Comments on: The Scandal of Galatians http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians Sniffing out the work of God in the world... Wed, 03 Dec 2008 04:55:17 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1 By: Ray B. http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67167 Ray B. Wed, 05 Sep 2007 15:12:37 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67167 Keith , Amen ! What Jesus teaches is the final authority. Keith ,
Amen ! What Jesus teaches is the final authority.

]]> By: Keith http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67157 Keith Wed, 05 Sep 2007 04:14:28 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67157 I'm so glad Jesus himself said it so plainly, otherwise I would feel the need to argue myself. "He who believes and is baptized will be saved." I’m so glad Jesus himself said it so plainly, otherwise I would feel the need to argue myself.

“He who believes and is baptized will be saved.”

]]> By: Royce Ogle http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67106 Royce Ogle Sat, 01 Sep 2007 18:12:31 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67106 It was Peter who was speaking the coC's favorite verse in the Bible.(Acts 2:38) Now for the rest of the story. It was also Peter speaking in the 10th chapter of Acts when at Cornelius' house "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” (How did they receive the Holy Spirit?) Then later when he would defend his words and actions to the counsel by saying this, "If therefore God gave them the same gift (of the Holy Spirit) as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God? When they heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, “Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life.” (Acts 11:17, 18) By Peter's own lips, his testimony was that he and everyone else received the Holy Spirit "When we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ". There is no question about this, the Bible is very clear. So, what about Acts 2:38? The operative word in that text in 2:38 is "repent" not "be baptized". Peter declares that he and the others received the very proof of salvation at the point of belief, (faith/repentance...”God has granted to the Gentiles repentance to life".)Not at baptism. He and they received the Holy Spirit when they believed. Please don't think I'm being offensive but I could correctly say to a sinner, "Repent and start going to church and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit", or I could say "Repent and love your neighbor and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit". If God is restrained as to the reach of His love and grace by who is or is not immersed in water as some teach, He has been stripped of some of His eternal attributes and cannot possibly be just. The fact is that just as Phillip instructed the Ethiopian eunuch after he had preached Jesus to him, "If you believe with all your heart you may" be baptised, so that saving trust must precede water baptism. Will we void Romans 10 "with the heart man believes unto righteousness"? Salvation is only in Christ, wholly upon His merit, and only by faith. Those who "believe with the heart" (different than giving mental ascent to facts) will gladly and joyfully want to do everything they know to do to please Christ including public immersion in water because of the forgiveness of their sins. Should every believer be immersed? Absolutely they should. And, if they are properly taught they will gladly submit to believer’s baptism just as they do in every other area of Christian living. Grace to you, Royce Ogle It was Peter who was speaking the coC’s favorite verse in the Bible.(Acts 2:38) Now for the rest of the story. It was also Peter speaking in the 10th chapter of Acts when at Cornelius’ house “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?” (How did they receive the Holy Spirit?)

Then later when he would defend his words and actions to the counsel by saying this, “If therefore God gave them the same gift (of the Holy Spirit) as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God? When they heard these things they became silent; and they glorified God, saying, “Then God has also granted to the Gentiles repentance to life.” (Acts 11:17, 18)

By Peter’s own lips, his testimony was that he and everyone else received the Holy Spirit “When we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ”.
There is no question about this, the Bible is very clear. So, what about Acts 2:38?

The operative word in that text in 2:38 is “repent” not “be baptized”. Peter declares that he and the others received the very proof of salvation at the point of belief, (faith/repentance…”God has granted to the Gentiles repentance to life”.)Not at baptism. He and they received the Holy Spirit when they believed.

Please don’t think I’m being offensive but I could correctly say to a sinner, “Repent and start going to church and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit”, or I could say “Repent and love your neighbor and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit”.

If God is restrained as to the reach of His love and grace by who is or is not immersed in water as some teach, He has been stripped of some of His eternal attributes and cannot possibly be just. The fact is that just as Phillip instructed the Ethiopian eunuch after he had preached Jesus to him, “If you believe with all your heart you may” be baptised, so that saving trust must precede water baptism. Will we void Romans 10 “with the heart man believes unto righteousness”?

Salvation is only in Christ, wholly upon His merit, and only by faith. Those who “believe with the heart” (different than giving mental ascent to facts) will gladly and joyfully want to do everything they know to do to please Christ including public immersion in water because of the forgiveness of their sins.

Should every believer be immersed? Absolutely they should. And, if they are properly taught they will gladly submit to believer’s baptism just as they do in every other area of Christian living.

