Alright DBVZ.....

Again, for my clarification of your position.....

If someone asks you how to become a Christian, what do you tell them??

Thanks!

-- Anonymous, March 21, 2000

Answers

My oh my!!!

I'm reminded of the old proverb...."Make sure that the words you speak are sweet.....in case you have to eat them."

-- Anonymous, March 21, 2000

Brother Lee....

I fear that you are fighting a losing battle. It appears that those who pout and take their ball and go home illicit more sympathy than those who state their mind.

I wonder out loud if people would be as sorry to see you leave??

I guess I was wrong. This forum is not really a battlefield of ideas....but a playground of emotions.

It hurts me to see someone with your talent and ability blasted for simply stating your mind.

But should I be surprised?? Certainly not. The spirit of the age is prevalent, even in the Christian Church....i.e., any speech that is contrary or negative is viewed as "hate." Tolerance is the highest form of nobility.

Really Brother Lee....you have nothing to prove by continued post.

Don't take this as trying to tell you what to do.....but I think your talents are better spent not defending yourself.

Benjamin was not asked to leave, told to leave, requested to leave....etc. I have no reason to say, "I'm sad to see you go".......because.....it makes no difference to me.

In fact, in all the time I've been here....I've never seen any place where anyone was requested to leave. They may have been referred to another site that is more in line with their thinking....but....no one has been told to go somewhere else....or to leave.

I don't know.....it's times like these that depress me about the state of affairs in our churches.

Just last week I was in the home of someone who use to be Baptist and has now returned to the Baptist church. They visited our church two weeks ago. Don't know whether they will be back or not. But one thing they said really bothered me.

They said, "The worst decision they ever made was to switch from the Baptist church to the Christian church." (They were going to one of the "biggies" in Florida.)

The said they learned way more Bible in the Baptist church than they ever did in the Christian Church. They confronted the preacher about this and his response, and I quote....was...."I've had way too many bills for way too long....I'm not going to start offending people now.....and the board doesn't want me upsetting people."

Compare that to the early days of our movment when newcomers would come to town and ask where to go to church and the overwhelming response was...."Well....if you want to know what the Bible says....go to the Christian Church."

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Nate....

No.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Nate...

Been there....done that.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

As I suspected BVD's.....if I asked you about becoming a Christian.....I'd go away scratching my head wondering what in the world you said.

Which, by the way, is the essence of Calvinism....i.e., you never know!!

If possible.....I would like you to try again.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

DBVZ....

Ah....there we have the essense of it all.

The biggest difference is.....you refer to creeds....we refer to the Bible....not realizing....that the creeds have been the very thing that haveivided Christendom from the beginning.

You read the Bible through the eye glasses of Creeds steeped in Calvism.....we reject all creeds and read....the Bible only.

I do pray, that one day you will be eptive to the simpleness of N.T. Christianity and come to have the assurance of your salvation based upon the promises of His Word alone.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Connie.....

Denial??? As what you do with Acts 2:38 and the myriad of other Scriptures that deal with the necessity of baptism??

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

Benjamin....

Your words exactly......"I won't go so far as to say I have been casting my pearls before swine" (though I'm tempted)."

Benjamin....I guess it comes down to what the meaning of the word "is"....is.

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

Benjamin....

After taking some time to think it through, I've come to the conclusion that your example of my "ad hominem" is in fact.....not one at all.

An "ad hominem" is used during the course of a debate on a specific issue in a attempt to undermine the credibility of the one making an argument on the issue. It is usually made when someone's logic and argument is failing.

I want to ask you....what argument were you making that I undermined??

Did I undermine your soteriological discusssions?? No!! In fact they were right on. Did I undermine you as a Christian brother?? No!! Did I even undermine your credibility? No!!

My statement concerned the general demeanor of this forum at times lately which has too many people carrying their feelings on their sleeves. (To be honest.....it started with Connie. Sorry...just my honest opinion.)

Even my statement about pouting was not a shot at you. If anything, it was a challenge to buck up.....or as we say here where I live..."Cowboy up!"

It appears you keep wanting to make this personal. It's not to me (although the swine thing still comes close to the line IMHO).

This all started with a contention between you and Lee....and my coming to Lee's defense....or at the least challenging you about your attitude towards Lee.

I'm still twinging from the swine thing....but other than that....I got no problem with you Ben!! I don't like your approach to things.....but who cares!!!! Most people don't like the way I do anything....and I don't care!!!

It's what makes the world a wonderful unique place.

God bless!

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

For all of you who have been in a love fest with Connie.....her last post says it all.

Now you understand why Lee and I DO NOT accept her as a sister in Christ.....i.e., her continued propagation of heresy in spite of all that has been presented to her.

She apologizes to DBVZ because she is afraid....and I quote...."if it seemed that I was referring to you, I wasn't; I meant that baptism is a necessity for salvation of the RM."

In other words.....the RM movement is wrong about it's stance on baptism.

She then makes this riduculous statement in reference to salvation..."He didn't want us to know everything."

Although, I shouldn't say it is ridiculous.....it's understandable coming from a Calvinist....i.e., you never do know. That's what you are Connie.....you just don't have enough sense to know it.

Like I told you before Connie....I prayed and the Holy Spirit illumined me. He told me you were dead wrong!!!

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2000

For those of you who know me.....you know that last statement made about praying and having the Holy Spirit reveal to me......is sarcasm!! Sarcasm that underscores the fact that you simply cannot have an intelligent discussion with someone who always resorts to...."Well the Spirit taught me." Sarcasm that also points to the invalidity of anyone's subjective experiences.....including mine.

You know my theology rules out illumination!!

This is also an official notice.....I'm done talking to Connie.

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2000

Sammy Boy.....

That was a home run hit deep into the upper bleachers of left field!!!

Like I said, I've wearied of saying it. Anything God tells us to do in order to accept the gift of salvation is......GRACE!!!

Thanks!

-- Anonymous, March 27, 2000

Ooooo...Scottie.....I feel "beamed."

Good question BVD's......how can a pure Calvinist, such as your self.......obey....anything???

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2000

D. Lee....no it's not!!

BVD's.....I will give you this much....you are a consistent Calvinist....(in fact, I was telling my wife this about you last night).

Notice your consistency (which is consistent with all Calvinists).....

1: You fail to explain how a Soverign God leaves you with ANY choice. As a Calvinist you cannot choose to obey whether out of thankfulness or anything else.

2: You equate the foreknowledge of God to God's picking and choosing (also known as predestination).

3: And....my personal favorite......when backed into a corner the standard Calvinistic response is...."Who are we to question God?"

I do commend you for your consistency.

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2000

D. Lee....

You said....."I admit, my mind is slow."

I said....."No it's not."

Anymore questions??

-- Anonymous, March 30, 2000

Lee.....

I'm convinced of it!!!

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

Connie...Connie....Connie.....

The old "double standard" hits again!!!

You criticize everyone for being rude and yet consistently you have some of the rudest comments in the history of the forum and then you try to whitewash it with hypocrital, lips of deception, honey.

I don't care if you are 66 years of age....it just means you have had a long time to build up an exteme amount of ignorance.

The Scipture again proves its words true..."Don't answer a fool according to their folly."

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

Brother Benjamin, you have said:

I truly hope -- and pray! -- that none of you are involved or ever get involved in any kind of cross-cultural ministry. I think you would very soon have reason to congratulate yourselves for being "persecuted for righteousness' sake", but I think you would alienate and drive away many more people than you would win.

Now Brother Benjamin, I do not know exactly what you mean by cross- cultural ministry but it appears that you are referring to preaching the gospel among those of a different race or culture than our own such as the good work you are doing in Hong Kong. Now if that is what you mean I believe that you do not have enough evidence concerning our lives to make such a judgment. For we are to judge righteous judgment, aren't we? I do not think that you are aware that my whole life is presently cross-cultural as you appear to be talking about. My wife is from Mainland China and I speak putonghua or mandarin Chinese fluently. There are over 3500 Chinese in the city of Birmingham. I taught my wife the gospel of Christ and baptized her into Christ. I have taught the gospel to several of my Chinese friends who have also become Christians in obedience to the gospel of Christ. There is an entire congregation of Chinese in this city numbering around 250 and they call themselves the Chinese Christian Church. I had nothing whatsoever to do with the establishment of that congregation however several who have obeyed the gospel among them have been taught the gospel by this person that you CLAIM would not have very much success in a cross- cultural ministry. (Incidentally, they know absolutely nothing about any "restoration movement" they have simply obeyed the gospel and follow the teaching of Christ. This is eactly what we would all want them to do, isn't it. Now so much for those who claim that we only accept those who are of our "own little group". Ha! These people we learning and obeying the gospel of Christ before they ever met me or any other Christians in Birmingham. They are not even aware that there is another group of people in this country called "the Christian Church". They know and understand that I am a Christian and have never worshiped in the congregation where I worship because they prefer to worship in their native tongue.) I am pleased to know that you are in China teaching the blessed Gospel of Christ our Lord. I am certain that you are doing an extremely good job and I pray fervently for your success using whatever method you deem to be the best. But I can assure you, Brother, that when you are faced with those who persist in perverting the right ways of the Lord your diplomatic and apparently compromising approach will not work very well. But I am happy to know that you are preaching Christ in Hong Kong.

But this pretence at superiority that is displayed by your uninformed judgment that neither Danny nor I could do well in a cross-cultural ministry is shameful. The fact that you actually pray that God would prevent us from doing such a good work as you are doing in Hong Kong is equally pathetic. You would think that a man with your penchant for kindness and understanding would rather pray that we would be lead to just such a field that has clearly taught you some things that you think we do not know and should learn. So what kind of arrogance would cause you to ask our Lord to keep us away from such a work?

Now Brother Benjamin, we are dealing with those who deliberately resist, avoid, and pervert the truth of God to the detriment of their own souls and the precious souls of those who hear them. Those who do these things will not be won by any means until their hearts turn in humble submission to Christ as LORD. Nothing that is said in kindness or righteous indignation will bring them to accept the truth for they love themselves and their own way more that they love God and His way. But we are set for the defense of the gospel (Phil. 1:17) and we will not be moved by anything that even slightly appears as compromise. For the truth of God cannot be compromised.

Now in working with the Chinese, I eat their food, read their poetry, speak their language, sing their songs, practice their Kung Fu, write with the brush in Chinese Calligraphy called, as you know, Mao Bi, I love the Chinese people dearly and live as one of them. Now this is what Paul meant when he said that he was all things to all men He did not mean that he pretended that they were saved even though they had not obeyed the gospel in order to convince them to one day obey the gospel as you have done. SO this ridiculous desire to pray that God would prevent me from being involved in a cross-cultural ministry when my whole life is just that because my wife and her entire family are from a completely different culture is really sad. But you did not know that my wife was Chinese. But that is just it Brother Benjamin. You just do not know all the facts, now do you?

I pray fervently for your work and that Christ our Lord will reach many with the blessed Gospel of Christ through your work. I pray that you will be supported very well and that the peace of God will abide with you and the brethren there in Hong Kong and that God will protect you from the real persecutions that can happen to you in that country because you are a Christian, though I know it is not so dangerous in Hong Kong. I admire what you are doing in China and would be among the first to help if there were any way that I could. So, please do not ask the lord to remove me from the work that I am doing in my family which is a truly cross-cultural" ministry if there ever was one!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 21, 2000

dbvz, I am quoting what you said to me from the What is the Christian Church thread.

"D. Lee Muse: The "human act" of immersion baptism, is in the fact that humans need to get into the water, and humans need to be drawn under the water, and humans need to be brought out of the water. By the fact that you insist humans can refuse to be saved by refusing to be baptized, you assert that salvation is through the human act of participation in immersion baptism, and the human act of administering baptism. You take salvation that is the gift of God, by grace through faith; and make it dependant on an act of man, in the administration of immersion baptism."

-- dbvz (dbvz@wa.freei.net), March 20, 2000.

I have never asserted that salvation is through the "human act" of participation in immersion! Again I ask you, where does the Bible say that baptism is a "human act"? It originated with God, He says do it for the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. He says our sins are washed away in baptism, that is when we are buried with him, and also raised by God. I do not make salvation dependant on an act of man, because baptism is not an act of man. The Bible states that salvation is dependant on many things, Grace through Faith in Jesus Christ and his atoning sacrifice. Repentance, Confession, and Baptism.

II Ki 5:10-14 "Elisha sent a messenger to say to him, "Go, wash yourself seven times in the Jordan, and your flesh will be restored and you will be cleansed." But Naaman went away angry and said, "I thought that he would surely come out to me and stand and call on the name of the LORD his God, wave his hand over the spot and cure me of my leprosy. Are not Abana and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than any of the waters of Israel? Couldn't I wash in them and be cleansed?" So he turned and went off in a rage. Naaman's servants went to him and said, "My father, if the prophet had told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it? How much more, then, when he tells you, 'Wash and be cleansed'!" So he went down and dipped himself in the Jordan seven times, as the man of God had told him, and his flesh was restored and became clean like that of a young boy."

Naaman was told to go and wash seven times in the Jordan, and that if he did he would be cleansed. "Wash and be cleansed!" Do you believe that if Naaman had not done exactly what he was told to do for the reasons he was told to do it that he would have been cleansed?

-- Anonymous, March 21, 2000

Hey, dbvz:

To decide to repent is a human act, originated in the human mind and carried out by the human body under the direction of the human will.

To decide to submit to God is a human act, originated in the human mind and carried out by the human body under the direction of the human will.

to decide to believe God is a human act, originated in the human mind and carried out by the human body under the direction of the human will.

So how are these different than to decide to be baptized, which is an act originated in the human mind and carried out by the human will?

The only way out of this for you is to declare that "ultra-Calvinism" is the answer, and that God gives you belief, and makes you be repentant, and brings you into submission, all against your will, which, according to Calvinism, is completely corrupt and cannot choose God anyway, so God has to do it all.

Is that what you believe? (Serious question here, not just rhetorical bombast.)

-- Anonymous, March 21, 2000

DBVZ:

You have said:

I have agreed with all of you several times that baptism is required in obedience to God; but that obedience is the RESULT of salvation, and not the cause of it.

Now, dbvz, this is a fine assertion but I want you to notice that you offer us no proof from the word of God that it is true. Jesus said, He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: He that believeth not shall be condemned. (Mark 16:16). He did not say,  he that believeth shall be saved and should be baptized as the result of his salvation now did he? Peter said,  Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Acts 2:38). He did not say,  Repent and be baptized in order to obey God because it is the natural result of the salvation that you have already received by faith ALONE, now did he? Anninas told Saul,  And now why tarrriest thou, arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins calling on the name of the Lord. (Acts 22:16). He did not say,  Thanks be to God, Saul, for since you have actually seen the Lord you have already been saved and because your sins have already been washed away why are you waiting arise and be baptized as a result of your salvation, now did he?

You see, dbvz, you offer no scripture that says we are baptized in obedience to God as a result of our salvation and not as a cause of it. The cause of our salvation is not baptism ALONE and we have never said that it was. The cause of our salvation is the removal of our sins from our souls in the circumcision of Christ which he performs upon us when we are baptized. (Col. 2:11,12). It is the place where Christ washes or sins away by his blood when we submit to him through faith after we have genuinely repented of our sins. If we do not have faith and refuse to repent and confess that he is the Son of God Christ will not remove our sins with or without baptism. But when we have faith in Christ (John 3:16; Mark 16:16) repent of our sins (Acts 3:19; Acts 2:38) and confess that Christ is the son of God (Matthew 16:16; Matthew 10:32-34; Romans 109,10) and are baptized for the remission of our sins (Acts 2:38; Mark 16:16; Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21; John 3:3-5; Titus 3:3-5; Eph. 5:26; Heb. 10:22; Gal. 3:26,27; Acts 8:35-40) we undergo the Circumcision of Christ wherein our sins are removed by Christ and we are thus saved by the grace of God through our living and active obedient faith in Christ. (Eph. 2:8,9; James 2:14-26; Hebrews 5:8,9). Now that is the truth, dbvz, substantiated by the very word of God for all to see. That is not a mere assertion without proof as you have offered up for us to believe. You cannot show us any passage in the scripture that says, Baptism is required in obedience to God but that obedience is the result of salvation, not the cause of it. Such a doctrine is not taught anywhere in the word of God and your mere assertion that it is taught in the word of God does not prove it to be true.

Your Christian Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 21, 2000

Dbvz:

You have said:

E. Lee Saffold wrote, "I suppose that you also consider our Lord Jesus Christ himself as a trouble maker when he said,  He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: He that beliveth not shall be condemned. Mark 16:16." "No. But I believe it is significant that the second half of the quote is, "He that believeth not shall be condemned." Saving faith, the free gift of God by grace, is the point of this quote. Baptism is also required of the children of God, but it is not being given a saving faith that will result in condemnation. It does not say, "He that is not baptized shall be condemned", does it?

Now, dbvz, this is a typical response of those who resist the truth. They ignore what Christ actually said in order to find hope in what He did not say. Christ said, He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: He that believeth not shall be condemned. ( Mark 16:16). Now if one wants to know how to be saved Christ said, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: Now, dbvz wants to ignore what the Lord here very clearly says in order to find hope in what he did not say. Christ said he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved but dbvz seeks to make that statement null and void by seeking to save his false doctrine by an appeal to what Christ did not say. If you cannot understand what Christ actually said, dbvz, how can we trust you to comprehend something he did not say. We do not live by what the word of God does not say we live by what it says. It says, HE THAT BELIEVETH AND IS BAPTIZED SHALL BE SAVED. Now that is what is says but you do not want to believe in what Christ says because it does not fit your false teaching. So your only hope is to find some argument from what Christ did not say. This is foolish at best.

However, you must realize that your claim that Christ did not say, he that is not baptized shall be condemned may not be true. Now since you have separated the first part of this verse from the second part and are attempting to show that Christ taught one thing in the first part and the direct opposite to it in the second part I will refer to them as Mark 16:16a and Mark 16:16b. I do this to keep things clear for you have separated them. Now Jesus told us how to do two things in this verse. If one wants to be saved Jesus said that he must believe and be baptized in (Mark 16:16a) if one wants to be condemned he need not do anything. Unbelief is sufficient for condemnation. Mark 16:16b. Now it is obvious to any thinking person that if Jesus meant what he said, he that believeth AND is baptized shall be saved: (Mark16: 16a) that he would not then contradict himself by teaching the direct opposite. That he that believes will be saved even if he is not baptized in Mark 16:16b. Notice that the scriptures teach that one who does not believe is condemned already (John 3: 36) and one that believes has the power to become a Son of God if he obeys. (John 1:12;3:36; Heb 5:8,9; Acts 5:32) And that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to all them that OBEY him not those who merely believe in their minds the facts concerning Him. ( Heb.5:8,9). Jesus said why call ye me Lord, Lord and do not the things which I say? (Luke 6:46).

Also we find that the word believe in the scriptures is often used in the comprehensive sense to include all that one has done to become a Christian. Notice some examples. We are told,  And Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his house and many of the Corinthians hearing believed and were immersed. Acts 18:8. All we are told in this place is that Crispus did to become a Christian was that he believed on the Lord. But when we go to 1 Corinthians 1:12 15 we find Paul condemning division and he reminds them to whom they really belong with these words, was Paul crucified for you or were you baptized into the name of Paul? ( Notice that Paul was saying that they Belonged to christ for two reasons: (1) Christ was Crucified for them and (2) they were baptized in the name of Christ) then he says that he was glad that he had baptized none of them save Crispus and Gaius lest they should say that he had baptized in his own name. 1Cor. 1:12-15. Now notice that the word used to tell what Crispus did in the book of Acts was that he believed. Then we find in 1Corintians that he was baptized. It is clear that the word believed in Acts included baptism. Therefore, it is possible that the word believeth in Mark 16:16b could have this comprehensive and inclusive meaning as well. If it does and I believe that I can prove that it does, the word beleiveth encompassed all that the Lord said about Baptism in Mark 16:16a and thus would in fact be saying he that is not baptized will be condemned. Your argument however is based on what Jesus did not say in Mark 16:16b. Our argument is from what he did say in Mark 16:16a. You cannot prove anything from what Christ did not say. An argument from silence is hard to make. Christ is not silent about what must be done to be saved. He said, He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: that is not silence. That is clear. Now you are the one who is trying to teach that one can possibly be saved without being baptized and that is some thing that is not taught in the scriptures and it is in direct conflict with the very words of Christ that plainly says that he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.

Now when he clearly told us that he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved he, with that very statement, excluded all who did not believe and all who were not baptized. If he meant by simply saying, he that believeth not shall be condemned the converse of he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved he would have contradicted himself in the same breath. Thus it does your argument no good whatsoever to ignore what Christ plainly said in order to find some shred of hope for your false doctrine in what He DID NOT SAY. I can assure you that what Christ did not say does not contradict what he plainly said. He said, He that beleiveth and is baptized shall be saved: Now if by not saying "He that is not baptized shall be condemned" he meant "he that believeth shall be saved whether he is baptized or not" Christ would have irreconcilably CONTRADICTED Himself. We know that he did not do any such thing, now did he?

Now I ask you to not ignore what the Lord said. Take up his words and tell us why he would say, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: Why would he say that if he did not mean it? Explain what he meant by what he said not by what he did not say. If you cannot understand what our Lord said, how can we trust you to comprehend what he meant by what he did not say?

Think about it, my friend, you are deliberately ignoring what Christ said in search of finding hope for your own doctrine in what he did not say. For when he said "he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" he was, in effect, saying "he that is not baptized shall be condemned".

Your Christian Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 21, 2000

Dbvz:

You have said:

E. Lee Saffold wrote, " If you read all of the accounts of Conversion in the book of Acts you will notice that everyone who preached the gospel urged their hearers to be baptized and those who were converted were baptized."

I have no problem with any of that, as an act of obedience required as the result of salvation. My criticism that you create trouble is not that you preach baptism. Every Christian denomination preaches baptism. It is that you make immersion baptism a human action that is the condition of salvation, rather that the result of salvation. My point was that the Bible teaches that those who WERE converted (saved), were urged to be baptized. Your position seems to be that they WERE NOT converted (saved) UNTIL they were baptized.

Now, dbvz, you say that you have no problem with the fact that all who became Christians in the book of Acts were baptized as an act of obedience required as the result of salvation. Now the fact that you cannot find one single person who became a Christian in the book of Acts that you can prove was baptized as an act of obedience required as the result of salvation is proof that you do have a problem with THAT! It is a problem that you cannot solve without accepting the simple truth that baptism originated with God and is a command that He put in place that we humbly and passively submit to in order to the remission of our sins (Acts 2:38) and it is the place where Christ washes awy our sins (Acts 22:16) and where our sins are removed by the Circumcision of Christ" that He performs on us when we are buried WITH HIM in baptism (Col. 2:11,12).

Then you act as if there is such a thing as "Christian denominations". There are no Christian denominations because they are all against Christ. Denominationalism is anti Christian. ( 1 Cor. 1:10). Then you say:

It is that you make immersion baptism a human action that is the condition of salvation, rather that the result of salvation.

This is just more assertion without proof. I have never said that baptism is a human action. Christ is the one who said that it is a condition of salvation. Lets just put your words next the words of Christ and see how they match up:

DBVZ SAYS: BAPTISM IS THE RESULT OF SALVATION

CHRIST SAYS: HE THAT BELIEVETH AND IS BAPTIZED SHALL BE SAVED: (Mark 16:16).

Then you say:

"My point was that the Bible teaches that those who WERE converted (saved), were urged to be baptized.

Now here again we have nothing but a mere assertion without any scriptural proof! Now you claim that the Bible says those who WERE converted (saved), were urged to be baptized. Now why dont you just show us this in the scriptures? I already know why. It is because you cannot show us any scriptures that teach this nonsense.

Then you say:

Your position seems to be that they WERE NOT converted (saved) UNTIL they were baptized.

Now Dbvz, this is what the Scriptures say. It is not merely MY POSITION it is GODS POSITION and you just do not like it, do you? It was Christs position for he is the one who said, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved (Mark 16:16). It is the Holy Spirits position which He made clear when he told Peter to say,  The like figure whereunto even baptism doeth also now save us (1 Peter 3:21). And when he told Peter to tell those who wanted to know what to do to be saved on the day of Pentecost to, repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38). So this POSITION is not MINE it is GODS and your position is just that, dbvz, it is your position for you cannot show that your position originated from God in the same way that I have shown that what you CLAIM to be my position is in fact GODS POSITION. Now GOD'S POSITION is completely in direct opposition to YOUR POSITION, isn't it? I highly recommend that you surrender to GODS POSITION for yours cannot stand against GODS.

