Let me preclude the question with the comment that, as anyone on this BB who knows me will testify, I am a firm believer that immersion is a part of the process one goes through to become a Christian. So, this is not a question I ask with some background of trying to prove that immersion is not important. Let's NOT turn this into another "immerson is needed" / "immersion is not needed" thread, please!

That being said ... I have always pointed people to the Book of Acts when discussing conversion, since it is the history book of the early church. I do not subscribe to the "Roman Road to Salvation" or any other salvation plan that uses passages "out of context" ... especailly from books that were written TO Christians, and not for the purpose of sharing the salvation process with unbelievers, but which assumed the readers knew how they had been saved.

There is a chart that is used sometimes to help people to see the importance and plan of immersion when it comes to salvation. Many of you have either see or even used this chart. It lists (I thought) all of the conversion accounts in the Book of Acts, and allows the person completing the chart to see for themselves what the process whas ter person or persons went through to become a Christian. It shows that SOMETIMES repentance, belief, and confession is mentioned, but that immersion is mentioned in each case.

Yet, when reading through Acts, I am reminded of at least two other accounts: Acts 13:4-12, and 13:13-52.

13:4-12 is the account the procouncil Sergius Palus. Following his hearing Paul's testimony and seeing what took place with the sorcerer Bar-Jesus, the procouncil "... believed ..." v.12. There is no direct mention of immersion in this case. Was he a Christian?

13:13-52 is the account of Paul's preaching in the synagogue at Pisidian Antioch. He preached on two successive Sabbaths. Following the preaching the Gentiles "... honnored the word of the Lord, and all who were appointed for eternal life believed." (NIV) Again, no mention of immersion. Were these Gentiles Christians?

I have no problem "assuming" these folks were immersed, yet there is a silence of the Scriptures here.

My question is such that, while I have always stated that all acounts of new believers in the Book of Acts included immersion, I now see that is not the case. Does this "weaken" the argument for immersion from the Book of Acts? When God's Word uses the term "believers" does it always mean those who became Christians? I have always believed and taught that was the case .. even though I use the word "believer" and "Christian" in a different context today. All Christians are certainly believers ... but all believers MIGHT NOT be Christians ... due to the immersion issue.

Thoughts????

-- Anonymous, January 13, 2002

Answers

Darrell,

Those are interesting accounts to bring up on the subject of Baptism. Like you, I have no qualms with the assumption of their baptisms in these 2 instances.........especially in the 2nd one, as they "glorified the word of the Lord" - which would of necessity mean believing that word & following that word.

The case of the proconsul is much more "iffy" however. There can most definitely be a difference between believing & actually being saved. Satan & his demons believe who Jesus is, but they're not saved. The rich young ruler obviously believed Jesus, yet was not saved as he walked away from Him. In Acts 26, Paul "almost persuaded" Agrippa to become a Christian - it appears that there was belief, just not enough to submit to the Lord's wishes at that time.

The proconsul may or may not have submitted to Baptism - the evidence is inconclusive. Even so, because of the lack of evidence, the passage cannot be used as a good example against the idea of the necessity of Baptism - as one cannot logically prove a point by a lack of evidence. But every diffinitive example of someone being saved in the book of Acts (those specifically mentioned as being "added" to the "church" or "body") submitted to baptism. This is a much safer position and easier to debate from.

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

Very true, Mark, and basically the position I would hold. I guess we'll have to wait till we get to heaven to find out for sure!

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

Good thought starter, Darrell. Here is, I think, another . . .

Since the New Testament wasn't gathered together for a couple of hundred years, and anyone who read any of it until then only read parts, or A part, of it, then what would be the "salvation status" (best guess, given that we're not God) of a man who had been given a copy of the gospel of John, which says nothing about baptism being in the salvation sequence, but who reads the passage that says, "Jesus did many other miraculous signs in the presence of his disciples, which are not recorded in this book. But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in His name." Could such a man have believed that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and believing, had life in His name?

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

Mark:

The way I would answer your question is to say that, throughout the conversion stories in the book of Acts, when it mentions people of whom it is said, "they believed", it is talking about people coming to salvation. I THINK that's the case, anyway. I'll have to go check again.

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

Brethren and Friends:

I call your attention now to a passage of Scripture that we will examine with specific reference to the fact that Christ saves believers and we will examine in some detail just what that means. I will ask you to read that passage. And we will discuss a few important matters and then at the end of this post we will take this passage up again as a conclusion to and completion of our argument. An argument, which we are convinced, will show that the word Believe is often used in a Comprehensive sense, which embraces all that is essential and necessary to the obedience of the gospel. We now quote that passage for you to keep in mind as we proceed to make our arguments to support that this proposition. It is found in the account of the conversion of the Philippian Jailer as follows:

““But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm: for we are all here. Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.” (Acts 16:28-31).