Grace to you,
Royce Ogle

]]> By: Donald http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67102 Donald Sat, 01 Sep 2007 01:41:42 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67102 When I think of baptism, I think of Christ's example. We know Jesus was baptized. It is my belief/understanding that Jesus was baptized to receive the Holy Spirit. Certainly Jesus did not need to be saved, but if Jesus was a man and tempted in every way as you and I are, Jesus ultimately had to rely on the Holy Spirit to overcome temptation. Isn't that how we overcome? The scriptures say the Holy Spirit descended and remained on him. Remained on him. When did Jesus begin performing miracles? The only ones recorded occurred after he was baptized. When was he tempted personally by Satan? After he was baptized. When did Jesus begin his ministry? After he was baptized. We know that Jesus relied on the Holy Spirit to do all he did. Something more than just a ritual occurred here. I wouldn't say that 99% of believers out there think baptism is just a ritual. Look at our brothers and sisters in the pentecostal faith. I don't want to generalize, but I believe the majority of them believe baptism (by that I mean immersion)is essential for salvation. Only they believe that a very visible sign such as speaking in tongues must occur to show that one has truly been saved. Talk about pressure! There are other people who believe if you are baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit that you are going to hell, because at baptism it should only be said that you are being baptized into Christ. So it's not just churches of Christ that are at odds with mainstream Chritian media. When I think of baptism, I think of Christ’s example. We know Jesus was baptized. It is my belief/understanding that Jesus was baptized to receive the Holy Spirit. Certainly Jesus did not need to be saved, but if Jesus was a man and tempted in every way as you and I are, Jesus ultimately had to rely on the Holy Spirit to overcome temptation. Isn’t that how we overcome? The scriptures say the Holy Spirit descended and remained on him. Remained on him. When did Jesus begin performing miracles? The only ones recorded occurred after he was baptized. When was he tempted personally by Satan? After he was baptized. When did Jesus begin his ministry? After he was baptized. We know that Jesus relied on the Holy Spirit to do all he did. Something more than just a ritual occurred here.

I wouldn’t say that 99% of believers out there think baptism is just a ritual. Look at our brothers and sisters in the pentecostal faith. I don’t want to generalize, but I believe the majority of them believe baptism (by that I mean immersion)is essential for salvation. Only they believe that a very visible sign such as speaking in tongues must occur to show that one has truly been saved. Talk about pressure!

There are other people who believe if you are baptized in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit that you are going to hell, because at baptism it should only be said that you are being baptized into Christ. So it’s not just churches of Christ that are at odds with mainstream Chritian media.

]]> By: Rex http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67100 Rex Sat, 01 Sep 2007 00:40:14 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67100 Larry, Baptism cannot be substituted for circumcision (OT sign of the covenant), for in the New Testament the Holy Spirit is the sign of the convenant (Eph 1.13-14). However, the point is still the same. If Abraham was credited as righteous before circumcision (which Paul says he was), then one can be credited as righteous before receiving the Holy Spirit (which is received in baptism). ---- Since the Holy Spirit is the sign of salvation, I do not know what to think of people who either deny the Holy Spirit's existance or ignore the Holy Spirit for one reason or another. ---- As far as the CoC and our way of teaching baptism... IMHO it seems that when baptism is preached it is done so as though baptism is about what we are doing. While I agree that we must make a decision to "be baptized," if we would read closely we would notice that the verb "be baptized" is passive (We don't need a Greek NT for this either). The point is that our role in baptism is passive. It is God who is the active agent in baptism. When I offer an invitation to be baptized at the end of a sermon, I have been asking people to "Come and let God baptize you into Christ." Recently someone came up to me and said "Why do you say 'let God baptize you,' we are the one's who must be baptized." First, this person was not even aware of the passive language (s)he was using. But secondly, this shows just what happens when we continue to ignore God as the active agent in baptism. And as long as we teach baptism that stresses our role above God's, then our Baptist brothers and sisters are correct in acusing us of teaching salvation by works. That's all, Rex Larry,

Baptism cannot be substituted for circumcision (OT sign of the covenant), for in the New Testament the Holy Spirit is the sign of the convenant (Eph 1.13-14). However, the point is still the same. If Abraham was credited as righteous before circumcision (which Paul says he was), then one can be credited as righteous before receiving the Holy Spirit (which is received in baptism).

—-

Since the Holy Spirit is the sign of salvation, I do not know what to think of people who either deny the Holy Spirit’s existance or ignore the Holy Spirit for one reason or another.

—-

As far as the CoC and our way of teaching baptism… IMHO it seems that when baptism is preached it is done so as though baptism is about what we are doing. While I agree that we must make a decision to “be baptized,” if we would read closely we would notice that the verb “be baptized” is passive (We don’t need a Greek NT for this either). The point is that our role in baptism is passive. It is God who is the active agent in baptism.

