible@tk7.net>
To: dokimos <dokimos@erols.com>
References: 1dokimos wrote:
Mahlon, you wrote,I sincerely wish you would take the time to read my booklet "Abraham's Covenant and Baptism" in my URL, and then show me where anything is biblically incorrect. In spite of what you have tried to explain to me, baptism does indeed "wash away" sins. Read it for yourself in Acts 22:16.
Read your page. Water baptism is symbolic, it does not wash away sins. Spirit baptism is what you need to understand. We wish you would read our page http://www.erols.com/dokimos/immersed.html more carefully. This answers your question on this passage and others. Our page http://www.erols.com/dokimos/baptized. html will also clarify regarding Spirit baptism and passages frequently confused with water baptism.
Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. (KJV)
1st: arise and be baptized, and 2nd: wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. Baptism does not wash away sins. Sins are washed away when calling on the name of the Lord.
You wrote,
Your line of reasoning on baptism and works is what is commonly accepted and taught, and is the viewpoint of most of the denominational Churches.
We are not denominational but we are NOT anti-denominational. So what if we do have denominational view in any case? What's your point. That which is wrong in your view point is that you are confusing others on how sins are washed away. Your view is not denominational but slightly cultic.
1 Peter 3:21 The like figure whereunto [even] baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: (KJV)
See our immersed.html page.
You wrote,
If sincere people use your supposed logic on "works", then in their minds there would be no need for repentance. Repentance is stressed throughout the bible, especially in the new testament. If you respond to me in attempting to explain away the need for repentance, then I must say in honesty that you have lost all credibility with me. No, I do not believe on a "works" salvation as you falsely assumed that I do. Using common sense and spiritual logic, no one is able to earn salvation by works. However if we choose to believe the apostle James (as we should), then faith without works is dead. Read it for yourself in James 2:20.
Repentence is a valid requirement for salvation when understood as synonymous with faith. Therefore, the faith side of repentance is a requirement of salvation. The works end of repentance is the result of salvation, not the requirement.
You wrote,
By the way, Jesus Christ never stated that the "born of the flesh" is the first birth, or what you falsely assume is the "water birth". Why do you, as do many others, take it upon yourself to falsely assume and teach that the "born of the flesh" is first birth for the children of God? You are not being honest with the bible!
You are making excuses to pass off the context of Scripture to support a viewpoint based on verses you have misunderstood (namely the ones you mentioned previously). We're not trying to come on strong with you but we believe you need to read again with an open mind willing to more carefully consider. We commend your willingness to proclaim Christ openly to the world and write with eloquence and detail. However, we think your pages could use just a bit of refinement. Good things you have to say regarding the christian life within the Abrahamic covenant. Thanks for taking the time to write. We hope you will most boldly declare the love, grace, forgiveness and free gift of eternal life to the world.
With faith and love which are in Christ Jesus,
-Dokimos
Dokimos,
It appears that our contention is on how sins are "washed away". It would serve no purpose to argue with you because we can both read and believe scripture if we both choose to do so. However I will attempt once more to explain my belief on baptism, and then rest my case. The physical act of obedience to baptism is the general theme, and is at the heart and core of Acts 22:16. Of course, I can agree with you in that by invoking the name of Christ is how God can "wash away" sins. You see, this is how baptism is done (in the name of Christ), and it is a divine "washing". Calling on the name of the Lord is to put strength and validity to the law of baptism, which is how the divine "washing" is done. It is very frustrating for me to read how you attempt to explain this, because it appears that you have it reversed. Why not just accept and believe what Acts 22:16 is saying, instead of attempting to pick it apart with "technicalities". The divine instruction of baptism is to be done with the authority and permission of Christ, which in turn will move God to "cleanse" a sinner. It is incredible that you cannot (or refuse to) understand this. Do you honestly believe the people in the book of Acts would have had their sins "washed away" if they were not rebaptised. Come on, please tell me that you now understand the theme and purpose of baptism. It is time you begin to see the profound importance in the act of obedience to baptism, and the purpose of ceremonial law under the new covenant. Obedience is the key word, and as you know baptism will save believers from being damned (or from coming under judgment), as our Savior explained in Mark 16:16.Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (KJV)
I choose to believe these most serious words spoken by Jesus Christ. How about you? I consider you a friend in Christ and I hope it is mutual. Remember, no more arguing, but feel free to keep in touch anyhow.