Your Christian Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 21, 2000

I said I was leaving. I think I should. But it looks as though I should clarify one or two things first.

Danny, I am sorry THAT YOU THINK I called you and your wife and others "swine." But it is mainly sorrow for you that you are so quick to jump to negative conclusions that you will not even read with understanding the things that someone says.

I will not apologise for calling any of you "swine", because I DID NO SUCH THING. I called you brethren and praised your knowledge (if not your handling) of the Scriptures.

If you will go back to the other thread and re-read what I did say, you will find that I did not even characterise what I had been doing in this forum as "casting pearls before swine." I only said I was "tempted" to do so, i.e. to use this PROVERBIAL SAYING to characterise what was happening.

Even if I had gone so far as to say that this PROVERBIAL SAYING did apply directly to what was going on, this (like what the other proverb I quoted, about catching flies with honey rather than vinegar) is only a figure of speech.

The way I understand it, Jesus' admonition -- this saying was from the Bible, the other, about flies and honey, was not -- means that we should not waste precious things (like the gospel message, like our time, like our talents) by continuing to squander them on those who seem incapable of understanding or appreciating what you have to say to them or give to them.

Most of what I have said in this forum has either been ignored, or it has been grossly misunderstood and then attacked or ridiculed, especially by Lee Saffold, but I think a little by you too, and even by Jenny. If people will not even attempt to understand what I have said, much less to take it seriously, it is a waste of time for me to say it. It is not that my feelings are hurt or that I can't stand the "battlefield of ideas" -- I was enjoying having my own ideas sharpened by the debate until it degenerated into "ad hominems" by Lee against first Connie and then me. The problem is that I think what this thread is turning into is a waste of time for all of us.

I will also amend SLIGHTLY what I said about cross-cultural ministries, since it appears that both of you are or have been involved in such. I will say that I hope AND PRAY that you do not use the same tactics in these ministries that Lee (and you too, Danny, though not to quite the same extent) has been using on this forum. If you do, then all that I said previously still goes.

Lee, have you asked very many of the people in the Chinese church what their understanding is about what the purpose of their baptism was and what they understood was accomplished by it? I don't know this particular church, but my experience with independent Chinese churches like this has been that unless the leaders were thoroughly indoctrinated at some point by specifically "Church of Christ doctrine", many have views and practices much like those Connie describes in her church. If you do ask them ... when you find that there are people who are fully accepted by the church who believe that their baptism was a necessary step of obedience, but that they were already "saved" when they first believed and prior to taking that step, will you harangue them in similar fashion to how you behave in this forum? Being Asian, they probably won't argue back like Connie has, but they won't quickly change their views either unless you have some better tactics for teaching and persuading them than you have been using here.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

P.S. Brother Lee Saffold,

Yes, I did know your wife was Chinese. You have referred to the fact a number of times. But being married to someone of a different culture and knowing how to effectively witness to or persuade people of another culture do not necessarily go hand in hand, as I have seen all too often in other cases.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Benjamin;

I for one will be sorry to see you go, :(

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Brother Benjamin:

I have not attacked you or Connie in anything that I have said. I have plainly attacked your arguments, which are contrary to the word of God. Connie claims to have been baptized to obey God and that such is enough for her to be saved and therefore I should be able to call her sister. And, you, instead of trying to Gently teach her as you claim, you have instead tried to agree with her that it is possible for one to be baptized just to obey God and such would save them and that it is possible that Connie has done just that. These are your very words concerning that matter:

But I am not God, and if someone has been immersed for a Scriptural reason, including "obedience to the command of Christ" (which is what you have been stressing yourself), it is not my place to judge that her baptism was invalid just because she hasn't yet come to understand some part of what the Bible teaches is accomplished by and at our baptism. If I continue to teach, with patience, I trust that God, through his Holy Spirit (which can even work in the lives of non- Christians, though not with the same force or intimacy), will enlighten her, and if she does need to be immersed again, she will see this herself. An "in-between" conclusion that she MIGHT reach is that "I wasn't actually saved until my immersion" (second immersion, since she said she was immersed twice, though the first time was before she had faith), "BUT since I WAS immersed in obedience to Christ, that was enough." Now it is clear from these words that you are not attacking Connie at all and it is also clear that you are not merely using a different and better approach to teaching her but instead you are agreeing with her in such a way that she will never learn the truth. Now you have said that being baptized to obey God is a scriptural reason to be baptized. But you do not prove it from the scriptures. You cannot prove from the scriptures that it is even possible to obey God unless you understand the commands that he has given us to obey. In fact you and everyone else has completely ignored the fact that Paul talks of obeying FROM THE HEART that form of teaching that was delivered them. (Romans 6:17). I have asked Connie numerous times now to tell us just which command of God she obeyed when she was baptized but she refuses to say because she knows that all of the commands of God related to that matter contain language that is easy to understand and is also completely contrary to what Connie believes and therefore she could not have obeyed from the heart (understanding) any of those commands of God when she was baptized. But you have said that you are not God. Now that is the truth Brother Benjamin, you are not God and therefore you cannot assert that God has saved her just because she CLAIMS to have been baptized to obey God. Especially sense we all know that she does not know the truth about that subject. Now I have done all that we can do in such a case. I have correctly asserted and proven that Connie did not obey any of Gods commands concerning baptism when she was baptized. There is not a single one of Gods commands concerning baptism that is not in direct opposition to everything she is teaching concerning baptism and therefore she could not have obeyed any of those commands from the heart. And these commands concerning baptism are not hard to understand, Brother Benjamin. They are easy to understand and Connie knows what they say but she is deliberately rejecting and ignoring them but you think that while she is doing such she has in fact been obedient to the very commands of God that she vehemently resist in her teaching. So the reason for the conflict between you and I is not merely a difference in Approach but rather a difference in understanding the very word of God. There is no passage in the scriptures that teaches a person can be saved by being baptized to obey God even though they have no idea of which command of God they are obeying and what it says. Then you say: Most of what I have said in this forum has either been ignored, or it has been grossly misunderstood and then attacked or ridiculed, especially by Lee Saffold, but I think a little by you too, and even by Jenny. If people will not even attempt to understand what I have said, much less to take it seriously, it is a waste of time for me to say it.

I have not ignored what you have said in this forum. I have attacked some of the things you have said but I have never ridiculed anything that you have said. I want to be clear that I have not attacked you as a person in any place. I have attacked your arguments in a few places and I have never ridiculed you or Connie or anyone else in this forum.

But you continue to falsely accuse me of ad hominems with these words:

I was enjoying having my own ideas sharpened by the debate until it degenerated into "ad hominems" by Lee against first Connie and then me. The problem is that I think what this thread is turning into is a waste of time for all of us.

Now this word means, attacking the man. I have not attacked you Brother Benjamin. I have attacked your arguments for they should be attacked. Especially when someones soul is at stake and when the truth of the gospel is at risk of being perverted. Now some people are so closely connected with their arguments that they cannot distinguish between an attack upon those and attack upon their person. I have not personally attacked you or anyone else but your arguments I have assaulted and have done right in doing so.

I also want to say I appreciate your amendment to what you said about cross-cultural ministries with your following words: I will also amend SLIGHTLY what I said about cross-cultural ministries, since it appears that both of you are or have been involved in such. I will say that I hope AND PRAY that you do not use the same tactics in these ministries that Lee (and you too, Danny, though not to quite the same extent) has been using on this forum. If you do, then all that I said previously still goes. Now this I can at least understand far better that your initial words. For I do understand that you believe that I am being very unkind and unloving. I disagree with you about that matter but I can understand that since you believe such a thing about me you would not want me to be involved in such a ministry. I believe that you fail to see the difference between how we approach one who merely needs to be taught the way of the Lord more perfectly and the way we fight against those who are deliberately set to constantly pervert the right ways of the Lord. A false teacher must be dealt with in a very different fashion than a misguided soul that simply needs to learn more facts. Connie is a deliberate teacher of false doctrine and has no desire to face the truth. I cannot and will not deal with her as if she has never heard the truth. She has heard it all too often and is continually perverting the right ways of the Lord. But I know that you do not agree, and that is your right, but do not pretend that there is no difference between teaching a sincere person seeking the truth and a deliberate false teacher seeking to pervert it. For there is a vast difference in the necessary approach to these two very different people. Then you act as if I have no idea what the people of the Chinese Christian Church that I described believe with these words: Lee, have you asked very many of the people in the Chinese church what their understanding is about what the purpose of their baptism was and what they understood was accomplished by it? I don't know this particular church, but my experience with independent Chinese churches like this has been that unless the leaders were thoroughly indoctrinated at some point by specifically "Church of Christ doctrine", many have views and practices much like those Connie describes in her church.

I do know of what you speak for there is a Chinese Christian Church here that does in fact teach and believe much like Connie describes in her church. They even meet in the basement of the Baptist Church here in town because they are so closely aligned with them in their teaching. But the Church to which I referred is not associated with them in any way though they use the same name. I told you that I had baptized some of these people myself therefore it is quite likely that I would know what they were taught and what they believed. But you are correct that there are some among them that do not understand the truth on many things but it seems that their understanding of Baptism is very accurate. Most of these people are form the mainland. I talked with one of the older members and he did indicate that there is some history of their being in contact with members of the Church of Christ long before the liberation in 1949. They mention Brother Ira Y. Rice Jr. So I was wrong in my assumption that they had not had any contact with the restoration movement but it was slight and it was a very long time ago. It is still true that the most of them have not had such contact. But now they do because we are in contact with each other often.

Then you say:

 If you do ask them ... when you find that there are people who are fully accepted by the church who believe that their baptism was a necessary step of obedience, but that they were already "saved" when they first believed and prior to taking that step, will you harangue them in similar fashion to how you behave in this forum? Being Asian, they probably won't argue back like Connie has, but they won't quickly change their views either unless you have some better tactics for teaching and persuading them than you have been using here.

Now brother Benjamin, you asked if I would harangue them in similar fashion to how I behave in this forum. I have not harangued anyone in this forum. I do not know how often I must repeat that to you and others. You accuse me falsely without evidence of this too much. Show me the evidence and then maybe I can apologize if it is true. But just showing me a place where I have strongly attacked the teaching of a deliberate false teacher is not an example of haranguing.

Brother Benjamin, I know how to talk with the Chinese believe me. I do it daily. You speak of the fact that being Asian they will not argue back like Connie. This is true for they, being Asian are far different than Connie and they will listen and they will reason and they will not be angry just because you have told them something that is contrary to their current beliefs. I have baptized several Chinese into Christ and I do not think that you have enough facts to conclude that I would treat them the same way that I have approached Connie, which is the correct and scriptural way to approach those who pervert the right ways of the Lord. Therefore any false teacher that resist the truth openly as Connie has done whether Chinese or not, whether a brother in Christ or not, will get the exact same treatment. Yes, it will not change their thinking but it will change the thinking of those who hear them. But you do not understand this distinction between a false teacher and a humble student just seeking the truth. I do not treat those two the same and I never will.

Then your postscript says:

P.S. Brother Lee Saffold, Yes, I did know your wife was Chinese. You have referred to the fact a number of times. But being married to someone of a different culture and knowing how to effectively witness to or persuade people of another culture do not necessarily go hand in hand, as I have seen all too often in other cases. You are correct, I had told you about my wife being Chinese. I thought maybe you had not noticed that or had forgotten. Yes there is a difference, I suppose, between being married to someone of a different culture and knowing how to effectively, as you say, witness to someone of a different culture. But I told you that I was not sure what you meant by cross cultural ministry. But you ignore the fact that I have spent years in Asia and especially among the Chinese and I do know how to teach them the gospel but I would not be able to be a witness of the resurrection of Christ as were the apostles and many of the first Century Christians who were the only witnesses for Christ that we find in the scriptures. I am not quite sure just how it is that you can be a witness of the resurrection of Christ either. However, I will just have yield to your superiority concerning cross- cultural ministries for you surely are more involved than I am in such a thing. Now I know that you said you were leaving. I sincerely wish that you would reconsider for I am happy to know that you are discussing things with us though you do not think it is very pleasant. However, you complain that we responded to your parting shots. Now if you must leave and you want to tell us so and have us not respond to you after you have left, then just say you are leaving without taking any shots at anyone on the way out. We have a right to respond to your final shots, Brother Benjamin, now dont we? I do pray fro your work among the people that I love so much. Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Brother Danny:

I appreciate your words and I agree. You were exactly right when you said:

I guess I was wrong. This forum is not really a battlefield of ideas....but a playground of emotions.

Emotions are being use as a tactic to quell and hinder the truth of God. It is not new for false teachers to use anything available to fight against the very truth of God. That tactic will not work however because those who are seeking the truth will not fail to see that these appeals to emotion and this false accusations of unkindness and lack of love do not answer the arguments that were put forth against their false teaching. The arguments that I have made are still there left unscathed and untouched by those who oppose the truth and honest people will be able to see them. When they go looking for answers that prove them to be wrong all they will find in response to them is a bunch of whining and crying and emotional outburst toward the person that presented them. Many for a long time have hated Gods word but it still brings men to Christ. I have confidence that it will continue to do so for we are told Gods word will not return unto Him void.

I also agree with you when you say the following:

Really Brother Lee....you have nothing to prove by continued post. Don't take this as trying to tell you what to do.....but I think your talents are better spent not defending yourself. You are absolutely correct. I am set for the defense of the gospel (Phil. 1:17) and I must not be diverted from that task to the needless task of defending myself. I appreciate your alerting me to a path that I should not be going down. I will continue to defend the truth and by now I have grown quite used to the unjust criticisms of me personally and my so called methods that are so unloving. God knows how much I love and that is sufficient for me. Therefore I will not defend myself any more. It is a diversion from my purpose in defending the gospel, which I am so thankful that you brought to my attention.

Thank you for the advice.

There are still places, by the way, where people are told if you want to learn the Bible go to the Church of Christ. It is true. So do not be depressed that it is not true in many places as it once was.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Bro. Lee,

If you were to say that you were going to "take my marbles and go home!" I would call you a LIAR, because it is already apparent that you have already lost all your marbles! :-X

I for one, Danny, would miss Lee as he is my inspiration for apologetics. I have learned much from my Bro. and while we may not always agree, I have a great respect for where his heart is.

I do not always agree with you either, Danny... but I respect your desire to keep God's Word at the heart of all YOU do too!

I think that we will probably ALWAYS disagree on how to interact with people however. I am reminded of waaay back when when I worked, as a teenager, for McDonalds Hamburgers and there was this controversy over Burger Kings misuse of a marketing pole.... You see they were truthful in reporting that people liked Flame Broiled Hamburgers over the ones at McDonalds, but they skewed the results by asking the question in this fashion... "Would you rather have a cold piece of cow flesh ground up and then fried on a griddle in it's own fat... OR a choice piece of steak, cooked to perfection over an open flame and serve hot and juicy with lettece, tomato and onion on a carmelized bun?

Isn't it all really HOW you say something?

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Danny...

Why?

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Oooh! Here's something really unique to the forum: one word posts!

ha ha ;-)

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Danny Gobbard asked, "DBVZ....

Help me in clarifying your position......

If someone came to you and stated they wanted to become a Christian.......what would you tell them???

Thanks!"

ANSWER: Repent and be baptized. Both require a good deal more explanation; about what it means to repent, an understanding of our sinful condition before a Holy God, about how repentance and faith in the finished work of Jesus Christ leads to forgiveness of sins, and how baptism and a life of service to Him are required in obedience to God and as evidence before men of true repentance and faith.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Muse and Loveal:

I am a Calvinist (ultra or not) and believe that God calls those he will call and leaves the rest, and without the call of God we are by nature unable to repent and believe. Baptism is a human act, that can be refused or done "wrong" according to your requirement for immersion. It was instituted by God; but it is still a human act that can be abused, misunderstood, or refused. If what humans do in baptism is important at all, that importance makes it a human act. If it were entirely an act of God, humans could not resist it or get it wrong. Hense the phrase "Act of God" in many insurance policies, meaning beyond human control.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

DBVZ:

I am a Calvinist (ultra or not) and believe that God calls those he will call and leaves the rest, and without the call of God we are by nature unable to repent and believe. Baptism is a human act, that can be refused or done "wrong" according to your requirement for immersion. It was instituted by God; but it is still a human act that can be abused, misunderstood, or refused. If what humans do in baptism is important at all, that importance makes it a human act. If it were entirely an act of God, humans could not resist it or get it wrong. Hense the phrase "Act of God" in many insurance policies, meaning beyond human control.

1) What do you then do with verses that say things like, "that WHOSOEVER believeth in Him should not perish", and "repent and be baptized, EVERY ONE OF YOU", and "The Lord is . . . not willing that ANYONE should perish, but that ALL should come to repentance", and the verses where the NEw Testament evangelists tell people that they may be saved IF they believe, as though they have a choice in the matter?

2) Do you then believe that God forces salvation on certain of mankind? that if you are chosen, God simply makes you believe, and that you have no choice in the matter?

Explanations would be helpful.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Danny Gobbard:

I don't write books like Lee. Read the Heidelberg Catechism, the Canons of Dort, the Apostles Creed, and the Belgic Confession; each point based and supported by many references in the Bible and organized into understandable summary statements. You can "know" as a Calvinist, but it takes more than a short post to explain the entire plan of God. It is a little more conplicated that "be baptized". I know you don't like doctrinal standards, but they are a valuable shorthand to avoid repeating everything again here to explain what I believe. That is all they are. A summary of what is taught in the Bible.

PS: I also believe I am about done with this forum.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

dbvz answered all these questions on the "once saved always saved thread."

Dbvz, are you choosing to leave or is God making you? You sound as though you have a choice in the matter.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Another "parting shot", I'm afraid -- but see my next post, following:

Thank you, Nate Graham, for your explanation of "ad hominem" in the thread on Bible translations. I've pasted it below:

ad [1] ho*mi*nem (adjective)

[New Latin, literally, to the person]

First appeared 1598

1 : appealing to feelings or prejudices rather than intellect

2 : marked by an attack on an opponent's character rather than by an answer to the contentions made

That's what I thought it meant! Now, one example of what I meant by what I said -- from one of Danny Gabbold's recent postings:

"It appears that those who pout and take their ball and go home illicit more sympathy than those who state their mind."

Another example: all that emotive garbage at the end of the "Restoration Movement" thread about me calling him and his wife "swine" when I said no such thing.

Q.E.D.?

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

'elicit'?

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Thank you to both Connie and Lee for saying (Connie) that you will be sad to see me go, and (Lee) that you hope I will reconsider. I thought Lee would be happy to see me go. Perhaps he is more flexible at heart than the impression he gives in some of his postings.

My main point is and was that it is pointless to spend so much time and space going round and round on tactics and techniques while ignoring the important issues of the thread. I like the new title, by the way -- "Salvation Issues." I felt someone needed to end it, and that it might as well be me, especially since I think it started with me -- not with pages and pages, though. I simply made an off-hand comment that I felt Lee's approach was "doing 'our' side a disservice ..." (because I felt it obscured, rather than explained, issues that I have found "faith only" people really confused about). After that, one thing led to another and things continued to escalate.

In what I said, I was not trying to "take a parting shot" and not allow anyone to respond, as Lee has suggested. I expected that some would respond, and intended to allow "your side" to have "the last word". The trouble is that some of what has said in response has seemed so outrageous that I can't seem to resist coming back and responding to it.

To explain my intentions more fully and perhaps more moderately, I will continue to "lurk" in this thread and some of the others that interest me. If I feel I have anything worth contributing on the more important issues (like "salvation issues"), I will do so. If it is more argument on tactics or more "ad hominems", I am going to TRY my best to resist the temptation to defend myself and my choice of tactics.

I do have one request, Brother Saffold. In your postings to Connie, you have said things like "don't expect Benjamin to come to your rescue", "Brother Rees is too kind to tell you (such-and-such), etc. PLEASE do not continue to do that. You are making unwarranted assumptions, since you don't know what I would do, and it gives me the feeling (whether you intend it or not) that you are either criticising or making fun of (a.k.a. "ridiculing") my approach. If you can avoid saying such things, I think we would get along a lot better.

-- Anonymous, March 22, 2000

Brother Rees:

You have made the following request:

I do have one request, Brother Saffold. In your postings to Connie, you have said things like "don't expect Benjamin to come to your rescue", "Brother Rees is too kind to tell you (such-and-such), etc. PLEASE do not continue to do that. You are making unwarranted assumptions, since you don't know what I would do, and it gives me the feeling (whether you intend it or not) that you are either criticising or making fun of (a.k.a. "ridiculing") my approach. If you can avoid saying such things, I think we would get along a lot better.

You are correct that I have referred to you in some of my writing to Connie as you have stated. My reason for doing so was that she constantly refers to you as one of her super heros as a means of implying that she is correct in her doctrine because some of us agree with her. It was intended to counter her tendency to do this.

However, I can see how that would make me feel if someone did that to me and it is unfair and I apologize to you for having done so. I did not make fun of you nor did I ridicule you in doing this but I can certainly see how that you would have felt such was my intent. Regardless it was not right to do that to you and I apologize for having done so.

I also promise that I will not do that again in the future.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

Lee and Danny:

'De Nile' (denial) ain't just a river in Egypt!

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

Brother Lee Saffold,

Thank you!

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

(1 Cor 3:1 KJV) "And I, brethren, could not speak unto you as unto spiritual, but as unto carnal, even as unto babes in Christ."

(1 Cor 3:2 KJV) "I have fed you with milk, and not with meat: for hitherto ye were not able to bear it, neither yet now are ye able."

(1 Cor 3:3 KJV) "For ye are yet carnal: for whereas there is among you envying, and strife, and divisions, are ye not carnal, and walk as men?"

(1 Cor 3:4 KJV) "For while one saith, I am of Paul; and another, I am of Apollos; are ye not carnal?"

(1 Cor 3:5 KJV) "Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?"

(1 Cor 3:6 KJV) "I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase."

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

Seriously Mark Hillyard....

You could help people like me out sometime if you would interpret a little...i.e., what's your point?

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

Danny, I see Mark and Lee are not the only ones around here who's names people have problems with. So far in this thread alone I have seen Gabbold and Gobbard. Seems to be Garbled, to me :-)

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

Danny,

And just incase anyone wants to know, I am yelling...THE BEST DECISION I EVER MADE WAS TO SWITCH FROM THE BAPTIST CHURCH TO THE CHRISTIAN CHURCH!!!!!

I have learned more about God and the Bible in the last 6 or so years than I have in my entire life. I have learned more about the Bible than my family has, who have been baptist as far back as I can remember. They are also reading the Bible through the eyeglasses of CREEDS. When you do this it is very difficult to see the truth.

Looking at the big picture is at times very depressing. I personally know of several so-called Christian Churches that have gone the way of denominations.

Can I ask you though, what are you doing where you live, in your community, in your congregation?

I can give you a great testimony about my local body!! We have increased attendance in the last couple of months from 80's to 130's. Why? Our people are in the community, talking to neighbors, co- workers, friends, & family about Jesus Christ. People from many different denominations are being taught from the scriptures. They are being taught the doctrine of Christ. They are being taught the importance of checking everything someone says against the Word. They are being taught to Obey the Word.

Now having said that, my point was not the numbers jump. For many years we averaged 40-50, even though the same message was being taught.

My point is this...there are congregations out there who teach it like it is, and who are following it for what it says.

Don't grow weary!! It is because of people like you and E. Lee... insistent, bold, argumentative, & bulldogish when it comes to the truth...that I am saved today.

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

Brother Nate:

You said:

Bro. Lee,

If you were to say that you were going to "take my marbles and go home!" I would call you a LIAR, because it is already apparent that you have already lost all your marbles! :-X

Wiping fresh sweet tea off my computer screen! Ha! Not mountain dew but it will do! Ha!

As I have always said, YOU ARE TALENTED! Ha! Take my marbles and go home! Ha! I have already lost my marbles! Ha! My wife knows your telling the truth! Do not let her see this post she may use it against me! I just love your sense of humor!