When I offer an invitation to be baptized at the end of a sermon, I have been asking people to “Come and let God baptize you into Christ.” Recently someone came up to me and said “Why do you say ‘let God baptize you,’ we are the one’s who must be baptized.” First, this person was not even aware of the passive language (s)he was using. But secondly, this shows just what happens when we continue to ignore God as the active agent in baptism. And as long as we teach baptism that stresses our role above God’s, then our Baptist brothers and sisters are correct in acusing us of teaching salvation by works.

That’s all, Rex

]]> By: Ray B. http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67099 Ray B. Sat, 01 Sep 2007 00:08:55 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67099 Scott, I agree. Always Jesus and His cross must be preached. His death and victory over the grave. All I am saying in the discussion is that baptism is taught in the scriptures and we do not need to avoid it because some may have forgotten about the cross in the ministry of evangelism. Scott,
I agree. Always Jesus and His cross must be preached. His death and victory over the grave. All I am saying in the discussion is that baptism is taught in the scriptures and we do not need to avoid it because some may have forgotten about the cross in the ministry of evangelism.

]]> By: Scott http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67098 Scott Fri, 31 Aug 2007 23:11:16 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67098 Larry, Never appologize for sparking good discussion. Thanks for provoking us onto the green edge of growth for a bit... the place where it's always a bit uncomfortable and there's always a chance I may have to change my mind! Ray B., I think everyone would understand and accept the reasoning behind your comments: that you aren't implying that someone is saved by anything other than Jesus' blood. So many of us just have experienced so much arrogance (or purpetuated it) by either assuming people who see baptism differently are either "not very smart" or are somehow "misled" or perhaps even have "evil motives." Personally, I have found that to be so distasteful and hurtful that I can't bear to place myself in the position of pointing people toward anything but Christ himself. For most, I think that will lead in some way, at some point, to baptism. If I point them to baptism... that MAY lead them to Jesus... but why not aim straight for the source! Larry,
Never appologize for sparking good discussion. Thanks for provoking us onto the green edge of growth for a bit… the place where it’s always a bit uncomfortable and there’s always a chance I may have to change my mind!

Ray B.,
I think everyone would understand and accept the reasoning behind your comments: that you aren’t implying that someone is saved by anything other than Jesus’ blood. So many of us just have experienced so much arrogance (or purpetuated it) by either assuming people who see baptism differently are either “not very smart” or are somehow “misled” or perhaps even have “evil motives.”

Personally, I have found that to be so distasteful and hurtful that I can’t bear to place myself in the position of pointing people toward anything but Christ himself. For most, I think that will lead in some way, at some point, to baptism. If I point them to baptism… that MAY lead them to Jesus… but why not aim straight for the source!

]]> By: Ray B. http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67094 Ray B. Fri, 31 Aug 2007 21:35:48 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67094 When an indidvual believer is baptized , immersed , that believer is trusting in the blood of Jesus for salvation, receiving the gift of salvation and looking to the cross for the forgiveness of sins. When an indidvual believer is baptized , immersed , that believer is trusting in the blood of Jesus for salvation, receiving the gift of salvation and looking to the cross for the forgiveness of sins.

]]> By: Larry James http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67089 Larry James Fri, 31 Aug 2007 19:54:18 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67089 Sorry, Mike! I'm going to stop now and crawl back into my hole! Sorry, Mike! I’m going to stop now and crawl back into my hole!

]]> By: Larry James http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67088 Larry James Fri, 31 Aug 2007 19:53:36 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67088 My only point--and it always sets off this debate, unfortunately--is that the principle at issue here with Paul would best be compared to what we have done with the Lord's teaching on baptism--thrown the essence out or, better, in with the bath water--sorry, I try to smile! So that in Gal 5:12, is it, where Paul talks about the circumcision party mutilating themselves, he might well say to us who trust so in baptism, and judge so in baptism (just as the circumcision party trusted and judged in circumcision, also a command of God!): "Would that they would go on and drown themselves!" My only point–and it always sets off this debate, unfortunately–is that the principle at issue here with Paul would best be compared to what we have done with the Lord’s teaching on baptism–thrown the essence out or, better, in with the bath water–sorry, I try to smile! So that in Gal 5:12, is it, where Paul talks about the circumcision party mutilating themselves, he might well say to us who trust so in baptism, and judge so in baptism (just as the circumcision party trusted and judged in circumcision, also a command of God!): “Would that they would go on and drown themselves!”

]]> By: Ray B. http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67087 Ray B. Fri, 31 Aug 2007 19:25:15 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67087 No one speaks for God. All any of us can do is to teach His word. As far as teaching baptizo being associated with water is to examine the scriptures that make such a reference. It is not speaking for God , it is only teaching what is written in the scriptures. We can be found guilty for the failure to not teach about salvation to a lost and dying world. No one speaks for God. All any of us can do is to teach His word. As far as teaching baptizo being associated with water is to examine the scriptures that make such a reference. It is not speaking for God , it is only teaching what is written in the scriptures. We can be found guilty for the failure to not teach about salvation to a lost and dying world.