In Christian Love, Mahlon
Subject: Re: 1 Corinthians 12:13
Date: Sun, 13 Sep 1998 00:38:37 -0500
From: Mahlon <bible@tk7.net>
To: dokimos <dokimos@erols.com>
References: 1dokimos wrote:
Mahlon, you wrote,Why not just accept and believe what Acts 22:16 is saying, instead of attempting to pick it apart with "technicalities". ed in Mark 16:16.
Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. (KJV)
I choose to believe these most serious words spoken by Jesus Christ. How about you? I consider you a friend in Christ and I hope it is mutual. Remember, no more arguing, but feel to keep in touch anyhow.
In Christian Love, Mahlon
Mahlon,
You have chosen to completely disregard the words of our webpage and have not answered them. In them the Scripture will answer you. Apparently you and your website have much more talking to do than listening."Desiring to be teachers of the law; understanding neither what they say, nor whereof they affirm." -1 Timothy 1:7
Before you write again answer what we wrote on http://www.erols.com/dokimos/immersed.html page. It is short and to the point. It answers what you write. We take God's word seriously and in context. You run into clear contextual difficulties some of which we have pointed out to you which you have chosen to ignore. Has your separation into non-denominationalism made you a seperatist from being taught by others as well? Again, we know that we sound strong with our words. But we do not mean them harshly. There are many good things you write, but we all learn from each other and build each other up in the Lord and doctrine. We are fully immersed water baptised but we do NOT believe that cleanses us from original sin. Nor should we believe such a thing. Take time to meditate on the verses on the immersed.html page and then e-mail us. We really think you've been missing the point.
We are all baptised into one body by one Spirit (1 Cor. 12:13),
-Dokimos
Hi again Dokimos,
Here we go again! I have stated in my last e-mail that I will not argue, however I am enjoying this discussion. Praise God that we can continue this in a friendly manner, and hopefully some good can come of it. I also, as you have stated, do not mean to be harsh, but I will "put you down" at times. Please take it the right way. You asked me to review your web site, and address the points that you make. I examined your web page on the first e-mail exchange we had, which was about a week or so ago. This was the reason I brought certain scriptures to your attention, such as Mark 16:16. I sincerely believe you have missed the very obvious point Christ made in this scripture. It continually amazes me that sincere Christians refuse to believe the simple words of Christ. It is as if they want to "improve" on Christ's words, and attempt to "explain" what Christ "really" meant. It is a shame the way you attempt to put words in Christ's mouth. Why not just be easy on yourself, and simply believe the obvious implications of Christ's statement. Here is your quote from your web page regarding Mark 16:16... ("We are not damned for not being water baptized. Unbelievers are damned. Those who are saved are water baptized consequential to their belief in Jesus Christ".) What exactly did Christ say? He did not say, "we are not damned for not being water baptized". You made that statement! Christ did not, nor did he even imply it! Please note exactly what Christ said.Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned". (KJV)
If a believer is baptized he shall be saved, plain and simple. Sincere people come to believe and understand the merits of the sacrifice of Christ, and therefore become "believers". Then if they follow through with baptism, as Christ explained, they shall be saved. Is this not what Christ implied? Meaning of course that believers, if they are not baptized, will not be saved along with unbelievers. You fail to realize that unbelievers will not be baptized anyhow, simply because they are unbelievers; which is why Christ did not associate baptism with unbelievers in this verse. Using your interpretation of Mark 16:16 Christ would have said, "He that believeth shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be damned" (baptism is omitted). Is this not what you imply? Why did Christ even mention baptism if it is not required for salvation, as you falsely assume that it is not. Shame on you for misleading sincere people on this major point. Again, as I mentioned in my last e-mail, you seem to somehow have it reversed. It is not and cannot be a "consequential" situation (as you put it). Common sense tells us that believers cannot be saved and receive the Spirit unless they are "washed" of the Adamic sin. A believer is baptized simply because he wants to obey the divine instructions to get "washed" and be "cleansed" of the original Adamic sin, which allows the Spirit to do the work of the Spirit. I am assuming that this is your interpretation of the "spirit baptism" as you mentioned. The work of the Spirit is "baptizing" believers into the one body of Christ, as Paul stated in several scriptures and that you have also displayed in your web page. However this "spiritual work" cannot be done unless believers have ceremonially "washed" themselves of the Adamic sin in the "name of Christ".