May our Lord abundantly bless you Brother Nate. You never fail to make me laugh!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

Sister Muse:

You said:

Don't grow weary!! It is because of people like you and E. Lee... insistent, bold, argumentative, & bulldogish when it comes to the truth...that I am saved today.

I am deeply touched! May our lord Jesus Christ be with your spirit and grant you strength and that peace that passeth all understanding. I have been praying fervently for you. I love you in Christ for your love of the truth and the many sacrifices I know you have made for that great treasure.

We are blessed indeed, brethren, to have faithful women like D. Lee and Jenny in this forum. We are truly blessed for they are always an encouragement to all who love the truth and walk in it.

Thank you Sister D. Lee for your bold and strong statement and your support of the truth as it is in Jesus Christ our Lord.

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

E. Lee,

How I do wish we could meet someday!!! Your stand for the truth puts both you and Danny at the top of my list. Thank you for the love and encouragement! Hugs to you. Don't let Danny see that, I hear he has an aversion to hugs.

Your prayers are greatly appreciated! I too keep you and your wife in mine.

For the truth,

-- Anonymous, March 23, 2000

Danny wrote, "I do pray, that one day you will be eptive to the simpleness of N.T. Christianity and come to have the assurance of your salvation based upon the promises of His Word alone."

That is already the case. Is I stated before, and will again, the creeds are simply a summary of what is taught in the Bible. While you do not acknowledge any historic creeds, you are yet in a demonimation with very clear and specific standards for orthodoxy. The only difference I see is that you have not written them down anywhere, or if you have that has not been stated here. All the Christian denominations, including yours, believe they are based on the clear teaching of the Word of God. It is the nature of an orthodox doctrine, like immersion baptism for the remission of sins, that those who hold to it believe it is the clear teaching of the Word of God. I don't doubt your conviction on the subject. My understanding of the baptism and remission of sins through the finished work of Christ, and the doctrines of most other Christians, are just as orthodox and just as based of the Word of God. The fact that they write them down does not make them wrong, just as the fact you do not officially acknowledge your doctrines as a "creed" does not make it right. You say you believe in the simple faith if the New Testiment, and so do we all. From my perspective, you have simply misunderstood it.

I really am getting weary of this thread, but your parting post sounded so patronizing and so sure you have the only right answer that I could not let it pass unanswered. Believe I am wrong if you like, and believe I am not forgiven because I have not been immersed "for the remission of sins" but rather rely on the sacrifice of Christ for remission of my sins. Don't doubt that I am a Christian. And then deal with how your understanding of the human work of baptism, can be reconciled with the whole Council of God, the nature of God, and the history of the church.

-- Anonymous, March 24, 2000

THE BEST DECISION I EVER MADE WAS TO TAKE CHRIST AS MY SAVIOR AND LORD!!!

THE SECOND WAS TO DROP MY AFFILIATION WITH ANY DENOMINATION (INCLUDING THE BAPTIST CHURCH OF MY CHILDHOOD WHERE I HEARD BOOK REPORTS INSTEAD OF THE GOSPEL);

AND THE THIRD ONE WAS TO DECIDE NEVER TO JOIN ANY GROUP WHICH TEACHES TRADITION INSTEAD OF CHRIST'S SHED BLOOD ON THE CROSS.

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2000

Connie:

Having some doctrinal standards is NOT teaching tradition INSTEAD of reliance on the shed blood of Christ. Lets turn the issue around a little. What part of the Apostles Creed do you think is not simply a summary of the Word of God:

Do you believe, "in God the Father, Almighty, Maker of heaven an earth"? If not, why not?

Do you believe, "in Jesus Christ, His only begotten Son, our Lord"? If not, why not?

Do you believe He, "was concieved by the Holy Spirit, botn of the virgin Mary"? If not, why not?

Do you beleve, "He suffered under Pontius Pilate; was crucified, dead, and buried; He descended into hell"? If not, why not?

Do you believe, "the third day He rose again from the dead"? If not, why not?

Do you believe, "He ascended into heaven, and sitteth at the right hand of God the Father Almighty"? If not, why not?

Do you believe that, "from thence He shall come to judge the living and the dead"? If not, why not?

Do you believe, "in the Holy Spirit"? If not, why not?

Do you believe, "a holy catholic (universal) Church, the communion of saints"? If not, why not?

Do you believe, "the forgiveness of sins"? If not, why not?

Do you believe, "the resurection of the body"? If not why not?

Do you believe, "and the life everlasting"? If not why not?

If you agree with all this, what is wrong with an assent to these Biblical statements, along with the other Christians of the last several hundred years?

The Restoration Movement claims that creeds divide Christians, but in fact the oldest historic creeds unite Christians in a set of basic Christian beliefs in spite of the diffences on other issues.

As for divisions, the doctrine of immersion baptism for the remission of sins has separated those who insist it is the only true understanding of the Word from most other Christians. The only way no eliminate divisions is not to have an opinion on any of the disputed interpretations of the Bible. It is not a matter of reliance on the Bible as the Word of God to settle all disputes, because we all do that. It is often said that you could "prove" anything from the Bible if you are selective in picking your proof texts; and that is why doctrinal standards are of help. They provide a systematic and consistent summary of the whole Word of God with several "proof texts" for each point of doctrine. That is not teaching tradition in place of Christ.

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2000

dbvz:

I am so glad to meet you.

Let me explain. I was responding to an earlier post which was capitalized, so I capitalized mine, and did not mean your belief. I meant the very tradition of the RM that you mention. Our church allows people to join if they give assent to our statement of faith. Some have been sprinkled as babies, but if they believe, we accept them.

We, however, only baptize by immersion. It seems as though your church (or at least you) does not believe that baptism saves you. That is our position. I think also ~ are you Presbyterian or Christian Reformed? ~ that you sprinkle babies. Do you believe that that bestows salvation? If not, why do it? (Just curious ~ I'm not being smart alecky, I really want to know).

Our statement of faith is almost the same as what you have just written. (I'll have to get a copy of it; we joined many years ago.)

I am glad to read yours, because while we hear of various creeds, we don't always realize that it's all from the Scripture.

For people critical of creeds, with never having seen one, it could be informative. I agree with every point of it.

Someone said that the argumentativeness (or whatever he/she was referring to) started with me, but I notice that several have left this forum in the last month that I have been here, because of the style of debate, I guess.

I think of you dbvz, Barry Hanson, Benjamin, and others who gave up on posting, because of the seeming strife. And it was going on long before I showed up. I guess I have developed a thick skin. There are things I want to learn here, so I have put up with the abuse.

Please forgive me, if It seemed that I was referring to you; I wasn't. I meant the position that baptism is a necessity for salvation of the RM. I have conceded that there are a few verses which are seemingly paradoxical. I think perhaps, while God wants us to have every tool we need (the Scriptures and the Holy Spirit) to understand salvation, he didn't want us to know everything, because of our penchant for pride.

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2000

Earlier I asked you to look up every time baptize (and form of the word) is used in the Bible. Have you been able to do that?

It might be a help to you to look up the word saved (and every form) in the N.T. When you do, jot down everything that is connected with salvation in those verses.

I would love to see your results!

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2000

Oops, Connie, that last is for you.

-- Anonymous, March 25, 2000

Funny, Danny ~ He didn't tell ME I was wrong ~ in fact I got what I said from His Word: 'Now we see through a glass darkly, but then face to face.'

Yes, I know Danny, that your theology rules out illumination ~ if that means that the Holy Spirit teaches us. That's probably why you are wrong on some of this. You haven't been enlightened.

And I don't mind your sarcasm, having resorted to it myself.

D. Lee:

That is exactly what I have been doing. Have you ever read the complete thread? There are at least a hundred Bible references, and I am looking them all up in four different versions. Those are just the ones Lee has given (and maybe Danny ~ and sometimes the ones others mention. There are the ones I want to include, also.

Then I am writing them out by hand, because it is difficult to see the pages near my computer, and my eyesight is not what it once was. So I have to write them larger than the print of my Bibles. I told Lee two weeks ago that it would take me some time because I also have a life away from the computer.

No, Danny, I am not a Calvinist, but you will never understand that until you want to. And you are using the name 'Calvin' as an epithet, and I dare say he was a Godlier man than you are. And I have responded in kind by calling your group 'Campbellites'.

Both of them were just men and you continually quote both Campbells, Stone and Jack-whoever, just the way the Lutheran quote Luther, the Reformed and Presbyterians quote Calvin, the Baptists quote Roger Williams, the Anglicans quote Whitfield and Bunyan and Swift, etc.; also, the Methodists quote Wesley. Actually, they were all devout Christians, but you want to be divisive by denigrating them. Face it! They were Christians!

First, throughout history, there was the Roman Catholic Church. (From 300+ -.) They taught that baptism was necessary for salvation; they also baptized babies, which was understandable, since they believed it bestowed salvation.

The printing press was invented and various versions arose. Until King James of England authorized the translation which bears his name, the average person, even the average priest, did not have access to it. No one has seen the originals, is my understanding. Just think!

They had never read it, so they had little to argue about. 'Course they did have to obey all sorts of arbitrary rules, pay indulgences, go to confession, etc., and observe all of the glories of the R.C. church.

The miracle is that we have the Bible at all. As soon as it was available to the ordinary person ~ although I dare say it was not available to very many, but I don't know, ~ various people knew that the R.C. was in error about many things.

Because the concept that baptism (sprinkling) as a requirement for salvation was so deeply ingrained, (and most Protestant groups retained infant baptism as well) most Protestant churches retained it. The Baptists and your group did not.

I don't know why we are fighting about this. We all agree that baptism is a requirement for obedience. All we disagree on is the salvation requirement. I personally don't think we are ever going to come to an agreement on this.

I have found many places where the verses do not mean what Lee and Danny say they do. I am planning to write every verse out. No one has to agree with my interpretation. But I don't have to agree with yours, either.

And Danny, I am not afraid of anyone, but when one's words are so twisted by others, one has to clarify. But it seems that most here are quite intelligent and can see though your intent. Your intent is to completely defame me. Do you love Christ, Danny? Why are you not representing him in love to the lost of the world?

Calvinists and Baptists consider themselves at opposite poles, but what does that matter? I am neither; I am merely a Christian. But I want to make sure no one thinks I am CoC.

This has degenerated into divisions of the sort that Paul warned against. Paul, Apollos, Cephas. In direct rejection of what Paul said to do. The Apostle Paul. For shame.

As for me and my house, we will serve the Lord ~ not some man, not even Paul, Matthew, Peter, or John, much as I admire them. But especially not Luther, Calvin, Campbell, Williams, or Stone, who someone here said didn't believe Christ was the Son of God!

-- Anonymous, March 26, 2000

Connie:

You go girl!

Let me ask you a question:

Is obedience to God a requirement for salvation?

-- Anonymous, March 26, 2000

Not in my opinion, Duane, Dear!

We all sin all the time and 'If we confess our sin, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sin, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.' Should we obey if we want to experience all of what He has in store for us? Yes, Yes, Yes!!!!!

-- Anonymous, March 27, 2000

Duane:

I agree with Connie on this, and will give an answer. The same answer I gave before, and the same answer that is in the Bible.

Obedience is required of all God's people, in gratitude and in service as the RESULT of the salvation freely given by God by grace and through faith. Obedience is required, but that obedience is impossible to keep perfectly in our fallen human condition; but we have a faithful savior who will forgive us our sins and wash us clean through the attonement paid by Christ on the cross for the sins of his people.

Obedience is not a condition of salvation. (See Gal. 2:16) In fact all of Romans and Galatians (and much of the rest of the NT) repeats this message in different words. The 10 Commandments, and the Law of Love in the NT have two purposes. The first, and most important, is to show us how much we need a Savior, and how filthy we are before a Holy God. Paul calls himself the chief sinner, and we should all see our sins as the cause and reason that made it necessary for Christ to suffer and die for our sins. The second is to show us how we should live, and we should grow more into obedience every day as we grow into the knowledge of the whole Word of God and into Christ who is our head. In neither case can you say obedience is required for salvation, because obedience that is acceptable to God is impossible, and on that basis no one would be saved. Obedience is required of God's people, but we are forgiven sinners who continue to sin as long as we live.

Martin Luther and John Calvin were just men, like all of us, who studied the Bible and wrote down what they learned; much as all of you on this forum write down what you learn. That some others of us agree with them is not much different than the fact that many here agree with Lee or Danny or others. Danny seems to think a Calvinist can't "know", and I am not sure what he is implying.

Calvinists believe that once a sinner is redeemed by grace, his sins (past, present, and future) are forgiven through the once and all sufficient sacifice of Christ. We can "know" we are saved. We can "know" what is expected of us in terms of obedience, from the Word of God. We can "know" we belong, body and soul, to our faithful savior for all eternity. That is quite a lot to "know", even for a Calvinist.

-- Anonymous, March 27, 2000

By the way, I have to put off my response because a friend at church is reading my only copy of the long RM thread. He is the one who is starting a Christian Study course at a University in Kosovo.

Also, I've been meaning to ask: Does anyone know a Mike and Mary Murphy (former Roman Catholics) who have helped start three CoC churches ~ one in Connecticut, one in Katy, Texas, and one in another place I've forgotten? They left early today, so I didn't get to talk to them. They are in my Sunday School class (one of them ~ I go to two) and as I was talking to them, a couple of weeks ago, found out about this.

They have said that they did not leave any of the groups because of falling outs ~ but because they moved. But he does believe that baptism is a step of obedience, not necessary for salvation.

Praise God for His Justice and Mercy, both.

-- Anonymous, March 27, 2000

PS:

This site is addictive. I have resolved several times not to post again, but then something seems to require a comment. I guess my reluctance to withdraw entirely is a concern that many on this forum see immersion baptism in the same way the Jews saw obedience to the old law, as the means to earn your salvation. I hope and pray you will come to see that nothing we do will make us acceptable to God, and it is only by grace we are brought to faith in Jesus Christ who saves us by his blood. Baptism is required, certainly; but it is required of those who HAVE BEEN saved by grace.

To Connie:

I am not a Pastor. I have been an elder in the Evangelical Presbyterian Church, and later in the Christian Reformed Church, for many years. Both are "Reformed" denominations, which generally means we believe John Calvin got most of the important issues right. We believe that "reformed doctrine" means nothing more than Biblical truth. I was an elder in the Presbyterian Church USA many years ago; but left that denomination when they began requiring local congregations to follow some of the "politicly correct" thinking of the world, regarding some basic issues of faith and practice. The PCUSA (formerly United Presbyterian) was once another reformed denomination, but they abandoned their Biblical foundation. Many good Christians still labor to keep the truth alive in the PCUSA, and that is just another example of how Christ will call his own out of many different Christian fellowships. Doctrinal standards help identify when the church is no longer faithfully teaching all of the Biblical truth, so you can decide to resist the change or leave. It also helped me find another congregation that I could have confidence would present the gospel of Christ with authority, from the Bible. I have enjoyed your comments here.

-- Anonymous, March 27, 2000

DVBZ:

I guess my reluctance to withdraw entirely is a concern that many on this forum see immersion baptism in the same way the Jews saw obedience to the old law, as the means to earn your salvation.

See, this is a problem in discussing this with you. You are misrepresenting what we are arguing. As long as you think we mean that baptism earns salvation, you will not understand what we are saying.

Be very clear about this - - - NO ONE here will take the position that baptism earns anything. EVERY ONE here will state that the only work involved in salvation is the finished work of Christ on the cross. Baptism is presented EVERYwhere in this forum as a part of the response required of man by God. Baptism is on a level with believing, with repenting, with confessing His name. No one here, including, I believe, you, would say that salvation comes to those whoe choose to not believe, or who choose to not repent, or who choose to not confess His name.

To separate baptism from those things, and to say that being dunked in the water is a human act that EARNS salvation, is to misrepresent what we believe. As long as you do so, you are dishonest with the argument, and we will go round and round and get nowhere.

-- Anonymous, March 27, 2000

Semantics, semantics.

-- Anonymous, March 27, 2000

Connie, in response to Duanes question, Is obedience essential to salvation? you said:

Not in my opinion, Duane, Dear! We all sin all the time and 'If we confess our sin, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sin, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.' Should we obey if we want to experience all of what He has in store for us? Yes, Yes, Yes!!!!!

But we are not asking for your OPINION Connie. We want what God says about it. Your opinion, as always in reference to this subject, is diametrically opposed to all that God says about the matter. Now lets just compare, again, what Connie says with what God says in His word:

CONNIE SAYS: Obedience is not essential to salvation

JESUS SAYS:  NOT EVERYONE THAT SAITH UNTO ME LORD, LORD SHALL ENTER THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN BUT HE THAT DOETH THE WILL OF MY FATHER WHICH IS IN HEAVEN. Matthew 7:21

CONNIE SYAS: Obedience is not essential to salvation.

JESUS SAYS THROUGH THE INSPIRED WRITER OF HEBREWS: THOUGH HE WERE A SON YET LEARN HE OBEDINCE THROUGH THE THINGS WHICH HE SUFFERED AND BEING MAD PERFECT HE BECAME THE AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM. Hebrews 5:8,9.

CONNEI SAYS: Obedience is not essential to salvation.

CHRIST SAYS THROUGH PETER: AND WE ARE WITNESSES OF THESE THINGS AND SO ALSO IS THE HOLY SPIRIT WHOM GOD HATH GIVEN TO THEM THAT OBEY HIM. ACTS 5:32.

It should be clear to any one who can read and think that obedience is essential to salvation. But Connie says it is not. Gods word says that it is. I choose to believe God instead of Connie who is ever opposed to Gods word.

Notice even the scripture that she quotes from 1 John 1:9 IF WE CONFESS OR SINS HE IS FAITHFUL AND JUST TO FORGIVE OUR SINS AND CLEANSE US FROM ALL UN RIGHTEOUSNESS. So what if we chose to disobey God by refusing to confess our sins? Connie says that does not matter because obedience is not essential to salvation. But John said IF we confess or sins. That clearly means that forgiveness of our sins is conditioned upon our obeying the Lords command to confess our sins. Besides, the very scripture that she quotes which conditions our salvation upon confessing our sins is completely contradictory to what Connie has been telling us in this forum when she taught that we are saved by grace through faith ALONE. If we are saved through faith ALONE, as Connie would have us believe, then we would be saved without confessing our sins but this shows that even Connie does not really believe that we are saved by Faith alone as she wants to convince the rest of us to believe.

Then she asks and answers the following question:

' Should we obey if we want to experience all of what He has in store for us? Yes, Yes, Yes!!!!!

What if some one does not WANT to experience all that God has in store for us and decides that they want to live a life of complete disobedience to God in all things for they are satisfied with being saved by grace through faith ALONE as Connie teaches? Will they be saved in such deliberate disobedience to all that God Commands? Connies answer, to be consistent with her false teaching that obedience is not essential to salvation, would be YES, YES, YES!

But Gods word says NO, NO, NO! For we are told that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM (Heb. 5:8,9). He is therefore NOT the author of eternal salvation to ANY who disobey Him. That is the plain simple truth from Gods eternal word and it is diametrically opposed to Connies human and woefully misguided and rebellious opinion.

You choose, but for me and my house we will obey the Lord in all that he commands us to do. When we fail to obey we will repent and try harder to obey but we will not be like Connie and think that disobedience to the Lord is acceptable to our God. For it absolutely is not. To obey is better than sacrifice and to harken than the fat of Rams.

You can hear the voice of Satan in the words of Connie who is teaching us that God did not really say that we have to obey Him.

Connie, Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit Acts 2:38.

Your Christian Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 27, 2000

That pesky parrot is prognosticating again. And prevaricating.

-- Anonymous, March 28, 2000

Lee seems to be misrepresenting what we are saying now.

Obedience is not required for salvation, but is required of those who HAVE BEEN SAVED! The distinction may seem a minor point, but it isn't. Whether salvation results from obedience to the 10 commandments, as the Jews believed, or obedience to the law of baptism as you believe, it is still obedience you see as a condition that earns or permits or enables you to be saved. That is not grace. That is a "work", in the same way obedience to the old law is a "work".

The Jews owed obedience to God also, and the 10 commandments are a command of God. Yet obedience to that law can not save, and failure in obedience to that law will not result in condemnation for those who are in Christ.

Sam stated that, "Baptism is on a level with believing, with repenting, with confessing His name." It is not. "believing" is what the Holy Spirit causes in us, and is the grace of God that brings us to faith and salvation. That is not our human act alone. "repenting", "confessing", and "baptism" are all consequences of the salvation we have by grace; and are only possible as a REAL act for those who are saved.

Once you see that grace means totally without our merit, while we were yet disobedient sinners, you understand that the requirement to be obedient in baptism could not be a precondition - but rather must follow the salvation we receive by grace.

-- Anonymous, March 28, 2000

dbvz,

Do you ever just listen to yourself. I'll give you some credit, you are a genuine Calvinist, which means you believe in a completely irrational concept of the workings of God.

You tell us that you are wanting us to realize things that we cannot until God let's us in on it? You talk about obedience, but how can anything be called obedience if all we are doing is what God is forcing us to do? Why do you even bother trying to convert anyone? No one has any choice in what they do anyway, right?

To you, this existence we have here on earth is just God getting His jollies by forcing some, very few, to become obedient, and then forcing most others into hell. No one has any choice in the matter but yet God holds them accountable as though they did have a choice. I said it once before, I'll say it again, what a monstrous god you believe in.

If you are going to hold to the Calvinian line, at least be consistent. Go home, sit still until God makes you do something, of course if you were just sitting, that would be God making you do it because you have no choice, but then again, you want to try and change minds here on this forum, so God must be making you do that. But I dont agree, so God must be making me not agree, and on and on the absurdity goes.

I'm sorry to tell you this but Calvinism, to put it kindly, is a very stupid and irrational viewpoint. Of course, God made me type that, it wasn't me.

Give me a break, that is if you choose to, but then again, no one has a choice, but.....................

-- Anonymous, March 28, 2000

Good morning, Lee:

Earlier in this thread you said:

JESUS SAYS THROUGH THE INSPIRED WRITER OF HEBREWS: THOUGH HE WERE A SON YET LEARNED HE OBEDIENCE THROUGH THE THINGS WHICH HE SUFFERED AND BEING MADE PERFECT HE BECAME THE AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM. Hebrews 5:8,9.

We accept His gift of salvation and we LEARN obedience. Even HE learned obedience THROUGH THE THINGS THAT HE SUFFERED. And I certainly agree that He, when perfected, became the Author of my salvation, which I obeyed when I repented and believed.

**********************************************************************

NO MENTION OF BAPTISM

**********************************************************************

Praise the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit for their unspeakable gifts to me. I don't deserve them, but I have accepted them anyway.

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2000

On obedience:

The Bible presents many of these issues in some places from the point of view of our soverign God, and in some places from the point of view of the creation he made and upholds from moment to moment. Not a hair falls without the will of the Father. Yet we are commanded to be obedient.

As for Calvin, he did get soverignty and salvation right - again in my opinion, based on the Word of God. That you disagree on the critical issue of grace vs. works, is why I am still concerned. That you don't want to recognize that your position is based on works, makes it hard to get you to see it as the biblical problem it is. How do you deal with all the verses that tell us we are saved by grace, while we were yet sinners? That rediscovery in the books of Romans and Galatians is what produced the Reformation, and a return to biblical truth and a reliance of the finished work of Christ.

Grace means we are unworthy, and are saved anyway. You want to make those who are saved worthy, by their obedience. Obedience AS A CONDITION, and grace that is unconditional, are incompatable. We are saved by grace and obedient as a consequence, in gratitude and in service to our risen Lord.

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2000

"That you disagree on the critical issue of grace vs. works, is why I am still concerned. That you don't want to recognize that your position is based on works, makes it hard to get you to see it as the biblical problem it is. How do you deal with all the verses that tell us we are saved by grace, while we were yet sinners?"

dbvz,

Please give me a verse in the Bible that says baptism is a work of man.

We accept His grace on His terms, not ours. He does the saving, not ourselves. He is God, the creator of man. His rules apply.

He says here is my grace...accept it this way:

Through faith, repentance, confession, baptism.

None can stand alone.

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2000

D Lee Muse:

Are you obtuse? I have said several times that I agree that baptism was instituted by God. That is clear throughout the new testiment. What is also clear in every case baptism is mentioned in the Bible, that humans are doing the baptizing and are being baptized (in the physical sense). God baptizes with the Holy Spirit, and not by immersion in water. You have asked me this question many times, and get the same response; so I will turn it around:

Can you point to any verse in the Bible where God does the baptizing by immersion in water directly, without the human action of those baptizing and being baptized? God instituted baptism, and humans do it. That is what I mean by calling it a human act, and that is the way it was done in the cases of baptism mentioned by any of you from the Bible.