The word “believe” as it is used in the New Testament, is a comprehensive term. Therefore it has both a generic and specific meaning. Sometimes it is used to specifically name only one condition of salvation as required by the gospel of Christ and other conditions are named in connection with it. This is especially true when certain conditions had already been met and the hearers needed to be specifically informed of other things which they did not know about that they must do to obtain remission of sins which is the same as salvation from them. And at other times the word “believe” is used generically to include all the conditions of salvation and thus is used to report the salvation of those who had done all that was embraced in that one word. This is usually done, in the New Testament, when reporting conversions of others to Christians who knew the specific conditions and understood that each of them were “acts of faith” or that they were acts that were prompted or motivated by faith. And they therefore understood that each of them were encompassed, included and expressed in the meaning of the one word “believed”. So, that anyone who had not done all of those specific requirements in obedience to the gospel were never spoken of as having “believed’ in the generic sense of the term. And we can see even this day when we read reports someone has heard the gospel, believed it, repented of their sins and obeyed the command to be baptized for the remission of their sins. For when we report such events we do not do so by describing all of the specific acts that they obeyed. Rather we simply say that they “obeyed the gospel”. And when we say that we mean to use a phrase in its comprehensive and generic sense, which is inclusive of all that that we know is essential to obedience to the gospel. Well, in the New Testament they also used the phrase “obey the gospel” as we use it. But most often they simply used the word “believe” in this generic sense of including all of the conditions of salvation not merely the specific act of mental acceptance of the facts of the gospel. It was used to describe the “whole ball of wax”, as our faithful Sister Teresa likes to aptly put it. Or both the believing of the facts of the gospel as well as the obedience to the commands of the gospel in order to receive the promises offered in the gospel of Christ.

WE shall now give some examples of both the specific and generic uses of this comprehensive term “believe”. So that our readers can understand what is meant when the scriptures report only that some one “believed” without specifically mentioning, on every occasion, the other specific things required for our salvation. Such as “Repentance” (Acts 3:19), “Confession of Christ” (Romans 10:10) and “baptism for the remission of sins” (Acts 2:38; Mark 16:16).

First, let us look at the examples of the specific meaning or usage of the word “believe”.

“And many that believed came, and confessed, and shewed their deeds.” (Acts 19:18).

Here in this verse we have persons who believed-one specific act; and confessed-another specific act; and declared their deeds- a third specific act.

And again we read:

“And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.” (Acts 11:21).

Here again we have persons who “believed” and then did something else, showing that the word “believed” simply named one of the things that they did.

And again we see that Jesus said:

“He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.” (Mark 16:16).

Here Jesus uses the word Believe in both the specific and the generic or comprehensive sense within the same sentence. In the first part of the sentence he uses the term “believeth” to specifically describe only one of two specific acts that are both equally essential to salvation. “Believe” is one and “is baptized” is the other. Then in the second clause he uses the word “believeth not” in the comprehensive sense, as we shall explain later in this post, to include both of the specific acts mentioned in the first clause, which was belief and baptism. And this is necessarily so because if it were not Christ would have contradicted himself within the same sentence.

Then we read:

“But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.” (Acts 8:12).

This is the report of Phillip’s work in Samaria. The Samaritans believed. That is only one thing that they did, and the record tells the rest of what they did to be saved. They were baptized. So, again we have in this verse an example of the word “believe” being used in the specific sense of describing only one specific act along with others.

In the same chapter we have the report of Simon’s conversion. Let us look to see what actions he took. Here is the report:

“Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs, which were done.” (Acts 8:13).

Simon believed and that is ONE thing that he did. But that was not all. He was also baptized. Which fits the very command of Christ that “he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved:” (Mark 16:16).

Concerning the conversion of the Corinthians we read:

“And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.” (Acts 18:8).

What did these people do? They “believed and were baptized” just as Christ had commanded (Mark 16:16).

Now these passages ought to be sufficient to convince any of our unbiased readers that the word “believe” is sometimes used only to name one specific act or one condition of salvation. But all of these quotations tell of people who not only believed, but who also took the other necessary actions commanded by Christ. They complied with all that he commanded them to do.

Now let us read of some who also believed in this specific sense but who did not take the other steps and therefore were not saved.

Read this verse:

“Nevertheless among the chief rulers also many believed on him; but because of the Pharisees they did not confess [him], lest they should be put out of the synagogue: For they loved the praise of men more than the praise of God.” (John 12:42,43).

We showed in the beginning of this post a passage of scripture that plainly stated, “believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved” (Acts 16:30-31). But in the above verse from the book of John we have some men who believed but were NOT SAVED, now don’t we? How can we explain this? The explanation is found, as we shall see as we progress in our study of this matter, in the two senses in which the word “believe” is used in the New Testament. One sense is the specific sense, which we have seen in our above examples and the other is a generic or comprehensive sense, which we shall see presently.