]]> By: Scott http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67085 Scott Fri, 31 Aug 2007 18:43:40 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67085 My earlier question still stands. If the Greek word used, Baptizo, can mean "immersion" into water, into spirit or into death (it is used to refer to all three in separate places) or if it can also mean any sprinkling or pouring that is associated with "washing" (literally or figuratively) then do we have grounds to claim one singular interpretation as being the one God meant? Certainly we have grounds to interpret... but grounds to separate believers on the basis of interpretation? I think I might need a more definite and "prescriptive" passage for that (if you accept that catagorizing believers is something we should be doing for ANY reason). What we do have are "descriptive" passages from Paul that tell us what this "washing" should give to us and should demand of us (ie walking in a new life) and "narrative" passages that tell us what was said and done early on in the history of the church (which varies quite a bit from story to story). I so wonder how often I've put my own interpretation into God's mouth for others to hear. It's a bit blasphemous to presume to be God's ventriloquist. I stand guilty and repentant. My earlier question still stands. If the Greek word used, Baptizo, can mean “immersion” into water, into spirit or into death (it is used to refer to all three in separate places) or if it can also mean any sprinkling or pouring that is associated with “washing” (literally or figuratively) then do we have grounds to claim one singular interpretation as being the one God meant? Certainly we have grounds to interpret… but grounds to separate believers on the basis of interpretation?

I think I might need a more definite and “prescriptive” passage for that (if you accept that catagorizing believers is something we should be doing for ANY reason). What we do have are “descriptive” passages from Paul that tell us what this “washing” should give to us and should demand of us (ie walking in a new life) and “narrative” passages that tell us what was said and done early on in the history of the church (which varies quite a bit from story to story).

I so wonder how often I’ve put my own interpretation into God’s mouth for others to hear. It’s a bit blasphemous to presume to be God’s ventriloquist.

I stand guilty and repentant.

]]> By: Baruch http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67083 Baruch Fri, 31 Aug 2007 18:15:18 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67083 Ray B, Speaking for God are we? That’s a cozy little spot to be in, rhetorically speaking. Ray B,
Speaking for God are we? That’s a cozy little spot to be in, rhetorically speaking.

]]> By: Ray B. http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67076 Ray B. Fri, 31 Aug 2007 17:18:19 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67076 Baruch , It is God who will judge. I leave that to Him. If you read everything I mentioned then you would realize that I said immersion is the response to the gospel . And it is not a ritual. Those are your words. All I can do is to teach the scriptures and it is not my doctrine but the doctrine of scripture. Yes, to know anyone who believes and is baptized will be saved is good news. It is the good news that Jesus preached. The God I serve and worship is a loving God and good. It is His words that must be taught. Baruch ,
It is God who will judge. I leave that to Him. If you read everything I mentioned then you would realize that I said immersion is the response to the gospel . And it is not a ritual. Those are your words. All I can do is to teach the scriptures and it is not my doctrine but the doctrine of scripture. Yes, to know anyone who believes and is baptized will be saved is good news. It is the good news that Jesus preached. The God I serve and worship is a loving God and good. It is His words that must be taught.

]]> By: Baruch http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67074 Baruch Fri, 31 Aug 2007 17:00:33 +0000 http://preachermike.com/2007/08/28/the-scandal-of-galatians#comment-67074 Ray B, But the question I would have for you and Allison is simply this: If salvation is contingent upon following the baptism ritual per your specifications then can you claim that God is a good God? That is to say, 99% of all the Christians who have ever lived sharply disagree with your beliefs on this issue. And this list includes some amazing saints (e.g., Mother Teresa, St. Francis). In your view all these people are going to hell. This is such a ghastly belief. Allison chastises my pride. But her hubris goes beyond all words and moral accounting. The God who stands behind you belief system is, quite frankly, a monster. He will send 99% of his most devoted followers, people formed into the Image of His Son, to hell because they did not get wet from head to toe. Bravo, Ray and Allison. Bravo. This is such good news you preach. Ray B,
But the question I would have for you and Allison is simply this:

If salvation is contingent upon following the baptism ritual per your specifications then can you claim that God is a good God?

That is to say, 99% of all the Christians who have ever lived sharply disagree with your beliefs on this issue. And this list includes some amazing saints (e.g., Mother Teresa, St. Francis). In your view all these people are going to hell.

This is such a ghastly belief. Allison chastises my pride. But her hubris goes beyond all words and moral accounting. The God who stands behind you belief system is, quite frankly, a monster. He will send 99% of his most devoted followers, people formed into the Image of His Son, to hell because they did not get wet from head to toe.

Bravo, Ray and Allison. Bravo. This is such good news you preach.

]]>