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2000

Scott wrote, "I said it once before, I'll say it again, what a monstrous god you believe in."

I note you use a small g, to indicate you think my God is not your God, but in fact we know we have only one God that we understand differently. You seem to think you can judge God by your human expectations of Him, but that is more than a little presumpuous. From the beginning He chose some and rejected others, for no other reason given than his soverign good pleasure.

Cain and Able brought sacrifices, and God accepted that of Able and not that of Cain. God commanded Abraham to sacrifice his own son, but saved him at the last moment. The promise fell to Jacob, and not Esau. God drowned the armies of Egypt in the Red Sea, and saved Israel. God brought one thief on the cross to a saving faith, and left the other in his sins when both were in the presence of the Son of God.

You may say, "what a monstrous god", and the world will say the same of a God that permits famine, and abortion, and murder, and genocide, etc. to exist at all. But we don't judge God, He judges us; and we don't know His plans, but He knows all our plans and thoughts and actions. That He elects to save some, and in great love does it by the suffering and death of the Son of God on the cross, is a mystery to me. None of us deserve it. From our human perspective it would seem simpler for God to destroy all of creation and start over, after it was polluted by sin. But God had a better plan, and chose to save those He chose to save. Praise God I am one.

Just a parting thought. The language you used puts a wall between you and the hundreds of thousands (millions?) of Christians that believe in election unto salvation, and the soverignty of God. It is not creeds and doctrinal standards that divide Christians, but the pride and self confidence that causes some Christians to believe they have all the answers, and that other Christians are not even worshiping the same God.

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2000

ob7tuse: Lacking quickness of perception or intellect. See Synonyms at stupid.

"Are you obtuse?" I'm a little unclear here...uh....did...uh...you really want me to answer that question?

I have said several times that I agree that baptism was instituted by God. That is clear throughout the new testiment. What is also clear in every case baptism is mentioned in the Bible, that humans are doing the baptizing and are being baptized (in the physical sense). God baptizes with the Holy Spirit, and not by immersion in water. You have asked me this question many times, and get the same response; so I will turn it around:

"Can you point to any verse in the Bible where God does the baptizing by immersion in water directly, without the human action of those baptizing and being baptized?"

Col 2:11-13 In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, NOT WITH A CIRCUMCISION DONE BY THE HANDS OF MEN BUT WITH THE CIRCUMCISION DONE BY CHRIST, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the POWER OF GOD, who raised him from the dead. When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, GOD MADE YOU ALIVE. He forgave us all our sins,

The spiritual cleansing that is going on here, the sins being washed away are completely being done by Christ. NOT BY MAN. Man makes a decision to submit TO CHRIST in baptism.

"God instituted baptism, and humans do it."

Humans submit to God's will in baptism. Don't we submit to God's will when we repent? Believe? So on and so on...

I believe I brought up Naaman before, but will again (even with the threat of being called obtuse over my head) so here goes...

II Ki 5:10-14 Elisha sent a messenger to say to him, "Go, wash yourself seven times in the Jordan, and your flesh will be restored and you will be cleansed." But Naaman went away angry and said, "I thought that he would surely come out to me and stand and call on the name of the LORD his God, wave his hand over the spot and cure me of my leprosy. Are not Abana and Pharpar, the rivers of Damascus, better than any of the waters of Israel? Couldn't I wash in them and be cleansed?" So he turned and went off in a rage. Naaman's servants went to him and said, "My father, if the prophet had told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it? How much more, then, when he tells you, 'Wash and be cleansed'!" So he went down and dipped himself in the Jordan seven times, as the man of God had told him, and his flesh was restored and became clean like that of a young boy.

Can you tell me that if Naaman had not done what he was told he would have been cleansed? Same principle.

I will admit in all truthfulness, my mind is slow at times.

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2000

Danny:

We obey out of gratitude, as service to our risen Lord; and not as a condition that qualifies us for salvation. That kind of salvation is based on works, and not grace.

If you mean to ask how a Calvinist understands the need to obey, it is the same way Paul explains it in Romans 5 and 6. We are forgiven any sin, but we live as we ought because we were purchased by the blood of Christ and are now his. Proper obedience follows salvation.

If you mean that because of the soverignty of God, a Calvinist believes he is no more than a puppet on a string; you misunderstand the Calvinists on several levels. From the perspective of God everything occurs according to the will of God, and from the perspective of humanity we have a free will. The resolution of that seeming contradiction is not at our human level; but we are not puppets, and we live as responsible moral creations of God.

Let me turn this around, and ask you how God could be in and around and upholding of all creation, and be what allows us to live and move and have our being, and yet not have all things under His soverign control? He keeps every atom of the universe from flying apart in chaos, and not a hair can fall without His will; but somehow our human will can resist His soverign will? Is that what you believe?

Some things we see through a dark glass.

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2000

D. Lee Muse:

So based on Col 2:11-13, God can "baptise" all those who believe on Jesus Christ, with a baptism not of men? Is that really what you meant to say? So that the immersion baptism, or sprinkling, or calling upon God in a foxhole may be acceptable to God, since God can do His baptism without the human activity of being immersed?

You can't have it both ways. Either baptism is a human act, and a work of obedience; or it is symbolic of the work of God, and the symbol is not where the substance is.

Danny:

Thank you. I see similar inconsistencies in the positions of you and others here, but we all address these issues from our own limited understanding. It is a fact of this life, that "God only knows" is more true than false.

-- Anonymous, March 29, 2000

The passage in Colossians 2 is wonderful. I know we can all read it ourselves, but in our busy lives, sometimes we won't.

Therefore:

Colossians 2: 1-23: [AMPLIFIED]

1: For I want you to know how great is my solicitude for you -- in how severe an inward stuggle I am engaged for you -- and for those [believers] at Laodicea, and for all who (like yourselves) have never seen my face and known me personally. 2: [For my concern is] that their hearts may be braced (comforted, cheered and encouraged) as they are knit together in love, that they may come to have all the abounding wealth and blessings of assured conviction of understanding, and that may become progressively more intimately acquainted with, and may know more definitely and acccurately and thoroughly, that MYSTIC SECRET OF GOD [WHICH IS CHRIST, THE ANNOINTED ONE. 3: In Him all the treasures of [divine] wisdom, [of comprehensive insight into the ways and purposes of God], and [all the riches of spiritual] knowledge and enlightenment are stored up and lie hidden.

4: I say this in order that no one may mislead and delude you by plausible and persuasive and attractive and beguiling speech. 5: For though I am away from you in body, yet I am with you in spirit, delighted at the sight of your [standing shoulder to shoulder in such] orderly array and the firmness and the solid front and steadfastness of your faith in Christ, [that leaning of the entire human personality on Him in absolute trust and confidence and power, wisdom, and goodness]. 6: As you have therefore received the Christ, [even] Jesus the Lord [so] walk -- regulate your lives and conduct yourselves -- in union with and conformity to Him. 7: Have the roots [of your being] firmly and deeply planted [in Him]-- fixed and founded in Him -- being continually built up in Him, becoming increasingly more confirmed in and established in the faith, just as you were taught, and abounding and overflowing in it with thanksgiving. 8: See to it that no one carries you off as spoil or makes you yourselves captive -- men's ideas of the material by his so-called philosophy and intellectualism, and vain deceit (idle fancies and plain nonsense), following human tradition --men's ideas of the material [rather than the spiritual] world -- just crude notions following the rudimentary and elemental teachings of the universe, and disregarding [the teachings of] Christ, the Messiah. 9: For in Him the whole fullness of Deity (the Godhead), continues to dwell in bodily form -- giving complete expression of the divine nature. 10: And you are in Him, made full and have come to fulness of life -- IN CHRIST, YOU TOO ARE FILLED WITH THE GODHEAD: FATHER, SON, AND HOLY SPIRIT, AND REACH FULL SPIRITUAL STATURE. And He is the head of all rule and authority -- of every angelic principaliy and power. 11: In Him also you were circumcised WITH A CIRCUMCISION NOT MADE WITH HANDS, BUT IN A [SPIRITUAL] CIRCUMCISION [PERFORMED BY] CHRIST] BY STRIPPING OFF THE BODY OF THE FLESH [THE WHOLE CORRUPT, CARNAL NATURE with its passions and lusts.

I am going to split these up, because I don't want to somehow lose it after typing it (as has happened, much to my consternation.)

In Him,

-- Anonymous, March 30, 2000

O.K. Danny, I'm biting, Why not?

dbvz, Didn't I say, "HUMANS SUBMIT TO GOD'S WILL IN BAPTISM"? This does not mean man has done any work to merit his sins being washed away.

Again can you show where faith alone saves?

-- Anonymous, March 30, 2000

dbvz,

Yes, your god and mine are very different. Your god forces men to commit evil and then holds them accountable for doing it, though the only reason they did their evil is because God made them. He sends them to Hell because of their guilt that He caused. Your god is a cruel monster with no compassion whatsoever. He wants mankind to love Him, but without free-will, there is no such thing as love.

You say you hold to Calvinism, but then you speak as though you and I have choice. Make up your mind! You said, "You seem to think you can judge God by your human expectations ..." According to the way you believe, how can I be judging anything? Anything I do is God doing it! So if I am judging anything, it is God making me do it. So don't blame me, blame God.

As for your references, God rejected Cain's sacrifice, then Cain CHOSE to murder. Heb 11:4 let's us know that Abel's was a sacrifice of faith, THAT is why God chose Abel - not because of some predetermined plan where God forced Cain to kill Abel, God thus becoming the first murderer.

What does Abraham offering his son have to do with election? (Honest question).

God had a plan, Jesus; and that He would come thru a certain lineage. God chose Jacob, this is true, but it was to be his line that Messiah would come. That has nothing to do with his own personal salvation. Esau had a role to play, as do we all, but Esau chose to react the way he did. So much of what you say is tainted by Calvin it is hard to respond to without writing a book.

You assume that God brought one thief to a saving faith - where does it say that God brought him there. As I read it the guy made up his own mind.

You seem to try to counter my statement of you having a monstrous god by using the world and how they would view a God who permits such great calamities in the world. Abortion, famine, etc., are all a result of human choice (something you choose not to understand). Even the abortionists claim it is a matter of CHOICE. Famine is caused when nations refuse to help other nations. You see, the blame always comes back to choice. Your god, on the other hand, not only tolerates these things to occur, but he is actually the one causing it. I say again, what a monstrous god you believe in. Your god makes Hitler out to be a pansy.

God has called ALL men to salvation (it says that somewhere in the Bible). Actually what it says is, "This is good and acceptable in the sight of God our Savior, who desires all men to be saved and to come to the knowledge of the truth." II Tim 2:3,4. If God desires it, why are not ALL MEN SAVED? Or was Paul lying to Timothy.

You accuse me of trying to understand God on my terms (my words, not yours), I believe that you are absolutely choosing to make confusion king in the Word of God that was given to us so that we might have faith. Romans 10:17 you make into a lie. You take away your own responsibility for sin (and forgiveness) by saying that God makes you do and believe everything you do.

As far as your parting thought, it is not my place to condemn anyone to Hell or place them in Heaven (as my nephew Michael is prone to say, "My butt is not big enough for the throne of God), but I do believe that Calvinism has been one of the most successful schemes the devil ever came up with. Think about it, God becomes the bad guy, not only the bad guy, but an irrational one at that, who can't say what He means in His own Word. You accuse me of putting up walls. I am doing my best not only to tear walls down but to remove Calvin's glasses from your face.

No dbvz, we do not have the same God.

-- Anonymous, March 30, 2000

And just so that I am not misundertstood, I do agree that there is only one God that is alive and active. Calvin's god exists only in the minds of those who follow Mr. Calvin. Actually, Calvinism is nothing more than warmed over Augustinianism in a systematic form.

-- Anonymous, March 30, 2000

Calvinism a scheme "of the devil", but the heart of it is that we must tust in the finished work of Christ for our salvation. I can't see it.

My list of examples were of events where God made elective choices to accept some and reject others. Their are innumerable examples in the Bible. Abraham ans his son were an example of something else that I should have made more clear. By human standards such a sacrafice would be judged monstrous, but Abraham and Isaac both recognized God had the absolute right to demand even that. Abraham was an old man at this point, and Isaac was likely to be the stronger of the two, who could have resisted.

As for how God can permit evil, and not save everyone; we get into some complications about permissive will, decretive will, common grace, saving grace, etc. that are attempts to explain the mind of God. This is another aspect of the soverignty/free will controversy that is not understandable from our perspective; but is understood by God.

I need to quit here. I am recovering from minor surgery, and the pain pills make this difficult. I will respend more fully in a few days.

-- Anonymous, March 30, 2000

dbvz,

I'll be waiting. I am familiar with the arguments about God's will. Calvinism does a great injustice to God.

I will be praying for your quick recovery. I hope it was nothing too severe. But I will pray by my choice - because I choose to :o)

I hope you realize, and I think you do, that I am attacking your views, not you personally. I am convinced that Calvinism is of the devil, and will discuss it with you later. Take care and God bless (capital G).

Scott

-- Anonymous, March 30, 2000

Connie you said:

Good morning, Lee:

Earlier in this thread you said:

JESUS SAYS THROUGH THE INSPIRED WRITER OF HEBREWS: THOUGH HE WERE A SON YET LEARNED HE OBEDIENCE THROUGH THE THINGS WHICH HE SUFFERED AND BEING MADE PERFECT HE BECAME THE AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM. Hebrews 5:8,9. We accept His gift of salvation and we LEARN obedience. Even HE learned obedience THROUGH THE THINGS THAT HE SUFFERED. And I certainly agree that He, when perfected, became the Author of my salvation, which I obeyed when I repented and believed. ********************************************************************** NO MENTION OF BAPTISM ********************************************************************** Praise the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit for their unspeakable gifts to me. I don't deserve them, but I have accepted them anyway.

In your above words you claim, that we accept his gift of salvation and have to learn obedience. Now the Bible does not teach any such thing. It says that Christ is the AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM. You say that you obeyed Him when you believed (even though you do not believe what He says in Mark 16:16) and that you obeyed Him when you repented even though you did not repent with the hope of obtaining the remission of sins (Acts 2:38). You continue to resist being obedient to him in baptism for you argue that it is not essential to salvation but He said, He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: (Mark 16:16). NOW THAT VERSE MENTIONS BAPTISM but you have said that there is no MENTION OF BAPTISM as if it is not mentioned in the word of God. Now will you come back and tell us that you believe that there is no MENTION OF BAPTISM in Gods word? When the Hebrew writer said that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to all those who obey Him he includes all that God Commanded. This would include the commands to be baptized, now wouldnt it? But you say there is no mention of baptism. So it seems that you are trying to tell us another lie. For the word of God surely MENTIONS baptism in these verses: Mark 16;16; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 2:38; Col2:11,12; Eph. 5:26; Heb 10:22; Matthew 28:19,20; Acts 22:16; Acts 8:35-40). But you say there is NO MENTION OF BAPTISM. If you are talking about this verse from Hebrews 5:8,9, which is not clear that you are, it mentions obedience to Christ and Christ Commanded us to be baptized with these words, He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: (Mark 16:16. Therefore there is a clear reference to this as well as anything else the Lord has commanded. So baptism is included in this verse for you cannot be obedient to Christ without being baptized as you have said yourself. You said that baptism was "essential to obedience". And this passage says that obedience is essential to salvation. Therefore Baptism is essential to salvation.

And this command of Christ is one that you have not obeyed and that you continue to resist and teach others to resist. Therefore Christ is not the author of your eternal salvation because you have NOT OBEYED HIM and continue to resist obeying Him. So you do not have these unspeakable gifts that you pretend to have received from God. In fact you cannot prove from the word of God that you do have them. You merely think that it is true and we should believe you just because you say so. The truth is Connie that you will not receive these gifts from God until you obey Him in ALL things that He has commanded for the remission of your past sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Acts 2:38).

Your Christian Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 30, 2000

Connie:

It is interesting Connie how you consider Colossians 2 such a beautiful passage and that we seldom have time to read it and you graciously decided to quote it for us yet you deliberately left out the parts of this chapter that you do not consider very beautiful! You quoted through the 11th verse and deliberately left out the beautiful verse that explains that this circumcision of Christ, wherein he removes our sins from our souls, actually takes place in Baptism! I agree with you that Colossians 2 is beautiful. All of it is wonderful, including the words that it says about baptism that you HATE so much. You have no desire to contemplate those parts of Colossians 2, now do you?

Therefore, if those verses are to be quoted it must be done by someone like me who believes in them. You do not believe them and therefore would leave them out as you have done in quoting Colossians 2. Even though you said:

I am going to split these up, because I don't want to somehow lose it after typing it (as has happened, much to my consternation.)

You did not split them up, as promised, Instead you left them out. It is interesting that you selected this point to split them up. You never came back to put the rest of these verses into your quote therefore you have, in effect, deliberately left them out because you do not want to face the fact that the Circumcision of Christ wherein he removes our sins from our souls actually takes place in baptism. This is a new tactic for you isnt it Connie? Before you were busy INSERTING your opinions into the word of God because you could not find them there but now you are deleting sections of Gods word that says things that you wish were not found in it.

But for those interested in the truth I now quote the complete thought concerning baptism and its connection to the circumcision of Christ that you are deliberately trying to hide from our readers.

In whom ye were also circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands, in the putting off of the body of the flesh, in the circumcision of Christ; HAVING BEEN IMMERSED WITH HIM IN IMMERSION wherein ye were also raised with Him through faith in the operation of God, who raised Him from the dead. And you, being dead through your trespasses and uncircumcision of your flesh, you, I say, did He make alive together with Him, HAVING FORGIVEN ALL YOUR TRESPASSES; (Colossians 2: 11-13). So there it is Connie! The rest of the story that you did not want us to read! You see this translation translates the Greek word baptizo which means to immerse. Therefore this verse says very plainly that Christ had removed the sins of the Colossians from their souls in the process of their "having been immersed" or baptized with Christ and raised with Him. Paul says the exact same thing to the Romans in Romans 6:3-6. Notice even verse 6 of Romans 6 says, for IF we have been PLANTED in the likeness of His death we shall also be in the likeness of His resurrection". We are therefore recipients of the "circumcision of Christ" when we are baptized. It does not happen before baptism and neither does it happen after baptism. This circumcision of Christ, according to these verses takes place WHEN WE ARE BAPTIZED. This circumcision of Christ is the WORK that GOD does in baptism. Therefore it is the work of God to remove our sins from our souls and he does that work upon us WHEN we are baptized. Nothing could be plainer than this fact. A fact that you did not want us to read!

Connie, I urge you as Peter did those seeking salvation on the day of Pentecost, Repent and be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2:38.

HE THAT BELIEVETH AND IS BAPTIZED SHALL BE SAVED: HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT SHALL BE CONDEMNED. Mark 16:16

The Like figure whereunto even baptism doeth 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 Christ: ( 1Peter 3:21).

And now why tarriest thou arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins calling on the name of the Lord. Acts 22:16

See here is water, what doeth hinder me from being baptized? Acts 8:35-40

For ye are all children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. For (Gar meaning because) as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ (Gal. 3:26,27). Salvation is in Christ (Acts 4:12) and we are BAPTIZED into Christ. Therefore we must be baptized in order to undergo the circumcision of Christ and thereby receive the remission of our sins and be raised with Christ to walk a new life. (1 Cor. 5:17; Gal. 3:26, 27, Acts 2:38; Col. 2:11-13; Romans 6:3-6, 17).

BAPTISM IS MENTIONED IN ALL OF THE PASSAGES!!!!

NOTICE AGAIN FOR THOSE DULL OF HEARING AND WHOSE HEARTS ARE DARKENED AND THEIR EYES REFUSE TO SEE:

BAPTISM IS MENTIONED IN ALL OF THESE PASSAGES.

FURTHER NOTICE FOR THE DEAF: BAPTISM IS MENTIONED 127 TIMES IN THE NEW TESTAMENT.

NOTICE THAT ALL OF THE ABOVE PASSAGES CONNECT SALVATION WITH BAPTISM in some significant way.

Now Connie likes to quote a verse and then emphasis that "baptism is not mentioned" but she does not like to read the passages where baptism is mentioned. They bother her a lot and therefore she is always happy to find one that does not mention baptism. But you will notice that some of theses same verses that do not mention baptism also do not mention faith. But she does not bother to emphasis the fact that those verses do not mention faith because she teaches that we are "saved by grace through faith ALONE". Notice that Acts 2:38 does not mention faith. But connie has never bothered to tell us that it does not mention faith because she wants to convince us that we are saved by faith only. Now we know that Peter did not mention faith in Acts 2:38 because those who asked him, "Men and brethren what shall we do" already had faith but they did not have the remission of their sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit as Connie claims one can get by "grace through faith ALONE". But Peter told those who believed to "repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit" Acts 2:38. He said words that Connie and dbvz, and others who teach the false doctrine of "faith only" cannot and wil;l never say to those believers who come to them asking "what shall we do?". Poor dbvz does not know what on earth to tell people who ask "what shall we do?" because he thinks that God must DO IT ALL. Connie would at least tell them to go what they have already done "Just believe in Christ and trust in the finished work of Christ". Now isn't it a bit curious that Peter when asked these questions did not give the absurd response that Connie and dbvz would give?

I once challenged a baptist Preacher to stand in His pulpit on Sunday and simply quote Acts 2:38 and sit down without making any comments and that I would in return stans up and quote John 3:16 and sit down with out making any other comments. He refused to do it for fear that quoting Acts 2:38 without any of his normal "explainations" would leave someone with the false impresion that they MUST be baptised for the remission of their sins. That actually happened and I have yet to find a baptist preacher that would koin with me in merely quoting one verse of scripture on Sunday morning and sit down to leave the audience to "mull" it over without any special instructions to prevent them from geting the message. I have since continued to so challenge them.

I have even tried to get them to agree with me that I will stand in the pulpit on Sunday morning and quote every passage in the Bible on faith without any comments or explainations from me and then sit down. Then in return I they will quote all 127 verses in the New Testament concerning baptism in like manner with no comments or explainations from them and sit down. None have ever accepted the challenge. You can see why. They are afraid that the people can see the truth without their "explaining" it away! Try it preacher boys. You will not find many takers and you will be greatly blessed if you do find one!

Now Connie does not want to see it and when she says that she cannot see it just look over in her direction and you will notice that she is telling the truth. She does not see it because she not only has her eyes closed she has them covered with her hands holding a copy of Calvins Institutes to make absolutely sure that she does not really see what all of the rest of those honest souls who are willing to follow the word of God can readily see. Your Christian Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 30, 2000

Danny,

Now see, I reckon I proved dbvz right...

I scrolled back up ter see what comment of mine you all disagreed with...and...uh...thought...you was...uh...talkin' bout my reference to Naaman and that there "same principle".

Shucks, I guess I ain't got no more questions at this here time.

-- Anonymous, March 30, 2000

Connie,

Do you believe the WHOLE Bible to be God's Word?

-- Anonymous, March 30, 2000

Oh. My!

Get busy with necesssary errands and commitments; pick up your granddaughter from school, take her and her friend shopping, (for G.D.'s spring clothing); cook dinner because that lovely granddaughter's parents (my son and his wife) are coming for dinner; quickly check my e-mail and make a couple of short posts; eat dinner and chat a few minutes; rush to another son's and daughter-in-law's house to babysit their four beautiful children because they are attending nightly meetings this week at their church (I sat for them last night, also); get home at 11:30 P.M. and innocently, after checking a couple of other sites, and my e-mail, getting a snack and drop by here.

Fortunately, I don't need much sleep.

Do you people ever 'think the best of every person' ~ as I Corinthians 13 says to? If not, you are disobeying God. I broke that portion of scripture up at that point, because I had to stop ~ to fulfill my other responsibilies; there are 23 verses I was dealing with and 11 seemed to be halfway. Paranoia reigns!

I believe every jot and tittle of the whole Bible ~ Old and New Testaments. That's why I take it all seriously, and try to live up to its lofty ideals, though failing; not just a few verses which seem to prove my case, as you do.

I thought I could get back to verse 12 before now, but was unable to.