Here are some others who specifically “believed” and were not saved

“Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.” (James 2:19).

As we have sufficiently illustrated from the scriptures the specific usage of the word “believe” let us now illustrate the general or comprehensive uses of the word believe.

The General, Generic or comprehensive usage of the term “Believe” in the New Testament.

First let us recall the verse that is often referred to as the “golden text” of the Bible as follows:

“And as Moses lifted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must the Son of man be lifted up: That whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have eternal life. For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.” (John 3:14-17).

In this well- known text of the Bible the word “believe” is used twice and whosoever believeth is promised eternal life. No other conditions are named.

Look also at this verse:

“And many other signs truly did Jesus in the presence of his disciples, which are not written in this book: But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name.” (John 20:30,31).

Again, “believe” is the only condition named.

Let’s look at yet another passage:

“For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.” (Romans 1:16).

Salvation is offered to every one that believeth. There it is again. No other condition is named.

But once more let’s read:

“Whom God hath set forth [to be] a propitiation through faith in his blood, to declare his righteousness for the remission of sins that are past, through the forbearance of God; To declare, [I say], at this time his righteousness: that he might be just, and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.” (Romans 3:25,26).

Again we have the word “believe” with no other condition named.

Now as we saw some conversions reported in which the word “believed” simply named only one of several conditions or steps in the so- called “process” of salvation taken by those who were converted to Christ. Let us now notice some examples of other cases where the whole process or all of the conditions is included in the comprehensive usage of the one word “believe”.

Right in the beginning of the early preaching of the gospel when the apostles were preaching in Jerusalem and thousands were being converted we have the report of those conversions given in this language:

“Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand.” (Acts 4:4).

That means that those people became Christians. What did they do in becoming Christians? They believed.

Then we have the account of the conversion of Sergis Paulus, the governor of Cyprus as follows:

“Then the deputy, when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine of the Lord.” (Acts 13:12).

What did he do? He believed.

The report of the conversion of the gentiles at Antioch of Pisidia is in the same language.

“And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed.” (Acts 13:48).

The results of Paul’s preaching in Athens is reported by the comprehensive use of this same word as follows:

“Howbeit certain men clave unto him, and believed: among the which [was] Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others with them.” (Acts 17:34).

The Conversion of the people of Thessalonica is expressed in this one word also.

“Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.” (Acts 17:12).

Now, let us see how the New Testament itself demonstrates that this comprehensive or generic word “believe” INCLUDES OBEDIENCE. WE shall now see that the word “believe” in these last mentioned cases does include all of the “steps in the process” or conditions required of the gospel and that those who “believed” in this sense did in fact obey the gospel of Christ.

The first passage that we cite is quoted from the American Standard Version. It is the language of our Lord. Hear Him.

“He who believes in the Son has eternal life; he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him” (John 3:36).

You see that the word “believeth” and “obeyeth” is here used as synonymous terms.

But let us take a few other passages:

“And that, knowing the time, that now [it is] high time to awake out of sleep: for now [is] our salvation nearer than when we believed.” (Romans 13:11).

Here in this verse Paul looks back to a time when these Romans became Christians and says, “Now is our salvation nearer than when” we first started: than when we were first converted-than when we first became Christians. But what term does he use to designate what they did in becoming Christians? He uses the word “believe”. “Now is our salvation nearer than when we believed”. Then it is clear that these people became Christians by believing. Shall we then conclude, therefore that they did not obey the gospel? To do so would be to pervert the word of God. For in this same letter to the Romans just a few chapters back from where we find this verse-and remember Paul did not divide these words into Chapters-Paul had alluded to this same time when these Romans became Christians or when they “believed” and ceased to be servants of sin. And here is the way that he speaks of the time when they “believed” in this reference:

“Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness? But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you. Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.” (Romans 6:16-18).

Thus the apostle tells us that these people obeyed from the heart a form of doctrine that was delivered to them at the time that they became Christians, and then without dipping his pen in the ink he tells us that they became Christians when they “believed”. Therefore he used the word “believed” to include that very obedience.

But there is more yet! When Paul looks back to the conversion of these Romans he speaks of it as the time when they “believed” in the thirteenth chapter. But in the first part of the sixth Chapter of Romans he looks back to that same time and reminds these Romans that they at that time died to sin and were buried with Christ in baptism and raised from that baptism to walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:3- 6). Therefore he uses the term “believed” to embrace the WHOLE PROCESS, including their burial with Christ in baptism and their rising from that burial in baptism to walk a new life! Thus the term “believed” included their obedience to Christ in baptism (Mark 16:16).

And we will find that the word “believed” is used in that way in all places except where it is specific and other conditions are mentioned with it. Notice this:

“And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.” (Acts 19:1,2).