Here is another quote you made... ("If water baptism was a requirement for salvation Christ would have sent Paul the apostle to baptize. However, Paul was not sent to water baptize but to preach the gospel of which water baptism is not an essential element".) I believe Paul was overburdened as it was in his work of preaching the gospel, which is why I believe he simply did not take the time to baptize. It was a matter of priorities, and is the reason he was sent only to preach the gospel. However he did baptize at least two households and several men as opportunity permitted. It is very possible that he assigned other disciples to do the work of baptism.
Here is your quote regarding Acts 2:38... ("for the remission of sins" should be understood as "because of the remission of sins". We are baptized BECAUSE our sins are remitted. We cannot be baptized TO BE remitted of sins.") It is very true that only the shed blood of Jesus Christ can remit sins. However obedience to the physical act of baptism is at the center of Acts 2:38, and by doing this ceremonial "washing" causes the shed blood of Christ to be effective. Once again, you seem to have the uncanny ability to reverse the true meaning of baptism. Your logic means that there would be no need for baptism, and it would therefore serve no purpose. By using your logic and not being baptized for the "remission of sins" would fly in the face of what the apostle Peter was carefully trying to explain in Acts 2:38.
Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. (KJV)
Here is another quote you made regarding the account in Acts 10... ("In this passage is seen that the Holy Spirit is given to believers BEFORE water baptism. Hence, water baptism is a resulting act of obedience from faith. It cannot be a salvation requirement.") What was explained in Acts 2:38 is the opposite of your logic, and what you state in your quote. Keep in mind Peter commanded baptism, and then (quoting Peter)... "Ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost". They received the Holy Ghost after they were baptized. Is this not true? So which is it, before or after? The people in Acts 10 received the Holy Ghost as a direct result of hearing and believing the preaching of Peter, as it explains in Acts 10:44.
Acts 10:44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. (KJV)
Again, the physical obedience to a commanded "washing" is the central issue and theme in Acts 10. This was one example when the Holy Ghost came upon believers before they were baptized. However I believe the Holy Ghost would not have remained on them if they would have disregarded baptism. There is the possibility that some of these people were baptized under John as Peter implied in the previous verses in mentioning John, and were therefore "rebaptized". In Acts 19:4-6 is an example where people were baptized under John, and received the Holy Ghost after they were "rebaptized".
Acts 19:4-6 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5 When they heard [this], they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid [his] hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. (KJV)The point Paul made in these verses is that John did not baptize "in the name of Christ", simply because Christ had not yet shed his blood during the time when John was doing his baptizing. Therefore these believers were then rebaptized "in the name of the Lord Jesus" to receive the Holy Ghost. However John did indeed baptize for "remission of sins" as it explains in Luke 3:3
Luke 3:3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins; (KJV)
My question I have to ask you is this; why do you say the opposite of what is plainly stated in Luke 3:3. Here is your quote... ("We cannot be baptized TO BE remitted of sins."). The point I want to make is that John preached the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins before Christ shed his blood. Yet you say this is impossible because baptism cannot remit sins. What is missing in John's baptism is that it was not done "in the name of Christ". However John's baptism did remit personal sins upon repentance, but it could not remit the original Adamic sin until Christ shed his blood.
The other points that you make on your web page I have already addressed in the previous e-mails to you. I hope this rather lengthy discussion has been thought provoking to you and has been helpful. I have stated what I personally believe baptism is all about, and I am willing to simply believe what the Bible says about baptism. We can all read the Bible, and it is so sad that many sincere people somehow are mentally "programmed" to believe something that simply is not biblically accurate or true. Over the years this nation has produced hundreds of various so-called "Christian" churches which are doing this "programming". The incredible irony of this is that all these Churches claim to know the truth of the Bible. I believe the vast majority of our Churches are deceived, and have a major problem with understanding correct doctrine and theology! I know you are sincere in your work for Christ, however I must say in all due respect to you; I believe your web page is misleading truth seekers on the doctrine of baptism. Thank you for your time, and please stay in touch.
http://www.tk7.net/users/bibletruths
In His Service, Mahlon
Questions or comments?... Email: wickey777@verizon.net