As I stated earlier (don't remember which thread) I will not be able to address Lee's and others' postings on the long RM thread until I get my copy back from my friend at church, who is reading it. That will be Sunday, and then I have to complete my digging, (in four translations), copying and keying in of a LOT of material. After all, I'm trying to respond to about 175 pages of Lee's copying and pasting on that thread.

It is covered with hand-written notes on the backsides of the pages, which when I organize and keyboard in, will present my position on all the various verses. I have repeated this several times, and while I think D. Lee is being overly modest, (in other words, she seems very bright, not slow at all) I am not so sure of others.

Continuing what I started this morning, and didn't dream would take this long to complete ~ (And I haven't even checked the Faith/Works/Baptism thread yet, and it's now 1:35 A.M.:

{Connie's comment: We just saw, from verse 11, that it WAS NOT a physical circumcision (made with hands), (it says so, right within the verse!) but a SPIRITUAL circumcision, which is referred to.

Then, in 12, this FIGURATIVE circumcision is compared with our BAPTISM where we are raised to new life, ALSO FIGURATIVE (the 'new life', not the baptism ~ the baptism was real, but the purpose was figurative. And HOW does it say we are raised to new life?: THROUGH OUR FAITH IN THE WORKING OF GOD, AS DISPLAYED WHEN HE RAISED HIM UP FROM THE DEAD. Can you Bible scholars please look at this honestly and tell me that this says our BAPTISM saves us? IT DOESN'T SAY THAT!

It says our FAITH saves us. This is one of your very favorite verses to prove that baptism is a necessity for salvation, and it says no such thing. To go on:

COLOSSIANS 2:12-23: [AMPLIFIED]

12: [Thus you were circumcised when] you were buried with Him in your baptism, in which you were also raised with Him [to a new life] through [your] faith in the working of God [as displayed] when He raised Him up from the dead.

We were raised to new life through our faith in the working of God!!!! The baptism is symbolic! It's the figure of being buried and raised to new life ~ commemorating HIS DEATH and RESURRECTION and our faith is what lets us participate, NOT OUR BAPTISM!

13: And you who were dead in trespasses and in the uncircumcision of your flesh --your sensuality , your sinful, carnal nature [God] brought together with [Christ], having freely forgiven us all our transgressions;

14: Having blotted out and wiped away the handwriting of the note (or bond) with its legal decrees and demands, which was in force and stood against us -- hostile to us. This [note with its regulations, decrees, and demands] He set aside and cleared completely out of our way by nailing it to [His] cross.

15: [God] disarmed the principalities and powers ranged against us and made a bold display and public example of them in triumphing over them in Him and in it [the cross].

16: Therefore, let no one sit in judgement on you in matters of food and drink, or with regard to a feast day or a new moon or a Sabbath.

17: Such things are only the shadow of things that are to come, and they only have symbolic value. But the reality -- the substance, the solid fact of what is foreshadowed, the body of it -- belongs to Christ.

I'm going to post this and complete it in awhile. My old back and eyes hurt.

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

I'll finish when I get up (slow typist).

Starting with 18 on Friday, then. (If the Lord is willing).

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

Hi, dbvz,

I hope and pray you are recovering nicely from your surgery.

I am going to complete my posting INRE Colossians, starting with verse 18;

Colossians 2:18-23 [AMPLIFIED]

18: LET NO ONE DEFRAUD YOU BY ACTING AS AN UMPIRE AND DECLARING YOU UNWORTHY AND DISQUALIFYING YOU FOR THE PRIZE, isisting on self- abasement and worship of angels, taking his stand on visions [he claims] he has seen, vainly puffed up by his sensuous notions and inflated by his unscriptural thoughts and fleshly conceit,

19: And not holding to the head, from Whom the entire body, supplied an d knit together by means of its joints and ligaments, grows with a growth that is from God.

20: If then you have died with Christ to material ways of looking at things and have escaped from the world's cruel and elemental notions andteachings of externalism, why do you live as if you still belong to the world/ --Why do you submit to rules and regulations? [such as],

21: Do not handle [this], Do not taste [that], Do not even touch [them],

22: Referring to things all of which perish with being used. To do this is to follow human precepts and doctrines.

23: Such [practices] have indeed the outward appearance [that popularly passes] for wisdom, in promotingself-imposed rigor of devotin and delight in self-humiliation and severity of discipline of the body, but they are of no valuein checking the indulgence of the flesh -- the lower nature. [Instead, they do not honor God] but serve only to indulge the flesh.

AMEN. So Be It.

Well, All, just so I don't get accused of hiding: I'm off to go shopping for a dubbing machine at Sam's with my new daughter-in-law. Then, if my son and his wife can't get another sitter (they didn't want to ask me three nights in a row ~ but I don't mind ~ I love to sit for my grandchildren ~) I will be there 'til late tonight.

Of course I will have the window between getting back from shopping and getting dinner ready for my husband and daughter.

Shalom!

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

"...and while I think D. Lee is being overly modest, (in other words, she seems very bright, not slow at all) I am not so sure of others."

What? Me? Overly modest? Hardly, Just having some sarcastic fun with dbvz who called me obtuse.

dbvz, hope you recover quickly!!

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

Connie:

You said the following about Colossians 2:

{Connie's comment: We just saw, from verse 11, that it WAS NOT a physical circumcision (made with hands), (it says so, right within the verse!) but a SPIRITUAL circumcision, which is referred to.

Now Connie, no one said that this circumcision was a physical circumcision as you seem to be so excited about as if some one was claiming such a thing. It is called the circumcision of Christ. It is NOT BAPTISM that is called the circumcision of Christ it is the actual fact that Christ removes our sins from our souls that is called the circumcision of Christ. Now this removal of our sins is NOT A FIGURATIVE REMOVAL! It is an actual spiritual fact that Christ removes our sins from our souls and this is what Paul refers to as the circumcision of Christ. Now this action of removing our sins is a real fact that actually occurs WHEN WE ARE BAPTIZED. Now read the verse honestly, Connie, and stop trying so hard to avoid the actual facts that are written in the word of God. The verse says,  In whom ye also are circumcised with the circumcision MADE WITHOUT HANDS in the PUTTING OFF OF THE BODY OF THE SINS OF THE FLESH BY THE CIRCUMCISION OF CHRIST. (Col. 2:11). Now Connie, it does not take a genius to see that the removal of our sins by Christ our Lord is called the CIRCUMCISION OF CHRIST. Anyone therefore who has not had their sins removed by Christ in the CIRCUMCISION OF CHRIST is still in their sins and are therefore lost. Now this circumcision of Christ actually takes place WHEN we are baptized. Now read verse 12,  Having been immersed with him in immersion wherein ye also are raised with him by faith in the operation of God who hath raised him from the dead. Now Connie this verse states that the Colossians had their sins removed from their souls by the circumcision of Christ having been immersed with Him in immersion and that they had also risen with Him by their faith that was demonstrated when they believed his words and obeyed them having been immersed with him. Therefore this verse makes it clear that the CIRCUMCISION OF CHRIST removes our sins, when we are baptized with him and raised by faith in this operation of God-the operation of God being the removal of our sins.

Now since you are so fond of the amplified version which I despise, I will quote your own favorite version to show that even that absurd version says the same thing. Notice its rendering, 12: [Thus you were circumcised when] you were buried with Him in your baptism, in which you were also raised with Him [to a new life] through [your] faith in the working of God [as displayed] when He raised Him up from the dead. Now your favorite version says YOU WERE CIRCUMCISED WHEN YOU WERE BURIED WITH HIM IN YOUR BAPTISM Now Connie, it is clear, even using your favorite version, that we have our sins removed by the circumcision of Christ and that he performs that circumcision on us when we by faith in that operation of God obey him by being baptized. Those who have not been baptized according to this verse cannot have had their sins removed by the circumcision of Christ because this circumcision of Christ takes place WHEN WE ARE BURIED WITH HIM IN BAPTISM But Connie, you falsely claim that you had your sins removed before you were baptized but this verse says it happens by the circumcision of Christ WHEN were are baptized.

This makes Acts 2:38 even more understandable for there Peter said,  Repent AND be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ FOR THE REMISSION OF YOUR SINS. Acts 2:38 and this passage from Colossians tells us that our sins are removed by the circumcision of Christ WHEN we are buried with him in baptism. So no one, Connie, will receive the remission of their sins until they undergo the removal of their sins by the circumcision of Christ which happens when they are baptized. (Col. 2:12; Acts 2:38).

Then you tell us:

Then, in 12, this FIGURATIVE circumcision is compared with our BAPTISM where we are raised to new life, ALSO FIGURATIVE (the 'new life', not the baptism ~ the baptism was real, but the purpose was figurative. And HOW does it say we are raised to new life? THROUGH OUR FAITH IN THE WORKING OF GOD, AS DISPLAYED WHEN HE RAISED HIM UP FROM THE DEAD. Can you Bible scholars please look at this honestly and tell me that this says our BAPTISM saves us? IT DOESN'T SAY THAT!

This is pure ignorance Connie! Paul does use the idea of Jewish Circumcision as an illustration or figure of the removal of our sins by Christ our Lord. But he does not COMPARE circumcision with our baptism as you claim. He just is not making any comparison between baptism and circumcision at all! You cannot prove any such nonsense! Connie, no one who can read will honestly be able to see any comparison being made in this verse between circumcision and baptism. It just is not there! But it is not new for you to see things that are not actually written in the word of God because you have decided that your way is better than Gods way and if Gods word does not say it you will just pretend that it does. Connie, why do not you just show us the comparison in this verse that you claim is being made between baptism and circumcision. There is not one being made but you pretend that there is so that you can act as if you have just reason for neglecting the truth that Paul is using Jewish Circumcision as a figure of the removal of our sins by Christ and he even calls it the circumcision of Christ and tell us that Christ removes our sins from our souls when we by faith in that operation are buried with him in baptism. Thus we can be raised with him. Now Connie, notice how we are buried with Christ" according to these verses. We are buried with him by baptism. Then is says we are raised with Him. We cannot be raised with him until we are buried with him. If we are buried with him by baptism it only stands to reason that we are raised with him as we come out of the waters of baptism. Then you tell us:

It says our FAITH saves us. This is one of your very favorite verses to prove that baptism is a necessity for salvation, and it says no such thing. To go on:

Yes Connie it is our faith that saves us but it is not our FAITH ALONE that saves us. It is the removal of our sins by Christ that saves us WHEN our faith prompts us to yield to him and be baptized. This is not a favorite verse Connie. In fact it is not used as often as it should be because it is very clearly stating that the circumcision of Christ removes our sins WHEN we are buried with him by baptism. It tells us what saves us-The removal of our sins by Christ in the circumcision of Christ- and it tells us exactly WHEN this happens. The Circumcision of Christ-wherein he removes our sins from our souls- occurs WHEN WE ARE BURIED WITH HIM BY BAPTISM. So it really does teach such a thing now doesnt it Connie? But you will go on and refuse to abide in the doctrine of Christ as is taught in these verses.

Then you quote the very verse that we have just used to show that Christ removes our sins from our souls WHEN we are baptized as follows:

COLOSSIANS 2:12-23: [AMPLIFIED] 12: [Thus you were circumcised when] you were buried with Him in your baptism, in which you were also raised with Him [to a new life] through [your] faith in the working of God [as displayed] when He raised Him up from the dead.

Now Connie if you will notice that in verse eleven Paul had told the Colossians about the fact that they had been circumcised with the circumcision of Christ. He told them this because some had been causing them trouble because as gentiles they had never been circumcised and that they needed to be circumcised in the Jewish tradition. But Paul explains that they had been circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands in the removal of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ. Then in verse twelve he tells them just WHEN that circumcision took place. Thus you were circumcised WHEN you were buried with Him in your baptism. Therefore Connie this verse is teaching the direct opposite of your false doctrine. This verse makes it clear that the Colossians had their sins removed by the circumcision of Christ WHEN THEY WERE BAPTIZED. But Connie had hers removed the moment she first believed even before she repented! But this is not the truth as taught by Colossians. And because she was not baptized by FAITH in Christ and his teaching and according to His commands (Mark 16:16;Acts 2:38; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 22:16) she has not had her sins removed from her soul by the Circumcision of Christ which happens WHEN by faith in Christ we OBEY him in Baptism. Now that is the simple truth and Connie cannot answer it any more than she has even attempted to answer the other arguments that we have made from the Word of God. Then she spouts more ignorance with these words:

We were raised to new life through our faith in the working of God!!!! The baptism is symbolic! It's the figure of being buried and raised to new life ~ commemorating HIS DEATH and RESURRECTION and our faith is what lets us participate, NOT OUR BAPTISM!

This verse twelve shows, Connie, that we are raised FROM THE WATERS OF BAPTISM having had our sins removed through our faith in this Circumcision of Christ which is the operation of God which happened WHEN WE WERE BAPTIZED. The term operation of God refers to the circumcision of Christ wherein our sins are removed and it is our faith in Christ that causes us to obey him in baptism in order to undergo that operation of God that happens WHEN were are baptized. Now Connie this verse is conclusive proof that it is GOD that is doing the work when we by faith merely submit to the operation of God in the circumcision of Christ" WHEN were are buried with Him in baptism we are then raised to walk a new life because we have faith in this operation that took place in our baptism. This would have great meaning to the Colossians who had been concerned that they had never been circumcised according to the Law of Moses. Paul assures them that they had been circumcised with a circumcision not made with hands in the removal of the sins of the flesh in the circumcision of Christ which happened to them WHEN they were buried with him by baptism and raised with confidence of their forgiveness which occurred in this operation of God that took place in their baptism. But Connie could not have helped the Colossians as Paul did because her false doctrine does allow her to connect the removal of our sins in the circumcision of Christ with the time WHEN we were buried with him in baptism.

Connie wants us to believe that baptism is figurative and commemorative and symbolic. These verses in Colossians say no such thing. Circumcision is the figure in this passage not baptism. Baptism isolates the actual, physical place in Time when our sins were removed by our faith in the operation of God that happens in the circumcision of Christ WHEN we are physically immersed or buried and raised with Christ. We actually die to our sins and are actually BURIED WITH CHRIST and are actually raised to literally walk with Him in a new life. To make baptism merely commemorative, symbolic and nothing more than a figure takes away the very reality of our actually meeting Christ our baptism and actually undergoing the removal of our sins and the actually forgiveness of them and our being genuinely raised with Him to actually and literally walk in a new life with Him as Paul describes it to the Colossians and the Romans. (Col. 2:11-13; Romans 6:3-6). There is not one single word in the context or in the actual text that gives us any reason whatsoever to conclude that baptism is merely symbolic, Commemorative, or figurative. Now the fact that baptism relives the facts of the gospel such as the death burial and resurrection of Christ does not negate the fact that we are actually dying to the world as Christ died in it on the cross and literally being buried with Him as he was in the heart of the earth and that we actually are raised to walk in newness of life with Him all the days of our life. These things the scripture says actually occur in baptism not that baptism is merely symbolic of such things! This explains why Connie and others find it easy to think of baptism as nothing but a lifeless command that is necessary to obedience but not to salvation. Christ is the savior of all who obey him (Heb. 5:8,9) and if those who hold baptism to be a mere symbol could only see that we actually meet Christ in our baptism and that he actually removes our sins WHEN we meet him there and that we are actually raised with Christ and walk a new life literally in His presence then they could see that baptism is connected to our salvation because in it is the designated place when God has determined that we will meet Him and submit to that operation of God which is also called the "circumcision of Chris" that happens WHEN we are baptized into Him. (Col. 2:11-13; Gal. 3:26, 27; Romans 6:3-6). Preachers have put too much emphasis on the symbolism and too little on the Savior that we actually meet in baptism and who actually removes our sins so that we can be raised with him by faith in the operation of God.

Yes, Connie baptism is not merely an event surrounded by allusions to the facts of the gospel such as the death burial and resurrection of Christ but it is, in fact, the actual time and place that God has designated for us to meet Christ and have our sins removed by faith in that great operation of God called the Circumcision of Christ.

Then you say:

Can you Bible scholars please look at this honestly and tell me that this says our BAPTISM saves us? IT DOESN'T SAY THAT!

Now Connie no one, least of all me, has said that this verse teaches that baptism saves us. It teaches instead, what we have been saying all along that it is Christ who saves us trough our faith in Him WHEN we are  buried with Him by baptism. We are not saved by baptism we are saved by Christ IN OUR BAPTISM. That is the teaching of this verse. We have never said that baptism alone without Christ or faith in him saves us Connie and you know that we have said no such thing but you continue to try to prejudice others from giving a fair hearing to our arguments by pretending that we have claimed that these verses in Colossians are teaching that baptism saves us without our faith, without Christs precious blood, without our genuine repentance of all our sins. We have never taught any such thing and what is worse, Connie, is that you KNOW WE HAVE NEVER SAID ANY SUCH THING!!

So here we are with your deceptive tactics again. You deliberately try to leave this false impression when you know that it is just not the truth. Connie, if you are wondering why you are considered a liar it is because of your deliberate attempts to deceive. If you wonder why I have said that Satan is your father it is because he is the father of such lies (John 6:44). Now you tell me to change my tactics or you will never be convinced. Connie, if you really cared about and loved the truth you would accept it regardless of the tactics used by the one presenting it. Your determination to never accept the truth of God concerning this subject is because you do not love the truth and it does not matter what tactic anyone used until you love truth more than yourself you will never know the truth. In fact, God will send you a strong delusion that you might believe a lie and be damned because you believe not the truth but have pleasure in unrighteousness. (2 Thess. 2:10-12). But so long as you use these tactics to deliberately deceive others I will continue to use the word of God and point forcefully to your deliberate lies. If you do not love the truth enough to find it I cannot do anything about that but there are those who love the truth and they will learn it through its contrast with your lies. For truth shines brightest when it meets with the friction provided by false teachers. You will lose your soul Connie unless you sincerely seek the truth and Love it.

Your Christian Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

Danny:

Have you notice that Connie has never been accused of hiding as she claims in this statement that I quote below:

Well, All, just so I don't get accused of hiding: I'm off to go shopping for a dubbing machine at Sam's with my new daughter-in-law. Then, if my son and his wife can't get another sitter (they didn't want to ask me three nights in a row ~ but I don't mind ~ I love to sit for my grandchildren ~) I will be there 'til late tonight.

But I have accused her of avoiding the truth which I have also proven. But you and I do know someone whom I have deliberately accused of hiding and she is still doing so. But you may be right, she may now be using a disguise! Ha! What do you think?

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

Wasn't Nelta asked to 'take a rest' by Duane?

I think you 'Pit-Bulls' of the CoC forum drive evryone off who disagrees with you.

I think you were ALL very mean to Nelta ~ your 'sister' in Christ.

I think you should be ashamed.

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

Wasn't Nelta asked to 'take a rest' by Duane?

I think you 'Pit-Bulls' of the CoC forum drive everyone off who disagrees with you.

I think you were ALL very mean to Nelta ~ your 'sister' in Christ.

I think you should be ashamed.

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

Sorry it posted twice.

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

Danny:

Notice that Connie says:

Wasn't Nelta asked to 'take a rest' by Duane?

I think you 'Pit-Bulls' of the CoC forum drive evryone off who disagrees with you.

I think you were ALL very mean to Nelta ~ your 'sister' in Christ. I think you should be ashamed.

I do not remember Duane suggesting that anyone leave this forum and take a rest do you? It is not Duanes procedure to ask anyone to leave. In fact I remember him telling Nelta that he did not like to see her leave. She left because of the dilerberate LIES that she was caught telling and because of the constant pressure upon her to repent of her false accusations against her brother in Christ and the fact that she was completely unable to deal with the arguments presented against her false teaching concerning elders, the inspiration of the scriptures and many other Neo Orthodox false nonsense. I never asked her to leave I merely persistently call upon her to repent of the sins she had committed in this forum. However, Danny, I am curious as to just how Connie figured who it was that I had accused of hiding in this forum since she was not around when I accused of hiding. This "Connie" really caught on fast to the Idea that I had reference to Nelta though I did not mention Her name. Now there are others that I accused of hiding but Connie did not think I was talking about them! Ha! What do you think Danny? Is Nelta still hiding but only in a different way?

Notice that Connie says we drive off everyone that disagrees with us. Now I suppose she does not know of those who have been baptized into Christ who originally disagreed with us. They did not post in the forum but they were lurking and learning and they were able to see the truth. They happen to know who they are and they outnumber the small handful of false teachers who left the kitchen because they could not stand the heat! Those who love the truth have no reason to run and hide like Nelta and many other false teachers have done. It is characteristic of false teachers to not enjoy the scrutiny of those who love the truth. They do not like those hard questions and honest accusations against their doctrine which is contrary to the doctrine of Christ.

Jesus said to the Church at Ephesus,  I know they works, and thy patience, and how thou canst not bear them that are evil; and that thou hast tried them which say they are apostles, and are not and hast found them LIARS. Revelation 2:2.

Now Christ praised the Church at Ephesus for finding these false apostles to be LIARS. We have found some LIARS in this forum and proved it to be a fact that they are LIARS. Nelta was in fact one of them. She was never asked to leave and she never answered any arguments put to her and she has never repented of the sins that we proved conclusively that she was guilty of having committed in this form. Yes, she was a sister in Christ but she was also a false teacher and a deliberate LIAR and was dealt with accordingly and she could not take so she left. Those of us who challenged her did the right thing and Connie has no idea of what happened because she was NEVER around when these things happened but she has made judgements concerning this that she could only make if she was listening to Neltas side of the story only. So Danny it seems that Connie does know something that only NELTA might know doesnt it? What do you think of these things? Connie:

The one that should be ashamed Connie is the one who has been telling lies in this forum and defending those who do tell lies. Those who resist false doctrine and support those teaching the truth of Gods word have nothing whatsoever for which they should be ashamed. I have no shame whatsoever in these matters. And you have no knowledge of what happened in Neltas case that is sufficient for you to make an accurate and righteous judgement concerning these matters. A liar loves other liars and will defend them. When the ones that you defend are those who are against Christ you should be ashamed. Nelta is very much against Christ and His truth and so is Mark Hillyard who is teaching a pernicious and cultic doctrine that is purely racist in its premises but you even defend Him. You should be ashamed indeed.

John said, If any man come to you and bring not this doctrine receive him not into your haouse neither bid him Godspeed. For hew that biddeth him Godspeed is a PARTAKER of his evil deeds. (2 john 9- 11). Connie, your bidding Godspeed to these two false teachers makes you a PARTAKER in their evil deeds. You should be ashamed!

Danny:

Anyway, I was just wondering about your thoughts concerning the one that has been hiding for so long now and just what method of form she has taken, lately?

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

Danny:

I think you are right. I am almost convinced myself! Can you imagine haow pathetic such a thing must be! Ha! I just cannot wait to be able to EXPOSE this nonsense for ALL to clearly see!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

Now Christ praised the Church at Ephesus for finding these false apostles to be LIARS. We have found some LIARS in this forum and proved it to be a fact that they are LIARS. Nelta was in fact one of them. She was never asked to leave and she never answered any arguments put to her and she has never repented of the sins that we proved conclusively that she was guilty of having committed in this form. Yes, she was a sister in Christ but she was also a false teacher and a deliberate LIAR and was dealt with accordingly and she could not take so she left. Those of us who challenged her did the right thing and Connie has no idea of what happened because she was NEVER around when these things happened but she has made judgements concerning this that she could only make if she was listening to Neltas side of the story only.

-- Anonymous, March 31, 2000

In reading what you said above, I went back and found a few things you wrote, Lee:

First you said:

So I am a GREEK TEXT ONLY person. How about that! If you do not want to read the Greek text then you had better be safe and stick with the King JAMES VERSION or the AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION. All of the rest are dangerous to those with little knowledge of the original languages and the ability to judge the accuracy of the translations. Especially those who are so ignorant that they do not know that the "amplified Bible" and the LIVING BIBLE are not translations but are "paraphrases". They do not even claim to be the word of God. I do not advize flooding the churches with all of these versions as if there is no harm in any of them. But for those who are not Christians and have no desire to understand the very truth of God any version will do. For those seeking to find hope for their false teaching today they can not only find a preacher that preaches it and a church that practices it they now can find a version of the "Bible" that says it. What a great day to be false teachers! Satan must be dancing in the parched streets of hell and rolling on the ground with a large "belly laugh". How stupid can we be to fall for such obvious deception?

Your Christian Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- E. Lee Saffold (gdragon@mindspring.com), March 23, 2000.

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

Then Mark and I said:

Lee, You say you read the Greek text. Which Greek text? There are many manuscripts, and scholars categorize them in four families.

-- Mark Winstead (seminole@springmail.com), March 24, 2000.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Yes, Lee: It takes years to be able to read in Greek. My son has a Phd. in classical languages (Greek and Latin) and you don't read in Greek without a LOT of training. I took a year of Greek on Saturdays and, as I've said, I got to alpha, beta, gamma, delta, plus a few vocabulary meanings, (actually quite a few of those).

I'm not doubting your word, and wouldn't have even noticed it except for what Mark W. just said. Where did you get your training, if I may ask?

-- Connie (hive@gte.net), March 24, 2000.

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

Then you said:

Mark: Actually, I simply referring to my Greek New Testament that is just like most of the one's that are easy to access. It is the Westcott and Hort Text, though I do have a copy of the Texus Receptus. I did not mean that I read the Actual manuscripts such as the Vaticanus, Sinaiticus, Whashington, or Alexandrian, all of which are from the fourth century. I assumed that all would undeerstand that such was my meaning.

I understand what you mean and your point is well taken but my concern is similar to Jon's, that we be careful not to leave the false impression that we do not have a reliable text of the Scriptures for we most certianly do. The discussion of that subject is very lengthy and complex and worthy of our attention but we cannot do it in the short, interupped, and often disorganized format in which we discuss things here in this forum.

I do believe that we should teach these things to the church so that everyone has an understanding of these matters. I do not believe that flooding the church with numerous versions that are self contradictory and often are not even versions at all is helpful to the cause of Christ.

I am aware that it is imposible to avoid translation for even when we read the Greek text of Westcott and Hort or the Texus Receptus we must translate it our selves and are just as suceptible to human error and bias as those who have translated from those text for us. But we should be able to judge these things in our day of multiple versions.

I also like The "Living Oracles" translation which many know nothing about! The idea that we should have a version that we can trust is not a bad idea, now is it? I believe that the KJV gets entirely too much unjust Criticism. It is true that it has mistakes and errors but it does not contradict itself as some versions do and it is not really any more difficult to understand than some of the modern versions that I have read and it was subject to some bias but not as much bias as some of the modern versions. The harsh criticisms that I have seen of the KJV are not all reasonable. The Idea that anyone who likes or prefers the KJV is an ignorant buffoon who thinks that it was the version that was read by the apostles is extremely unjust. While there are some poor souls that are so ignorant as to think such it is far from true that all who prefer the KJV do so from pure ignorance. While, as I told Connie, I am not a KJV only man, I do have much respect for the great influence of the KJV and the fact that multitudes have learned the gospel from it and that it has a great deal of merit and that the scolarship of those who translated it equals if not surpasses that of those who translated our modern versions. The bias of those who translated the KJV was of a diferent sort from that of many modern versions in that some mordern versions have no greater purpose for their existance than to promote a "politically correct" version that is "non offensive" to the sprirt of our materialistic age. The way that handled their bias was far different. They made no effort to force their bias on the translation as many modern versions do. I do not want to go into all of these details only to assert, without offering proof which is detailed and lengthy but the KJV has merit for those who will honestly give it a fair hearing.

I am against the idea that no one can learn the truth of the gospel today unless he or she becomes a scholar and goes back through all of the "families" of manuscripts to construct a reliable text and reads from the Greek New Testament. I was being facicious when I said that I am a greek text only man in order to point to the absurdity of the insultive question that is often ask of others "are you one of those KJV only people. If a person has chosen the KJV and is able to read and understand it and prefers it as a version that he will study from and no other he is not in any less danger than those who can not settle on a version and are always jumping from one to the other with no settled conviction concerning what is right.

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

When she left, Nelta said:

Since this thread was started by me I get all the responses to it. I have wondered why so many of you are so concerned with what I said. I wrote Duane privately and told him why I said what I did. He wrote back indicating he understood. I also talked with Connie privately. Duane, I am still resting and plan to return when I have something worthwhile to post.

bye for now! (Can't wait to see what all you gents make out of that remark.)

-- Nelta Brock (nib@hal-pc.org), March 17, 2000.

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

Concerning whether obedience is learned:

Connie you said: Good morning, Lee:

Earlier in this thread you said:

JESUS SAYS THROUGH THE INSPIRED WRITER OF HEBREWS: THOUGH HE WERE A SON YET LEARNED HE OBEDIENCE THROUGH THE THINGS WHICH HE SUFFERED AND BEING MADE PERFECT HE BECAME THE AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM. Hebrews 5:8,9. We accept His gift of salvation and we LEARN obedience. Even HE learned obedience THROUGH THE THINGS THAT HE SUFFERED. And I certainly agree that He, when perfected, became the Author of my salvation, which I obeyed when I repented and believed. ********************************************************************** NO MENTION OF BAPTISM ********************************************************************** Praise the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit for their unspeakable gifts to me. I don't deserve them, but I have accepted them anyway. ********************************************************************** In your above words you claim, that we accept his gift of salvation and have to learn obedience. Now the Bible does not teach any such thing. It says that Christ is the AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM. **********************************************************************

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

Are you aware that those words were directly from the Scriptures? I find it strange that you would say:

'They say no such thing!'

I will place them here in 3 other version:

KJV:

Hebrews 5:8,9:

8: Though He were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things that He suffered;

9: And being made perfect, He became the Author of eternal salvation unto all that obey Him.

NAS:

8: Although he was a Son,, he learned obedience from the things which He suffered.

9: And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation.

NIV:

8: Although He was a Son, he learned obedience from what He suffered,

9: And once made perfect, He became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey Him.

Everyone has to learn obedience; some learn it more quickly than others. In my own case concerning baptism, I was not being disobedient by waiting; I was praying that my husband would come to see the necessity of being immersed, and we could be baptized together. He did and we were. Praise God!

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

I knew I had read the following:

Hello Connie,

I haven't been back because I had about all I could take (and I am a strong person.:-))

Duane wrote me and told me to take a rest and then come back. I might do that but there are so many rude ones that it got to where I was reading very few posts in answer to mine.:-)

From Connie:

Also, I didn't say anyone had accused me of hiding; I said so that I wouldn't be accused of hiding.....

But I forgive the ones who are so grossly unfair and bear false witness.

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

Just to clarify: the message above (between 'Hello, Connie' and 'From Connie') is from Nelta.

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

Connie, I have to ask you point blank since you have not come right out and denied it.

Are you Nelta???

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

No, Jenny, I am not Nelta.

The following is Nelta's and my first contact. I had seen her name being defamed continually, and she always answered with forbearance, so I wanted to know what HER position was (I contacted her first):

> I am praying for everyone on that forum, because it seems to me that God is > not being glorified there. > > Connie > > -----Original Message----- > From: nib > To: Connie Iversen > Date: Thursday, March 09, 2000 6:27 AM > Subject: Re: This forum > > >Connie, are you talking about the Christian church forum? The reason I > >am on there is I think the Lord wants me to do my part in trying to > >bring Christians back to the teachings of the Apostles. I know many on > >there are very rude to me but I just pray about it and go on. > > > >We have little time on this earth and our lives should be spent in His > >service. > > > >How do you feel about the forum? > > > >Nelta > > > >> Connie Iversen wrote: > >> > >> Nelta: > >> > >> Are you spiritually blessed through this forum? > >> > >> Connie >

She is a Godly woman. You, however, have some growing up to do.

In the Savior,

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

Good Grief Connie, A simple yes or no would have sufficed!

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

Yes or no.

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

Connie:

You have done nothing more in your last few threads but quote what I have already said without even attempting to answer it. I will now notice a few of your quotes and implications:

First you quote where I said that Nelta was a LIAR and that I proved it to be the truth:

Now Christ praised the Church at Ephesus for finding these false apostles to be LIARS. We have found some LIARS in this forum and proved it to be a fact that they are LIARS. Nelta was in fact one of them. She was never asked to leave and she never answered any arguments put to her and she has never repented of the sins that we proved conclusively that she was guilty of having committed in this form. Yes, she was a sister in Christ but she was also a false teacher and a deliberate LIAR and was dealt with accordingly and she could not take so she left. Those of us who challenged her did the right thing and Connie has no idea of what happened because she was NEVER around when these things happened but she has made judgments concerning this that she could only make if she was listening to Neltas side of the story only.

-- Connie (hive@gte.net), March 31, 2000. Then you quote where I said that I read the GREEK TEXT as follows:

In reading what you said above, I went back and found a few things you wrote, Lee: First you said: So I am a GREEK TEXT ONLY person. How about that! If you do not want to read the Greek text then you had better be safe and stick with the King JAMES VERSION or the AMERICAN STANDARD VERSION. All of the rest are dangerous to those with little knowledge of the original languages and the ability to judge the accuracy of the translations. Especially those who are so ignorant that they do not know that the "amplified Bible" and the LIVING BIBLE are not translations but are "paraphrases". They do not even claim to be the word of God. I do not advise flooding the churches with all of these versions as if there is no harm in any of them. But for those who are not Christians and have no desire to understand the very truth of God any version will do. For those seeking to find hope for their false teaching today they can not only find a preacher that preaches it and a church that practices it they now can find a version of the "Bible" that says it. What a great day to be false teachers! Satan must be dancing in the parched streets of hell and rolling on the ground with a large "belly laugh". How stupid can we be to fall for such obvious deception? Your Christian Friend, E. Lee Saffold -- E. Lee Saffold (gdragon@mindspring.com), March 23, 2000.

-- Connie (hive@gte.net), April 01, 2000. Your implication seems to be that you are saying that I have lied about my reading the GREEK TEXT. I will simply tell you that Mark did not mean to imply that he doubted that I read the Greek text in his comments to me. He simply was making the point that there are a number of Greek texts from different families and asked which one I read. I pointed out to him that I read the Westcott and Hort text. Now that is true. I have had 4 years of study in the 'Koine' Greek and I have spent the last ten years reading the Westcott and Hort text. But you do not have the courage to just come out and accuse me of lying about that matter but you imply that such is the case. Now Connie this is very different than what I have done with Nelta. I did not merely imply that she lied I proved that she had lied and she refused to repent. Now, honestly, I could care less if you believe that I read the Greek text or not. I was simply making a point about versions and your ridiculous question that implied that I was a KJV ONLY man. That was my only purpose to even mention that matter. I was trying to demonstrate that we couldnt avoid reading a translation even if we, as I do, read the Greek text of Westcott and Hort. When I read that text I cannot avoid translating it regardless of how much knowledge I have of the language. That was my point and it was completely missed because of your ignorant comments casting doubt on my ability to read the Greek text. I do read that text as I said and Marks question was not intended to doubt it. But your implication here is to cast such doubt. Now that is fine if you feel the need to do such a thing. But do not cry fowl when someone is harsh toward you or Nelta in this forum. Because you simply call me a liar without proving that it is true. I proved that Nelta was a liar and called upon her to repent of her false accusations against a brother in Christ. Now if you wish to doubt my words it is ok with me but if you doubt the truth that is taught in the scriptures it is not ok!

Then you simply quote yourself again where you refer to a passage that I had quoted and simply ignore completely the argument that I had made from it and make some ignorant comments claiming that it said things that no one can find in the passage at all by even the largest stretch of their imaginations as follows:

JESUS SAYS THROUGH THE INSPIRED WRITER OF HEBREWS: THOUGH HE WERE A SON YET LEARNED HE OBEDIENCE THROUGH THE THINGS WHICH HE SUFFERED AND BEING MADE PERFECT HE BECAME THE AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM. Hebrews 5:8,9. We accept His gift of salvation and we LEARN obedience. Even HE learned obedience THROUGH THE THINGS THAT HE SUFFERED. And I certainly agree that He, when perfected, became the Author of my salvation, which I obeyed when I repented and believed. ********************************************************************** NO MENTION OF BAPTISM ********************************************************************** Praise the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit for their unspeakable gifts to me. I don't deserve them, but I have accepted them anyway.

Then you say:

Are you aware that those words were directly from the Scriptures? I find it strange that you would say: 'They say no such thing!' I will place them here in 3 other version: KJV: Hebrews 5:8,9: 8: Though He were a Son, yet learned he obedience by the things that He suffered; 9: And being made perfect, He became the Author of eternal salvation unto all that obey Him. NAS: 8: Although he was a Son,, he learned obedience from the things which He suffered. 9: And having been made perfect, He became to all those who obey Him the source of eternal salvation. NIV: 8: Although He was a Son, he learned obedience from what He suffered, 9: And once made perfect, He became the source of eternal salvation for all who obey Him. Everyone has to learn obedience; some learn it more quickly than others. In my own case concerning baptism, I was not being disobedient by waiting; I was praying that my husband would come to see the necessity of being immersed, and we could be baptized together. He did and we were. Praise God!

-- Connie (hive@gte.net), April 01, 2000.

Now of course Connie, I am aware that those words from Hebrews 5:8,9 are from the scriptures. I am the one that first brought them to your attention in this forum! I quoted them to you because you said that obedience is not essential to salvation but this verse clearly says that Christ is the AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM. But you reject those words Connie. They clearly indicate that Christ is not the author of eternal salvation to those who disobey him.

CONNIE SAYS: CHRIST IS THE AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO THOSE WHO DISOBEYS HIM.

CHRIST SAYS THROUGH HEBREWS 5:8,9: CHRIST IS THE AUTHOYR OF ETERNAL SAVATION TO ALL THOSE THAT OBEY HIM.

So, once again Connie you are diametrically opposed to the very word of God. Gods word says Christ is the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him and Connie says he is the author of eternal salvation to those who DISOBEY him. Now whom do we believe? I believe Christ not Connie.

Now the words that are not found in the scriptures are those written by Connie, which say:

In your above words you claim, that we accept his gift of salvation and have to learn obedience.

Now the Bible does not teach any such thing. It says that Christ is the AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM. This passage from Hebrews tells how CHRIST learned obedience from the things that he suffered. It says absolutely nothing about OUR learning obedience at all Connie. Not one word in this passage indicates anything about OUR learning obedience. The point of this passage is to show us that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him. This gives us a very good reason to learn to obey Christ because it is certain that he is not the author of our salvation unless we do in fact OBEY HIM. Now that is the truth Connie. When I said,  Now the bible says no such thing I was referring to your ignorant comment that We accept His gift of salvation and we LEARN obedience. For the Bible does not say any such thing. Hebrews 5:8,9 certainly says no such thing. That is what you would like for it to say but it says no such thing. It says that Christ learned obedience by the things which he suffered and being made perfect he became the author of eternal salvation to ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM. Not a single word in this passage that says, we accept his gift of salvation and learn obedience. It says that HE learned obedience through the things which he suffered He obeyed Gods will unto the point of death and was the perfect example of obedience. The fact that he was perfect in his obedience is the reason why he can be a perfect sacrifice for our sins and therefore he became by that the author of eternal salvation. But he is clearly the author of eternal salvation to them that OBEY HIM and NOT TO THOSE WHO DISOBEY HIM. Now you refuse to deal with those words which say to all those who obey him. You, like all false teachers, deliberately ignore those words and try to turn everyones attention away from them by talking of how we accept salvation and then learn to obey. But this verse says he is the author of eternal salvation to those that obey him. Those words exclude those who do not obey him. This is the reason that Christ said, Why call ye me Lord, Lord and do not the things which I say Luke 6:46. And again he said, Not everyone that saith unto me Lord, Lord shall enter the kingdom of heaven but he that DOETH THE WILL OF MY FATHER WHICH IS IN HEAVEN. Matthew 7:21. Now Connie you teach falsely that God gives salvation to those who do nothing more than believe and simply cry Lord, Lord. But your teaching is diametrically opposed to the very words of Christ from Matthew 7:21 and Luke 6:46. You cannot escape it by merely pretending that the scriptures say, We accept his gift of salvation and learn obedience for it SAYS NO SUCH THING. The verse in Hebrews says NO SUCH THING. But you lie and say that it does. You have not proven that it says such a thing you have merely asserted it. Now I am going to quote that verse again and tell you to find your words in it:

Though he were a son yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered and being made perfect he became the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him. Hebrews 5:8,9

Now where does it say that we accept his gift of salvation and learn obedience as you claim. It says nothing in this passage about us learning obedience, NOTHING! It says nothing in this verse about our accepting His gift of salvation. It simply and plainly says that CHRIST learned obedience by the things that he suffered and that he became the author of eternal salvation NOT TO THOSE WHO MERELY ACCEPT HIS GIFT OF SALVATION ,as Connie falsely teaches, but salvation is for ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM.

So Connie says: Christ is the author of eternal salvation to ALL THEM THAT MERELY ACCEPT HIS SALVATION.

Christ says: He is the author of eternal salvation to ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM.

Now I believe Christ, dont you?

Well Connie I have once again shown that your words are diametrically opposed to the words of Christ. It does not matter how much you falsely accuse me without offering any proof whatsoever of lying or how much you dislike my approach and just how unloving you think that I am. The word of God remains the same and it will not change to suit your own stubborn will. It will continue to express the WILL OF GOD that you persistently resist. You falsely claim, as the false apostles of old claimed, to have the Holy Spirit. If you actually had the Holy Spirit you would not continue to resist the Holy Spirit who is the author of the truths written in His word that you diametrically and defiantly oppose. You are verily disobedient to Christ in your refusal to be immersed according to the truth taught by Christ. Such an immersion will never bring you in contact with Christ so that you can have your sins removed in the Circumcision of Christ that takes place when we are baptized according to the teaching of Christ. (Romans 6:3-6,17; Col.2: 11,12). Now that is more truth for you Connie.

I can understand your desperate need to imply that I have lied about something. For you cannot answer my arguments so now you must undermine my credibility. This is the reason that you imply that I did not tell the truth when I said that I read the Greek Text. I do read it. I can read any New Testament Greek Text to which I have access. The only ones that I have access to at the moment is the Westcott and Hort text, which most people who study the Greek New Testament in College use. I also have a copy of the Texus Recptus which was the basis of the KJV translation. But let me say to you Connie that the word of God is true even if every man should prove to be a liar. And the numerous arguments that I have made from Gods word -which you have completely ignored- will be true even if ALL of us prove to be liars. You will face the words of Christ in the Judgment (John 12:48) that you deliberately and diametrically oppose and you will lose your soul by rejecting his salvation that is offered to ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM (Heb. 5:8,9). You do not have this salvation Connie because you have refused to obey HIM by being baptized according to HIS teaching (Romans 5:17).

As far as your pathetic defense of Nelta, whom you seem to be very close to, it is just plain stupid. You were not here when those evils that we called upon Nelta to repent of having done occurred and you do not know what you are talking about concerning it unless of course you are much closer to Nelta than it appears on the surface but in that case you would only be a shadow of the real Nelta which would only prove conclusively that not only is Nelta a LIAR she is a very DEVIOUS one. Such deliberate deceptions are of the Devil and Satan is the father of such. I will continue to resist your false doctrine and I will continue to call upon Nelta to repent of her EVIL deeds, which she has committed in this forum. If you are close enough to talk to Her tell her to come back to this forum and either REPENT of her lies and evil deeds or prove that she is not guilty of them. You cannot speak for Nelta in this matter unless you ARE Nelta. You claim to be corresponding with her. Tell her to COME BACK AND REPENT OF HER EVIL DEEDS. Tell her that her Brother, E. Lee Saffold, challenges her to come back and just try to deny that she is guilty of such evil deeds, as I have accused her of Committing. She knows that I have already proven her to be evil and to have falsely accused her brother in Christ in this forum and that she has never repented. She will not come back for this purpose and she did not leave because she was so hurt by our words and actions toward her. She left because she lied about a brother in Christ and was caught doing so and the entire forum called upon her to repent and correct that lie but she has never done so. As long as I am on the forum and I see her appear in it I will call upon her to repent. Now I do not care if you like it or not that is exactly what all Christians should do. But since you are not a Christian and have little interest in being one I could not expect you to understand our requirement to rebuke those who sin in such a way.

This is a spiritual battle Connie. It is not some childrens game where we simply play hide and seek with each other. Souls are being lost daily because they do not love the truth. You do not love the truth Connie and Nelta does not love the truth and for that reason you will meet resistance always from those of us who do love it and accept it.

Your Christian Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

I quote the Word of God again: JESUS SAYS THROUGH THE INSPIRED WRITER OF HEBREWS: THOUGH HE WERE A SON YET LEARNED HE OBEDIENCE THROUGH THE THINGS WHICH HE SUFFERED AND BEING MADE PERFECT HE BECAME THE AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM. Hebrews 5:8,9. We accept His gift of salvation and we LEARN obedience. Even HE learned obedience THROUGH THE THINGS THAT HE SUFFERED. And I certainly agree that He, when perfected, became the Author of my salvation, which I obeyed when I repented and believed.

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

DBVZ:

Lee seems to be misrepresenting what we are saying now. Obedience is not required for salvation, but is required of those who HAVE BEEN SAVED!

No, DBVZ I cannot be misrepresenting what you are saying for you have just said it again in the above quote of your own words. You say that obedience is not required for salvation. But The inspired write of Hebrews said that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him Hebrews 5:8.9. He is herefore not the author of eternal salvation unti we obey his commands to believe (John 3:16) repent(Acts 3:19; Luke 13:3,5) Confess ( Romans 10:9,10) and be baptized (Mark 16:16; Acts 2;38; 1 Peter 3:21; Gal 3:26,27; Rom. 6:3-5; Col2:11-13; Acts 22:16;).

You Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

This is what I say:

I quote the Word of God again: JESUS SAYS THROUGH THE INSPIRED WRITER OF HEBREWS: THOUGH HE WERE A SON YET LEARNED HE OBEDIENCE THROUGH THE THINGS WHICH HE SUFFERED AND BEING MADE PERFECT HE BECAME THE AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO ALL THEM THAT OBEY HIM. Hebrews 5:8,9. We accept His gift of salvation and we LEARN obedience. Even HE learned obedience THROUGH THE THINGS THAT HE SUFFERED. And I certainly agree that He, when perfected, became the Author of my salvation, which I obeyed when I repented and believed.

-- Connie (hive@gte.net), April 01, 2000.

-- Anonymous, April 01, 2000

This is the way Lee twists my words:

CONNIE SAYS: CHRIST IS THE AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO THOSE WHO DISOBEYS HIM.

He does this multiple times, leaving people with the false inpression that I have twisted the Scripture. It is known as 'the BIG LIE' technique of propaganda ~ where you accuse the other person of that which you are guilty.

I am not the only one he does this to.

God is the righteous judge who will judge him.

-- Anonymous, April 02, 2000

But not soon enough for me, probably.

-- Anonymous, April 02, 2000

Connie:

In response to Duanes question, Is obedience essential to salvation? you said:

Not in my opinion, Duane, Dear!

Now this makes it very clear that you have said, obedience is not essential to salvation for when Duane asked you, Is obedience essential to salvation? your answer to Him was, NOT IM MY OPINION DEAR.

Therefore when I said the following:

CONNIE SAYS: CHRIST IS THE AUTHOR OF ETERNAL SALVATION TO THOSE WHO DISOBEYS HIM.

I definitely did not misrepresent you. If obedience is not essential to salvation, according to your own statement made in answer to Duanes question as stated above, then Christ must be the author of eternal salvation to those who disobeys Him. For if obedience is not essential to salvation then those who are disobedient can be saved even though they do not obey Him.

Now I admit that you have contradicted yourself when you say that Christ saved you when you obeyed Him by repenting and believing which are two things that are in fact essential to obedience and therefore essential to salvation. But you said that obedience is NOT essential to salvation. If one is not obedient he is disobedient. There is no middle ground Connie. And if, you believe that obedience is not essential to salvation then it logically follows that you believe that we can be saved in disobedience.

So Connie the statement that I have made is not a BIG LIE of propaganda as you falsely claim but rather it is an accurate representation of your words wherein you said that you did not believe that obedience is essential to salvation. Now that is in complete contrast to Christ who is the author of eternal salvation to all them that OBEY him".(Heb. 5:8,9).

Thus the statement is still very accurate that:

CONNIE SAYS: Christ is the author of eternal salvation to all them that disobeys him.

CHRIST SAYS: He is the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him. (Hebrews 5:8,9).

You do not like the logical, inescapable, ultimate conclusion of your false teaching that obedience is not essential to salvation but such is its result and if you do not like it then repent of it and believe the truth which is that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey Him. (Hebrews 5:8,9) instead of lying and pretending that you have been misrepresented. Connie everyone can clearly see that you have told us that obedience is not essential to salvation. But the scriptures teach that it is essential to salvation. (Heb. 5:8,9). I have simply pointed to the fact that your false teaching concerning obedience contradicts the doctrine of Christ. That is not misrepresenting you, Connie; it is exposing your false teaching to the Light of Gods Holy Word.

Your Christian Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, April 02, 2000

From an earlier post:

. 11: In Him also you were circumcised WITH A CIRCUMCISION NOT MADE WITH HANDS, BUT IN A [SPIRITUAL] CIRCUMCISION [PERFORMED BY] CHRIST] BY STRIPPING OFF THE BODY OF THE FLESH [THE WHOLE CORRUPT, CARNAL NATURE with its passions and lusts.

Then Lee said:

-- Anonymous, April 02, 2000

From an earlier post:

. 11: In Him also you were circumcised WITH A CIRCUMCISION NOT MADE WITH HANDS, BUT IN A [SPIRITUAL] CIRCUMCISION [PERFORMED BY] CHRIST] BY STRIPPING OFF THE BODY OF THE FLESH [THE WHOLE CORRUPT, CARNAL NATURE with its passions and lusts.

Then Lee said: (Hope this doesn't post twice)

-- Anonymous, April 02, 2000

Sorry it did.

Lee's post from above, after my post from above:

You said the following about Colossians 2:

{Connie's comment: We just saw, from verse 11, that it WAS NOT a physical circumcision (made with hands), (it says so, right within the verse!) but a SPIRITUAL circumcision, which is referred to.

Now Connie, no one said that this circumcision was a physical circumcision as you seem to be so excited about as if some one was claiming such a thing. It is called the circumcision of Christ. It is NOT BAPTISM that is called the circumcision of Christ it is the actual fact that Christ removes our sins from our souls that is called the circumcision of Christ. Now this removal of our sins is NOT A FIGURATIVE REMOVAL! It is an actual spiritual fact that Christ removes our sins from our souls and this is what Paul refers to as the circumcision of Christ. Now this action of removing our sins is a real fact that actually occurs WHEN WE ARE BAPTIZED. Now read the verse honestly, Connie, and stop trying so hard to avoid the actual facts that are written in the word of God. The verse says,  In whom ye also are circumcised with the circumcision MADE WITHOUT HANDS in the PUTTING OFF OF THE BODY OF THE SINS OF THE FLESH BY THE CIRCUMCISION OF CHRIST. (Col. 2:11). Now Connie, it does not take a genius to see that the removal of our sins by Christ our Lord is called the CIRCUMCISION OF CHRIST. Anyone therefore who has not had their sins removed by Christ in the CIRCUMCISION OF CHRIST is still in their sins and are therefore lost. Now this circumcision of Christ actually takes place WHEN we are baptized. Now read verse 12,  Having been immersed with him in immersion wherein ye also are raised with him by faith in the operation of God who hath raised him from the dead. Now Connie this verse states that the Colossians had their sins removed from their souls by the circumcision of Christ having been immersed with Him in immersion and that they had also risen with Him by their faith that was demonstrated when they believed his words and obeyed them having been immersed with him. Therefore this verse makes it clear that the CIRCUMCISION OF CHRIST removes our sins, when we are baptized with him and raised by faith in this operation of God-the operation of God being the removal of our sins.

Now since you are so fond of the amplified version which I despise, I will quote your own favorite version to show that even that absurd version says the same thing. Notice its rendering, 12: [Thus you were circumcised when] you were buried with Him in your baptism, in which you were also raised with Him [to a new life] through [your] faith in the working of God [as displayed] when He raised Him up from the dead. Now your favorite version says YOU WERE CIRCUMCISED WHEN YOU WERE BURIED WITH HIM IN YOUR BAPTISM Now Connie, it is clear, even using your favorite version, that we have our sins removed by the circumcision of Christ and that he performs that circumcision on us when we by faith in that operation of God obey him by being baptized. Those who have not been baptized according to this verse cannot have had their sins removed by the circumcision of Christ because this circumcision of Christ takes place WHEN WE ARE BURIED WITH HIM IN BAPTISM But Connie, you falsely claim that you had your sins removed before you were baptized but this verse says it happens by the circumcision of Christ WHEN were are baptized.

This makes Acts 2:38 even more understandable for there Peter said,  Repent AND be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ FOR THE REMISSION OF YOUR SINS. Acts 2:38 and this passage from Colossians tells us that our sins are removed by the circumcision of Christ WHEN we are buried with him in baptism. So no one, Connie, will receive the remission of their sins until they undergo the removal of their sins by the circumcision of Christ which happens when they are baptized. (Col. 2:12; Acts 2:38).

Then you tell us:

Then, in 12, this FIGURATIVE circumcision is compared with our BAPTISM where we are raised to new life, ALSO FIGURATIVE (the 'new life', not the baptism ~ the baptism was real, but the purpose was figurative. And HOW does it say we are raised to new life? THROUGH OUR FAITH IN THE WORKING OF GOD, AS DISPLAYED WHEN HE RAISED HIM UP FROM THE DEAD. Can you Bible scholars please look at this honestly and tell me that this says our BAPTISM saves us? IT DOESN'T SAY THAT!

This is pure ignorance Connie! Paul does use the idea of Jewish Circumcision as an illustration or figure of the removal of our sins by Christ our Lord. But he does not COMPARE circumcision with our baptism as you claim. He just is not making any comparison between baptism and circumcision at all! You cannot prove any such nonsense! Connie, no one who can read will honestly be able to see any comparison being made in this verse between circumcision and baptism. It just is not there! But it is not new for you to see things that are not actually written in the word of God because you have decided that your way is better than Gods way and if Gods word does not say it you will just pretend that it does. Connie, why do not you just show us the comparison in this verse that you claim is being made between baptism and circumcision. There is not one being made but you pretend that there is so that you can act as if you have just reason for neglecting the truth that Paul is using Jewish Circumcision as a figure of the removal of our sins by Christ and he even calls it the circumcision of Christ and tell us that Christ removes our sins from our souls when we by faith in that operation are buried with him in baptism. Thus we can be raised with him. Now Connie, notice how we are buried with Christ" according to these verses. We are buried with him by baptism. Then is says we are raised with Him. We cannot be raised with him until we are buried with him. If we are buried with him by baptism it only stands to reason that we are raised with him as we come out of the waters of baptism. Then you tell us:

It says our FAITH saves us. This is one of your very favorite verses to prove that baptism is a necessity for salvation, and it says no such thing.

-- Anonymous, April 02, 2000

Lee, et al: (So that it can be read in context):

Connie: You go girl!

Let me ask you a question:

Is obedience to God a requirement for salvation?

-- Duane Schwingel (duane@mytalk.com), March 26, 2000.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Not in my opinion, Duane, Dear! We all sin all the time and 'If we confess our sin, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sin, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.' Should we obey if we want to experience all of what He has in store for us? Yes, Yes, Yes!!!!!

-- Connie (hive@gte.net), March 27, 2000.

---------------------------------------------------------------------- ----------

Duane: I agree with Connie on this, and will give an answer. The same answer I gave before, and the same answer that is in the Bible.

Obedience is required of all God's people, in gratitude and in service as the RESULT of the salvation freely given by God by grace and through faith.

The two paragraphs just above are from dbvz.

Given in context, one can see our position with more clarity, without Lee's editing and twisting.

-- Anonymous, April 02, 2000

Connie and others:

I am back. The surgery did not go well, and they had to repair some problems in a second operation the next day. I am on the mend now, thank God. I missed quite a bit of the discussion, but I see Connie has kept up the debate.

Back a little, E. Lee Saffold wrote, "DBVZ: Lee seems to be misrepresenting what we are saying now. Obedience is not required for salvation, but is required of those who HAVE BEEN SAVED!

No, DBVZ I cannot be misrepresenting what you are saying for you have just said it again in the above quote of your own words. You say that obedience is not required for salvation. But The inspired write of Hebrews said that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him Hebrews 5:8.9. He is herefore not the author of eternal salvation unti we obey his commands to believe (John 3:16) repent(Acts 3:19; Luke 13:3,5) Confess ( Romans 10:9,10) and be baptized (Mark 16:16; Acts 2;38; 1 Peter 3:21; Gal 3:26,27; Rom. 6:3-5; Col2:11-13; Acts 22:16;). You Friend,E. Lee Saffold"

Again, you miss the point, by intent or accident I will not judge. As Connie and I have both stated, we do not dispute that obedience is requred by God. The only issue we dispute is whether obedience is required as a condition BEFORE salvation, or is required as a consequence AFTER salvation, in gratitude and service. To confuse the issue by an implication that we believe salvation is for the disobedient, is to misrepresent our position to some extent. We are ALL disobedient, yet salvation is for us. In fact, it is important for us to remember that our salvation is necessary because of our continuing disobedience, and our sins are the reason the Son of God had to die on the cross. The issue is whether we are saved while we are yet in our sins, as the Bible states; or whether we need to qualify for salvation by our obedience as you seem to believe.

You quote several verses, and I have noted before that the Bible is written from different perspectives, and to different audiences, and to address different issues; in different places. You seem to make no distinctions when it comes to baptism; regarding who are being addressed, what they are being addressed about, and how the specific verse fits into an understanding of the whole Word of God.

Those verses that speak of the requirements for obedience are addressed to Christians, to instruct them on how to live a Christian life. Nearly all of James, for example, is about how a Christian must demonstrate the faith that has saved us by our works of obedience. The obedience does not save us, but the faith that does save us MUST result on obedience. It is an unavoidable result if the faith is real. If you read James without also reading Romans, Galatians, etc. you could get the wrong idea; just as your reading of selcted verses has convinced you that baptism is a required condition of salvation, rather than a required consequence of salvation.

Regarding the soverignty of God, I will add just a little from science. We believe God created the heavens and the earth, including all the matter and energy that exists throughout the universe. Science has concluded by their own methode, that matter, energy, motion and time are related to each other. In other words, when the Bible tells us God created "the first day", it was literally the creation of time itself; which is a creation of God no less than the fish and the birds. When God identifies Himself as "I AM", He is making it clear that in our past, present and future; He is always in His present. While we experience our lives as a movie watcher, one frame at a time; God knows our lives as a movie editor, who has all the frames of our lives before Him before the movie is ever run - and it will turn out exactly the way the Editor wants it to end, and each frame along the way is under his control. Not a hair falls, remember. I am fully convincd now, that your position is inconsistent with reliance on the one all sufficient sacrifice of Christ for salvation, which is the heart of the gospel. As such, it seems to be, "another gospel" of works; and that was the error that resulted in the abuses in the Roman Catholic Church, that were addressed during the Reformation. The form of your requirements for salvation are somewhat different, but the result is the same. You make salvation depend on our human actions, rather than resting on our Savior and Lord, and the power of the Holy Spirit who brings us to a saving faith while we are yet sinners. That faith is not of ourselves, "lest anyone should boast." I see what could be called boasting among you, about your superior quality of obedience and more perfect understanding.

-- Anonymous, April 02, 2000

Hello, dbvz,

Hope you get to feeling like your best self soon.

I just had a wonderful nap, so I'm not feeling too combative.

So I'll have to get my weapons ready, AND my asbestos hat, for the flaming. It'll take a little time.

By the way, I'm beginning to think the Lord is NOT willing that I complete my study, fot it has been delayed again. I wonder what paranoid interpretation will be given to that.

The person to whom I gave my only copy of the RM thread ~ the long one ~ forgot to bring it to church. I've been wanting to show it to Mike and Mary Murphy, who helped found three CoC-Christian, Restoration Movement churches ~ one in Seymour, Connecticut, one in Katy, Texas, and I can never remember the third; they were not at church last Sunday, so I gave it to Charlie Mack.

Charlie is the one working to start a Christian Education department in a university in Kosovo. They are not paying him, is my understanding ~ our church is sponsoring him as a missionary. Today, the Murphys had forgotten to set their clocks ahead, so were runnung late and went to the service instead of the Sunday School. So at this point, only 30 or so pages have been read by one person.

I printed out 70 pages of it yesterday, (or the day before ~ I'm losing track of time ~) so that I could look at it while at my son's, babysitting. Then my printer developed a glitch, which still isn't fixed, and my notes that I laboriously labored on, are on the back pages of the copy in Charlie Mack's possession. I think, though, from my earlier period looking things up, that there are about 30 or so verses which Lee keeps repeating, (ignoring all of the ones which indicate that faith is the requirement for salvation.)

So, for now, I will be studying again in a more well-lit place, because my daughter wants to use the computer.

But I'm not hiding!

In My Savior,

-- Anonymous, April 02, 2000

I have been asked repeatedly to present a proof test for "faith alone", and the Bible does not provide that in the form you requested. The only time I am aware of that the words "faith alone" appear together is in James, in contrast to the need for works in living the Christian life, and not about salvation at all. Some passages to consider are these:

Rom. 1:5 .. to the obedience that comes from faith. Obedience is the result, not the cause.

Rom 1:17 For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: the righteous will live by faith. We get our righteousness (salvation) from God and by faith.. Faith from first to last sounds like faith alone to me.

Gal. 3:23-24 Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. You have a new law, and propose to be justified by immersion baptism.

Eph 2:8-10 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith - and this not of yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no one can boast For we are Gods workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do. Faith not works, and predestination, all in one passage.

2 Tim. 3:15 and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. Not that scripture will teach you to be wise for salvation through baptism, but rather salvation through faith.

In talking about salvation, the words "through faith" appear alone in the Bible most of the time. When not alone, they are often with "by grace". When baptism is mentioned, it is always of those who have come to faith and are therefore already righteous (saved) see Rom. 1:17.

It is frustratingly clear to me that you will need to see baptism as a work of obedience, before you can begin to put it in its propoer place as you interpret the whole Word of God. Obedience can't save. Works can't save. Only God can save, while we are yet sinners, and disobedient, yet he brings those he has chosen to a saving faith. As a result, we are able to grow more and more into obedience and ought to be baptized: but we continue to sin and continue to need forgiveness every day of our lives.

I will try again to leave this alone. It is hard to leave you all with "another gospel" that adds to the grace of God, but it is very clear most of you believe you already have the truth and will not listen anyway. Perhaps a seed has been planted, and another will water. May God bring you to a saving faith.

-- Anonymous, April 02, 2000

Truer words were never spoken. I will miss you, and hope you come back occasionally.

-- Anonymous, April 02, 2000

Lee copied and pasted what I said:

Notice even the scripture that she quotes from 1 John 1:9 IF WE CONFESS OR SINS HE IS FAITHFUL AND JUST TO FORGIVE OUR SINS AND CLEANSE US FROM ALL UN RIGHTEOUSNESS. So what if we chose to disobey God by refusing to confess our sins? Connie says that does not matter because obedience is not essential to salvation. But John said IF we confess or sins. That clearly means that forgiveness of our sins is conditioned upon our obeying the Lords command to confess our sins. Besides, the very scripture that she quotes which conditions our salvation upon confessing our sins is completely contradictory to what Connie has been telling us in this forum when she taught that we are saved by grace through faith ALONE. If we are saved through faith ALONE, as Connie would have us believe, then we would be saved without confessing our sins but this shows that even Connie does not really believe that we are saved by Faith alone as she wants to convince the rest of us to believe.

Then she asks and answers the following question:

' Should we obey if we want to experience all of what He has in store for us? Yes, Yes, Yes!!!!!

Forgiveness: To forgive is to grant pardon without harboring resentment. GRANT PARDON

Salvation: The deliverance of man or his soul from the penalty of sin; redemption. REDEEM (BUY BACK) I John 1:9: [AMPLIFIED]

9: If we [freely] admit that we have sinned and confess our sins, He is faithful and just [true to His own nature and promises] and will forgive our sins (dismisss our lawlessness) and continuously cleanse us from all unrighteousness -- everything not in conformity to His will in purpose, thought and action.

This one is not only not about baptism, but it is not about salvation, or even obedience.

It is about confession, forgiveness, and cleansing.

I can see part of what our problem is. It is not just about our individual interpretations; it is about definitions and context.

I don't know if we are going to get over the barriers.

-- Anonymous, April 02, 2000

DBVZ:

Finally, after weeks of continual prodding and pleading DBVZ makes a pathetic, feeble, attempt to offer a Scripture that says we are saved by faith alone with these words:

I have been asked repeatedly to present a proof test for "faith alone", and the Bible does not provide that in the form you requested. The only time I am aware of that the words "faith alone" appear together is in James, in contrast to the need for works in living the Christian life, and not about salvation at all. Some passages to consider are these:

Yes, DBVZ, you have been asked repeatedly for a Scripture that teaches we are saved by faith Alone. You say the Bible does not provide that in the form you requested. Now, DBVZ, the Bible does not provide that in ANY form much less the manner in which you and Connie and others have stated it. You act as if I was the originator of the form in which I requested it but I was not. I merely asked you to show from the scriptures that we are saved by grace through faith ALONE which is the form it which Connie had STATED it and the form to which you agreed. Even in this post you state your doctrine in the form of faith ALONE. It is the form it which you stated it that I ask you to find in the scriptures not the form in which I requested it. But the Bible does not teach salvation by faith ALONE in any form! You say that James is not talking about salvation at all. Well lets just read the verse in James again,  Ye see then how that by works a man is JUSTIFIED and not by FAITH ONLY. This word justified is related to our salvation. You cannot be saved without JUSTIFICATION. James is clearly showing Christians that they, like Abraham, were not justified before God by faith only. He used this argument about their justification to show that they did not begin their Christian life by faith alone and therefore they cannot sustain it by faith alone. Now James 2:26 states a clear principle that is true in every case whether you are talking about becoming a Christian or living faithful as one. The principle is, faith, if it hath not works is DEAD being alone. So the truth is that James proves the principle that faith only cannot do ANYTHING because it is dead being alone therefore based upon that scriptural principle FAITH ALONE cannot save anyone because it is DEAD, lifeless, helpless, empty, and useless. Even you talk of saving faith as if there is a type of faith that does not save! Well, James describes the faith that cannot do anything because it is dead because it is ALONE. Faith only according to James is not saving faith or an effective faith for any purpose because it is DEAD being alone. (James 2:26).

Now lets examine these so-called verses that you claim, prove that we are saved by faith ALONE. The first one is:

Rom. 1:5.. to the obedience that comes from faith. Obedience is the result, not the cause.

Now notice that there is a significant word that is missing from this passage. It is the word ALONE or ONLY. This passage does not even imply that we are saved by faith much less that we are saved by faith ALONE as you claim. SO this verse does not teach we are saved by grace through faith alone. So we are still looking for one single verse that teaches your false doctrine of salvation by faith ONLY. Because this one says nothing about it. Now you say that this verse shows that obedience is the result of faith not the cause of it. Now that is the very truth indeed. Obedience is in fact the result of faith. No one ever obeyed God without faith and no one ever disobeyed God by faith. Faith that does not lead us to obey God will not save us.

Now that is definitely the teaching of this passage and it harmonizes quite well with what James says, Show me thy faith without thy works and I will show thee my faith BY MY WORKS. I have shown over and over that when James says ye see then how that by works (acts of obedience produced by faith and proceeding from it) a man is justified and not by faith ONLY. (James 2:24). The Hebrew writer said,  Though he were a son yet learned he obedience by the things which he suffered and being made perfect he became the author of eternal salvation to all them that obey him (Heb. 5:8,9). Since obedience is necessary to salvation according to this verse and obedience proceeds from faith it follows that those who are disobedient are also faithless and thus cannot be saved by faith. Even this very verse that you quote shows the opposite of your faith only doctrine for if obedience comes from faith then faith cannot exist without obedience unless it is dead being alone and unaccompanied by obedience. So it is clear< DBVZ that this verse is of no help to your false doctrine of faith only and notice that it says nothing that would cause one to believe he can be saved by faith only.

Then you quote this verse from Romans:

Rom 1:17 For in the gospel a righteousness from God is revealed, a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: the righteous will live by faith. We get our righteousness (salvation) from God and by faith. Faith from first to last sounds like faith alone to me.

Now you say that faith from first to last sounds like faith alone to me. Ha! Dbvz, every time you see the word faith it sounds like faith alone to you. But this passages does not say we are saved by faith alone as you claim. Yes, DBVZ, our salvation does come to us from God by faith. But the verse that you quoted before makes it clear that obedience proceeds from faith and if there is not obedience there is no faith. We believe in Christ and by faith we repent of our sins and by faith we confess Christ and by faith we are baptized for the remission of sins. This is how we are saved by faith from first to last. In every part of our redemption we are prompted by faith to OBEY. If we do not obey God who commands all men everywhere to repent (Acts 17:30) we will not be saved at all (Luke 13:3,5). If our faith does not prompt us to Confess Christ we cannot be saved for the scriptures say for with the heart man believeth unto righteousness but with the mouth confession is made unto SALVATION. So even if a man believes until he is willing to Confess Christ he cannot be saved (Romans 10:9,10). By faith we believe what Christ said in Mark 16:16, he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: and by faith we obey him in baptism where he removes our sins by the circumcision of Christ Colossians 2:11- 13. And by faith we obey him the rest of our lives and repent by faith when we fail to obey and ask for His forgiveness and by faith we continue to obey and follow Christ by walking in the light. Yes DBVZ, we are saved by faith from the beginning to the very end. The principle of faith is that faith must be living faith that moves us to obey God because we believe His word and trust that he knows what is best. But you cannot separate obedience and faith because one cannot exist without the other. If one has no faith he cannot obey God and if one has not been obedient his faith is dead being alone. Faith by itself is dead faith that prompts us to act is genuine, living, active and saving faith. But even though we are saved by faith that leads us to obey God in all things we are not saved by faith alone. On one occasion you even inadvertently admitted this yourself. You said:

Saffold has the support of the majority on this forum, and I know I will be soundly attacked for what I have written. The majority of Christians rest on Christ alone, grace alone, faith alone.

Now with these words you claim that three things save us exclusively or ALONE. You really like this word ALONE, dont you? If Christ ALONE saves us then we are not saved by grace ALONE. If we are saved by grace ALONE then FAITH ALONE does not save us. If we are saved by faith ALONE we are not saved by Christ ALONE or grace ALONE. You cannot have it all three ways DBVZ. Either we are saved by grace ALONE or we are saved by Christ ALONE or we are saved by faith ALONE but we cannot be saved by all three ALONE. If all three save us then none of them are ALONE. So make up your mind which one of these three is the ONLY thing that saves us! Now the truth is that we are saved by Christ (Acts 4:12) AND we are saved by grace (Eph. 2:8,9) AND we are saved by FAITH (Eph. 2:8,9). All three working together saves us. Christ saves us by grace through faith (Eph. 2:8,9). We are saved by the blood of Christ (1 Peter 1:18,19) we are saved by the foolishness of preaching (1 Cor. 1:18) we are saved by the gospel of Christ (1 Cor. 15:1-4). We are saved by baptism (Mark 16:16; 1 Peter 3:21). The list of things that are working together to save us from our sins is long and Christ, grace, and faith are working together in all of then to save us from our sins. God saves us (John 3:16) the Holy Spirit saves us. No one can prove from the Bible that ANY ONE THING saves us to the exclusion of all else. It is your insertion of the word ONLY in every place where you think something saves us that is not only illogical in the extreme but is also incompatible with the teaching of Gods eternal word.

Then you fail again by quoting this verse:

Gal. 3:23-24 Before this faith came, we were held prisoners by the law, locked up until faith should be revealed. So the law was put in charge to lead us to Christ that we might be justified by faith. You have a new law, and propose to be justified by immersion baptism.

Yes, DBVZ, this passage teaches that we are justified by faith but it does not teach that we are justified by faith ONLY as you would like for it to teach. Then you say that I have a new law and propose to be justified by immersion baptism. Now, DBVZ, I do not have any law, new or old. I only have the word of God. And I have never proposed that we are justified by immersion. I have shown from the scriptures that baptism is one of several things that do lead to the remission of our sins. (Acts 2:38) and that if we believe and are baptized we will be saved. (Mark 16:16). But that is not my law it is the teaching of Christ and the teaching of Christ through the Holy Spirit in the apostles. But your doctrine that we are justified by faith ALONE is not found in this verse or any other verse in the scriptures. That doctrine is the new law that you and Calvin have made up. But Gods word says no such thing in any place. Also I find it absurd that you speak of immersion baptism the word Baptize comes from the Greek term baptizo that always meant, in new testament times to dip, plunge or immerse. There is no such thing in the New Testament as different modes of immersion. Baptism is immersion and nothing else according to the scriptures.

Then you fail again with this verse:

Eph 2:8-10 For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith - and this not of yourselves, it is the gift of God - not by works, so that no one can boast For we are Gods workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do. Faith not works, and predestination, all in one passage.

Yes, DBVZ, we are saved by grace (that is one thing) through faith (that makes two things). But this passage just does not say nor does it in any way teach what you so desperately would like for it to be teaching. It does not say nor does it teach that FAITH ALONE saves us. The word ALONE is just not in this passage. The idea of ALONE cannot be found in this passage. We are saved by grace through faith but we are not saved by grace through faith ALONE. This passage does not help you in the least to support your false doctrine of salvation by faith alone. Now, DBVZ, I have said it over and over again that we are not saved by ANY WORKS OF RIGHTEOUSNESS that we have done. For the scriptures do teach that we are not saved by works of righteousness, which we have done. Our salvation does not come from ourselves it is the gift of God. We cannot EARN our salvation as we EARN a salary. But this doesnt mean that we cannot do anything to save ourselves for Peter told those on the day of Pentecost to save yourselves from this untoward generation. (Acts 2:40) He did not mean that their salvation came from them selves. Rather he meant that God was offering them salvation and he urged them to save themselves by accepting that salvation which he had offered to them when he said repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38). Then we are told that they that gladly received his word we baptized and there were added unto them on that day three thousand souls. (Acts 2:41). So you see it was their faith that prompted then to obey the commands of Christ to repent and be immersed for the remission of their sins and thereby accept the free gift of God of the salvation that was arranged by the death of Christ for our sins. So you see we have in this one place several things working together to save these people on the day of Pentecost. We have Gods Grace being offered by the inspiration of the Holy Spirit who told Peter and the rest of the apostles what to say and the faith of these people which prompted them to heed Peters inspired advice to save themselves by accepting Gods grace in their repenting of their sins and being baptized for the remission of those sins. We have Grace, faith, Cod, Christ, the Holy Spirit, the gospel, and obedience and repentance and baptism all working together to save them. There is no such thing as our being saved by ONE THING ALONE. Even you do not believe such a thing for you have said, we are saved by Christ alone. We are saved by grace alone and we are saved by faith alone. All of which means that we are not saved by ANY OF THOSE three ALONE but rather by all three working together along with the blood of Christ and the work of the Holy Spirit and the love of God! SO this false idea that we are saved by faith only is ridiculous even to you.

Then you make another failed attempt with this verse:

2 Tim. 3:15 and how from infancy you have known the holy Scriptures, which are able to make you wise for salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. Not that scripture will teach you to be wise for salvation through baptism, but rather salvation through faith. Now, DBVZ, the scriptures do make us wise unto salvation through faith in Christ Jesus. But it does not make us unwise unto salvation by FAITH ONLY. This scripture says nothing to indicate that salvation is by faith alone. It is salvation through faith but not through faith alone. Now, this verse says the scriptures make us wise unto salvation. Though he is referring directly to the Old Testament scriptures that Timothy had know from his youth verses 16,17 make it clear that all scripture is inspired of God and those scriptures tell us that faith if it hath not works is DEAD being alone (James 2:26) and ye see then how that by works (Acts produced by faith and proceeding from it) a man is justified and not by faith only James 2:24. It is these scriptures that tell us He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: He that believeth not shall be condemned. Mark 16:16. It is these scriptures that tell us to repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of your sins and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. Acts 2:38. So you do not find any place in the scriptures that teach we are saved by faith only.

Then you reason thus: In talking about salvation, the words "through faith" appear alone in the Bible most of the time. When not alone, they are often with "by grace". When baptism is mentioned, it is always of those who have come to faith and are therefore already righteous (saved) see Rom. 1:17.

Now those words are absolutely false. The words through faith do not appear alone in the Bible most of the time but even if they appeared alone every single time it would not prove your doctrine of salvation by faith alone because the word alone is not found in connection with faith in any place whatsoever except to tell us that we are NOT justified by faith only and that faith if it hath not works is DEAD being alone. (James 2:24,26). Then you say that when these words through faith are not alone, they are often with by grace. Well, DBVZ, there goes your argument that we are saved by faith alone right down the tubes. For if the words by grace are combined in any place in the scriptures with the words through faith then salvation is not by faith ALONE in any passage! Because if salvation is by grace through faith then both grace and faith are working TOGETHER to save us and therefore neither of them saves us ALONE.

Then you falsely claim:

When baptism is mentioned, it is always of those who have come to faith and are therefore already righteous (saved) see Rom. 1:17.

Now lets see, what you are saying here is something that you cannot prove. Romans 1:17 does say that the righteous shall live by faith but it does not say that the moment that they come to faith they are instantly righteous. It is true that our faith will lead us to repent of our sins so that they can be blotted out (Acts3: 19) and remitted. Our faith will lead us confess unto salvation Romans 10:9,10 and it will also lead us to be baptized in order to the remission of our sins and to be saved (Acts2: 38; 1 Peter 3:21; Mark 16:16). After that our faith has made us righteous. For Romans 1:17 says nothing about our being made righteous instantly the very moment that we come to faith or that we are instantly made alive by faith. It says nothing about when and how the just live by faith it only states the fact that the just do live by faith. It is your theory that the moment that they come to believe they are made to live by faith. The scriptures show that faith is the motive force that causes us to obey Christ who is the author of eternal salvation to those who obey Him. (Heb.5: 8,9).

It is frustratingly clear to me that you will need to see baptism as a work of obedience, before you can begin to put it in its propoer place as you interpret the whole Word of God. Obedience can't save. Works can't save. Only God can save, while we are yet sinners, and disobedient, yet he brings those he has chosen to a saving faith. As a result, we are able to grow more and more into obedience and ought to be baptized: but we continue to sin and continue to need forgiveness every day of our lives.

You say that I must see baptism as a work of obedience before I can begin to put it in its proper place as you interpret the whole word of God. Now, DBVZ, I do not have to do any such thing. Baptism is already in its proper place right where God put it in His word. Now it is not in a place that is convenient to a Calvinist but it is right where he wants it to be. And baptism is not a work of obedience in the sense in which you wish to make it appear. In fact, one who is immersed is completely passive. Immersion is far less a work that is faith, repentance or Confession of Christ all of which are essential to salvation. In fact baptism is not a work of righteousness, which we have done as described by Paul in Eph. 2:8,9. The reason this frustrates you is because it upsets your false theories about baptism and you just cannot deal with the truth that baptism is not a work of righteousness whereby one could boast that he saved himself by his meritorious deeds.

Then you say:

Obedience can't save. Works can't save. Only God can save, while we are yet sinners, and disobedient, yet he brings those he has chosen to a saving faith.

Now here you go again with that word only! Now you say that only God can save but you are trying to prove that only faith saves now it is either one or the other my friend. It cannot be ONLY both faith and God. If you use the word ONLY then you are using a term that is designed to be exclusive. It is a word that excludes all else. If one says ONLY God can save. Then that excludes being saved by faith, grace, the dead of Christ, the blood of Christ, repentance of our sins, confession with our mouth all of which are said to have something to do with salvation. Of Course it is true that God saves us through Christ, the Holy Spirit, the word of God, the blood of Christ, the grace of God, and the faith of man. But God is not the ONLY one that saves. He is not ALONE in saving us.

Then you say obedience CANNOT save but the writer of Hebrews says that Christ is the author of eternal salvation to all them that OBEY HIM. Heb. 5:8,9) Now that verse is diametrically opposed to your lie that obedience cannot save. Now it is true that obedience ALONE cannot save any more than faith alone can save us or baptism alone or repentance alone or confession alone or grace alone. We are not saved by ANY ONE THING ALONE no matter how much you Calvinist like to find the ONE thing that saves us to the exclusion of ALL OTHERS.

Then of course no true Calvinist could fail to tell us that God brings those he has chosen to saving faith. Now that is shear nonsense and just as contrary to the word of God as is your false doctrine of faith only that you have still failed miserably to find even one scripture that teaches it. But this subject of God bringing those he has chosen to a saving faith is a different subject, which will require much discussion in itself. But the Scriptures do not teach any such thing! And just because you say it is true does not make it true.

So, DBVZ, you have now completely failed to show us one single passage that teaches that we are saved by grace through faith ALONE. But I must give you credit for trying regardless of how feeble the attempt was and how terribly long it took for you top even try! This is something that no one else in this forum that claims to believe in faith only has even attempted to do. But it may, however, be due to the fact that they are wise enough to know in advance that all such efforts will be futile because that doctrine is not found in one single passage of Holy Writ.

Then you say:

Perhaps a seed has been planted, and another will water. May God bring you to a saving faith.

Well, DBVZ, I am the only one in this discussion between myself and those of you who believe in salvation by faith only that is even interested in water. In fact this very night two were baptized in water for the remission of their sins and received the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Acts 2:38). So I will be happy to do the watering around here! For you certainly have no water in your plan of salvation but God has water in His plan ( Acts 2:38; Mark 16:16; Acts 8:35-40; Acts 22:16; 1 Peter 3:21).

But you say may God bring you to saving faith he has already done that for "faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the word of God" Romans 10:17. Therefore, we have the word of God and if we hear it we will have have enough faith to obey Him (Matt. 7:21-23; Luke 6:46; Heb. 5:8,9). Saving faith is not what you are telling us about because saving faith is not alone. The only place that we find faith alone in the scriptures it is a DEAD faith ( James 2:26) instead of a saving faith. You preach a dead faith and hope that God will bring us to a saving faith. Now that is ridiculous in the highest degree.

But according to your Calvinist views God has to bring His chosen ones to faith. Why would you care about this matter? Why would you even ask God to bring me to have saving faith? If he has already determined who will be saved and who will be lost and that number is set and cannot be increased or diminished your asking God to bring me to saving faith is ridiculous.

Your Christian Friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, April 03, 2000

Connie:

You Said:

I think, though, from my earlier period looking things up, that there are about 30 or so verses which Lee keeps repeating, (ignoring all of the ones which indicate that faith is the requirement for salvation.)

The verses that I keep repeating are the ones that you have never answered or discussed. They are the ones that you keep ignoring and all who read this forum can see it for themselves. You falsely claim that I am ignoring ALL of the ones that indicate that faith is THE requirement for salvation. I am not ignoring any such passage because you have NEVER given one single passage that says faith is THE only requirement for salvation. I have quoted several verses that teach that faith is one of the requirements, and a very important one, for salvation. But there is NO passage in the entire word of God that says faith is THE ONLY requirement for salvation. That is the very thing we have for the last month asked you to show us. You have still failed miserably to find even ONE such passage. All who read this forum know that DBVZ is the only one that has even attempted to show such a verse and he failed miserably also to even show one that says FAITH is the ONLY requirement for salvation. I have repeated because you continually ignore the passages that I have given that show repentance (Acts 3:19) and Confession (Romans 10:9,10) and Baptism (Acts 2:38; Mark 16:16; 1 Peter 3:21; Romans 6:3- 6,17; Col. 2:9-11) are also required for salvation along with faith. In fact it is faith that prompts us to repent, Confess and be baptized. Doing any of these things without faith would not save anyone but having faith ALONE without repenting of our sins, Confessing that Christ is the son of God and being baptized also will not save us because faith is dead being alone (James 2:26). We are not saved by a DEAD faith.

Therefore Connie, you still have not shown us even one passage of scripture that teaches we are saved by grace through faith ALONE. If you will show any such scripture from any place in the entire Bible we will not ignore it. In fact we will happily accept it. But you have not, and neither has anyone else given even one passage that says we are saved by grace through faith ALONE. So we cannot possibly be ignoring something that has never been presented in this forum. No one has presented one verse that says faith is THE only requirement for salvation. That assertion from you is just another of your deliberate lies. We can all see that though we have asked you for a month to show such a verse you have never even pretended to have found one that teaches we are saved by grace through faith ALONE. You have never even tried to show one verse that says faith is THE only requirement for salvation. So Connie we are still waiting for you to do that which we all know by now that you cannot do. We wait for ANYONE to give one single verse that says, FAITH IS THE ONLY requirement for salvation or that we are saved by grace through faith ALONE as you falsely claimed and have never proven to be the truth.

Your Christian friend,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, April 03, 2000

I will be sorry to see you go, dbvz, [haven't been able to buy any vowels yet, hmm? ~ ;-) ;-)] and hope you will quickly recover.

Your situation is why our answers should be soft ~ not JUST to turn away wrath, but because we never know what burdens others are bearing.

I am at peace ~ God has said that he will keep us in perfect peace, if our minds are stayed on Him ~ but I have come to the conclusion that a little sarcasm and satire is not really sinful. I could be wrong, but until that is proven to me, I will make use of it. Sometimes it makes the most succinct argument.

To Lee and anyone else still interested:

Boy, this is going to go slowly! I can see why you keep reiterating your parrot-like schtick. Almost all of the verses which state that it is by FAITH ONLY are stated in a positive and sometimes complex way. Now, none say that in so many words. (Notice that I did not put quotation marks around that expression, because if I did, it would be quoting Lee, not the Scriptures.

But dbvz, (and others) don't give up yet! There is ample proof that our position is the Scriptural one; it just takes a lot of effort to dig it out. Which time I am willing to invest. It will probably be in 1-3 passage increments, because of the necessary verbiage to be absolutely clear on my interpretation.

To copy and paste a still unresolved difference: (My words);

Then, in 12, this FIGURATIVE circumcision is compared with our BAPTISM where we are raised to new life, ALSO FIGURATIVE (the 'new life', not the baptism ~ the baptism was real, but the purpose was figurative. And HOW does it say we are raised to new life?: THROUGH OUR FAITH IN THE WORKING OF GOD, AS DISPLAYED WHEN HE RAISED HIM UP FROM THE DEAD. Can you Bible scholars please look at this honestly and tell me that this says our BAPTISM saves us? IT DOESN'T SAY THAT!

It says our FAITH saves us. This is one of your very favorite verses to prove that baptism is a necessity for salvation, and it says no such thing. To go on:

COLOSSIANS 2:12-23: [AMPLIFIED]

12: [Thus you were circumcised when] you were buried with Him in your baptism, in which you were also raised with Him [to a new life] through [your] faith in the working of God [as displayed] when He raised Him up from the dead.

[WERE WE ACTUALLY CIRCUMCISED? NO!! But it says we were circumcised! ~ so it HAS TO BE figurative.]

We were raised to new life through our faith in the working of God!!!! The baptism is symbolic! It's the figure [figurative?] of being buried and raised to new life ~ commemorating HIS DEATH and RESURRECTION and our faith is what lets us participate, NOT OUR BAPTISM!

To repeat:

ALSO FIGURATIVE (the 'new life' is real, as is the baptism ~ the baptism was real, but the picture was figurative.

As stated above, while hidden in all of the words: the BAPTISM WAS IN REAL WATER but IT WAS SYMBOLIC OF WHAT ACTUALLY HAPPENED. (our being raised to new life); Jesus' death and resurrection was the REAL THING that happened and OUR BAPTISM was THE SYMBOLIC DEPICTION of what Christ did. Christ did it all; we simply had to believe it ~ not a 'work', since a 'work' is a physical action of one thing on another.

Somehow you have been able to suspend your reason and claim that baptism is not a work.

I will be working off-line for quite awhile, and hope to post by 5:00 P.M., but if I can't get on the Internet, I will not get on 'til after 11:00 P.M., because I have a class tonight.

In Him,

-- Anonymous, April 03, 2000

Hebrews 4:12: [AMPLIFIED]

For the Word that God speaks is alive and full of power -- making it active, operative, energizing, and effective; it is sharper than any two-edged sword, penetrating to the dividing line of the breath of life (soul) and [the immortal] spirit, and of joints and marrow [that is, of the deepest parts of our nature] exposing and sifting and analyzing and judging the very thoughts and purposes of the heart.

Amen.

-- Anonymous, April 03, 2000

Connie,

As I said before, they believe they already have their truth; and are not listening. Their interpretation of the Word of God is colored by their doctrine of baptism as they have constructed it; and they are so "sold" on it that they consider any challenge to be unbiblical. I wish you success in your continued efforts to make this clear to them, but I believe I will leave this forum to you and them. Perhaps we have not made the point clear yet, as evidenced by the distortions in Saffolds last response to me. I thought it was clear that Christ (or God) alone is in contrast against Christ with the help of man; and that faith alone is in contrast against faith and works of obedience; and that grace alone is in contrast against "grace" earned by the merits of those who are saved - but Saffold at least did not get it, or intentionally does not want others to get it through his distortions of the truth of the gospel. Perhaps it is some lack in their seminary training that causes this misunderstanding of the basic s of the gospel.

Until they see that God saves, by his grace, throught faith in Christ brought about by the Holy Spirit; they can not see the error they teach. Once brought to the faith that saves them, Christians are required to be baptized, be obedient, repent, confess the name of their risen Lord, live a Christian life - all the things Saffold and the rest take pride in putting ahead of salvation as a condition or qualification for grace. But grace is the free gift of God, given by his soverign good pleasure to those he has chosen. If it were conditioned on our obedience, we would all be lost; and it would no longer be grace at all, but works that would cause us to fall.

But we have been through all this several times already, and they are as unconvinced of our positions as we are unconvinced of theirs; and we both begin with an absolute belief in the infallable Word of God! One side or the other (or both) has misunderstood the meaning of the scriptures; and though we believe they are wrong, they are just as convinced we are wrong. I see no means to resolve a fundamental difference in how critical verses are interpreted, short of the direct intervention of the Holy Spirit. But that is exactly the nature of how God brings sinners to a faith that saves them: By changing the heart, so they see the truth. We can at least pray that will happen.

-- Anonymous, April 03, 2000

No one is going to believe this but God. I saw it happen, and I don't believe it!

I just typed for two hours, wasn't finished, but left the computer to turn my burners down (dinner, you know); my daughter came home and minimized my work, thinking it would be there when I got back. It isn't. It is off in cyberspace or trapped in the dark recesses of my computer.

In any case, I don't know if I will ever get it done, if these roadblocks keep being thrown in my path. I am bowed and bloody, but not broken, and if the Lord is willing, satan's darts will not defeat me. Slow me down, maybe, but not beat me.

In Him,

-- Anonymous, April 03, 2000

I have come to the conclusion that only the Holy Spirit can get through to Lee, and Lee is resisting His instruction. Lee even twists what God's word says, so I don't think I will succeed. I leave him to God. I will still, little by little, address the verses I want to, to present my case for salvation by faith.

Also, I would like to post what one man of history says in his own words, about the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit:

'Sabellius says that the Father, Son and Spirit indicates some distinction in God. Say, 'they are three', and he will bawl out that you are making three Gods. Say, 'there is a Trinity of Persons in one Divine essence, you will only express in one word what the Scriptures say, and stop his empty prattle. Should any be so superstitiously precise as not to tolerate these terms, still do their worst, they will not be able to deny that when ONE is spoken of, a unity of substance must be understood, and when THREE in one essence, the Persons in this Trinity are denoted. When this is confessed without equivocation, we dwell not on words. But I was long ago made aware, and indeed, on more than one occasion, that those who contend pertinaciously about words are tainted with some hidden poison; and, therefore, that is more expedient to provoke them purposely, than to court their favor by speaking obscurely.

But to say nothing of words, let us now attend to the thing signified. By PERSON then, I mean a subsistence in the Divine essence, -- a subsistence which, while related to the other two, is distinguished from them by incommunicable properties. By SUBSISTENCE we wish something else to be understood than ESSENCE. For if the Word were God simply, and had not some property peculiar to himself, John could not have said correctly that he had always been with God. When he adds immediately after, that the Word was God, he calls us back to the one essence. But because he could not be with God without dwelling in the Father, hence arises that subsistence, which, though connected with the essence by an indissoluable tie, being incapable of separation, yet has a special mark by which it is distinguished from it. Now, I say that each of the three subsistences while related to the others, is distinguished by its own properties. Here relation is distinctly expressed, because, when God is mentioned simply and indefinitely, the name belongs not less to the Son and Spirit than to the Father. But whenever the Father is compared to the Son, the peculiar property of each distinguishes the one from the other.'

John 6:44,45: [AMPLIFIED]

44: No one is able to come to Me unless the Father Who sent me attracts and draws him and gives him the desire to come to Me; and [then] I will raise him [from the dead] at the last day.

45: It is written in the book of the prophets, 'And they shall all be taught of God -- have Him in person for their teacher.' Everyone who has listened and learned from the Father, comes to Me.

-- Anonymous, April 04, 2000

By the way,

What is the 'lie' that Nelta told obout Danny?....that is so unforgiveable that Lee would still be referring to it?

Even God forgave everything except blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

-- Anonymous, April 04, 2000

Connie:

You said:

By the way, What is the 'lie' that Nelta told obout Danny?....that is so unforgiveable that Lee would still be referring to it? Even God forgave everything except blasphemy of the Holy Spirit.

Now Connie, this statement of yours is proof positive that you have absolutely no idea what happened in this forum concerning Nelta! You do not even know what LIE she told that the entire forum was so repulsed that everyone encouraged he to repent of having said it. I am the one that continues to call upon her to repent of it because I sincerely want her to be forgiven for having committed such an evil of falsely accusing her brother in Christ. But you ask, what is this lie that is so unforgivable. Now Connie who told you that it was unforgivable? No one, least of all me, has said anything to leave the indication that this evil she has committed is unforgivable! It most certainly is forgiveable when and only when she repents of this sin against God and her brother in Christ. Forgiveness always precedes forgiveness, Connie. If and only if Connie repents of this sin will God forgive her for committing it. That is the reason that I continually call upon her to repent. But as to what this sin she has committed is, it is none of your business because you were not here when it was committed and you are too lazy to go through the archives and read for yourself all that transpired. You want us to go through all of that again just to satisfy you personal curiosity about it. I will not tell you what the lie was because it is none of your business because you were not present when these things happened and my only reason for bringing it every time Nelta comes to the forum is to fulfill my scriptural obligation to admonish my sister in Christ to repent of this evil that she has committed. I will not discuss the matter just to satisfy your personal curiosity. For Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, April 04, 2000

To continue my great venture RE: Baptism:

Matthew 3:11: [AMPLIFIED]

(John's Baptism)

11: I indeed baptize you in [with ] water because of repentance -- that is, because of your changing your minds for the better, heartily amending your ways with abhorrence of your past sins; but He Who is coming after me is mightier than I, Whose sandals I am not worthy to take off or carry; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. ********************************************************************** SEQUENCE: REPENTANCE ~ BAPTISM; JESUS; WITH HOLY SPIRIT AND FIRE ********************************************************************** Matthew 28:19:

Go then, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. ********************************************************************** SEQUENCE: MAKE DISCIPLES ~ BAPTIZE ********************************************************************** Mark 1:8:

(John's Baptism)

8: I have baptized you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit. ********************************************************************** JOHN WITH WATER; JESUS WITH HOLY SPIRIT **********************************************************************

Luke 3:16: [AMPLIFIED]

(John's Baptism)

John answered them all by saying, I baptize you with water, but he Who is mightier than I is coming, the strap of Whose sandal I am not fit to unfasten; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire. ********************************************************************** JOHN: WATER; CHRIST: HOLY SPIRIT AND FIRE **********************************************************************

Luke 11:13: [AMPLIFIED]

13: If you then, evil-minded as you are, know how to give good gifts that are to advantage -- to your children, how much more will your Heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to those who ask and continue to ask Him. ********************************************************************** THE HOLY SPIRIT IS OURS FOR THE ASKING! **********************************************************************

LUKE 12:11,12: [AMPLIFIED]

11: And when they bring you before the synagogues and the magistrates and the authorities, do not be anxious [beforehand] how you shall reply in defence or what you are to say.

12: For the Holy Spirit will teach you in that very hour and moment what you ought to say. ********************************************************************** HOLY SPIRIT AS TEACHER **********************************************************************

I am going to submit this now; Nothing new or exciting so far.

-- Anonymous, April 04, 2000