Paul did not ask these Ephesians if they received the Holy Spirit when they repented. No, that is not the word, is it? He did not ask them if they received the Holy Spirit when they were baptized? No, that is not the word either now is it? He asked them, “did you receive the Holy Spirit when ye believed?” Now that is the word that he used, isn’t it? And they answered “Nay, we did not so much as hear whether the Holy Spirit was given”.

Now hear Paul again:

“And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul; John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard [this], they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid [his] hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied. And all the men were about twelve.” (Acts 19:3-7).

Can you see it? Do you get the idea? Paul asked, “have you received the Holy Spirit since ye believed?” The answer was, no. And then Paul immediately said, “into what then were ye baptized?” For of course if you believed you were baptized! WE can see that the word “believed” in his first question included the whole process. Thus the word “believed” in his first question included baptism.

Now let us look at yet another case that is even clearer than the one we have just noticed. Paul came to Corinth and preached in the synagogues and as a result Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue was converted. But in reporting his conversion only one word is used. Luke says that he “believed”. Here is the way that the account of it reads:

“And Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were baptized.” (Acts 18:8).

What did Crispus do in becoming a Christian? He believed! That is all that is said no mention of anything else. Do you suppose that he repented of his sins? There is not mention of it unless it is included within this one word “believed”. Was he baptized? If so it is all reported in the one word “believed”. There is nothing else said in the entire book of Acts about the conversion of Crispus. Luke simply tells us that he “believed”.

Now, if we can show you, our readers, that Crispus was baptized at the time that he believed you will know certainly that the word “believed” in this instance embraced baptism.

Well, this conversion of Crispus took place at Corinth, as you know and Crispus believed and many of the Corinthians hearing, believed and were baptized. (Acs 18:8). Later Paul wrote a letter to these disciples and reproved them for being divided and denominating themselves after the names of the men who had baptized them. He did not want them to say, “I am of Paul”. He was therefore thankful that he had not baptized many of them lest they should claim that they were baptized in the name of Paul. However he did baptize a few of them and he tells us the names of those whom he baptized as follows:

“Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.” (1 Cor. 1:13-16).

Now in that verse, Brethren and Friends we have it clearly stated that Paul had baptized Crispus with his own hands. But in Acts the conversion of Crispus is recorded by the one word “believed”. Now, this is conclusive proof that the one word “believed” in the record of the conversion of Crispus in the book of acts included and embraced the whole process of conversion especially baptism! So that when we see this one word being used in this generic, general, or comprehensive sense in the New Testament it is being used to include all of the things essential to the obedience to the gospel of Christ. It is not a word that is always used to describe nothing more than the mere mental acceptance of the facts of the gospel concerning Christ.

But let us finish this examination of this important subject by looking at one final case. It is the case of the conversion of the Philippian Jailer recorded in Acts 16: 28-34). I will not go into all of the details leading up to his conversion as you can read them for yourself. For now it is sufficient to simply say that Paul and Silas were in prison under the guard of this Jailer. And as they were singing hymns there was an earthquake and all of the cell doors were opened. And the Jailer assumed that his prisoners assumed that his prisoners had escaped and was about to take his own life. And Paul spoke to him and stopped this madness. So let us now read the rest of Luke’s inspired account of this conversion as follows:

“But Paul cried with a loud voice, saying, Do thyself no harm: for we are all here. Then he called for a light, and sprang in, and came trembling, and fell down before Paul and Silas, And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.” (Acts 16:28-31).

This jailer was full of fear and trembling he fell down upon his face and was anxious to know what to do to be saved. He was simply told to “believe” in the 31st verse.

Now let’s read the 34th verse:

“And when he had brought them into his house, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, believing in God with all his house.” (Acts 16:34).

Now in this verse we see quite a different man, don’t we? He is no longer falling down and trembling and crying out for salvation, is he? He is calm and full of joy and rejoicing! And we ask what has caused this change? Well, this verse tells us, doesn’t it? He has “believed” in God, hasn’t he?

So we see that in verse 31 he is told to believe and he would be saved. In verse 34 he has believed and is saved, isn’t he? Now if we will read verse 32 and 33 we will see what he did in believing or when he believed. Read it for yourselves:

“And they spake unto him the word of the Lord, and to all that were in his house. And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed [their] stripes; and was baptized, he and all his, straightway.” (Acts 16:32,33).

Now there is the whole story or as Paul Harvey would say, “the rest of the story”! He believed and was saved. But in believing he was baptized the same hour of the night and it was about midnight. So you can see, Brethren and Friends, that the word “believe” even in this famous passage includes the “whole ball of wax” as our sister Teresa has so ably pointed put to us. It included repentance, baptism, and everything else required by the gospel of Christ in that great transaction between man and God.

So, do not let anyone make you believe that the Bible promises salvation to you upon a faith that is wholly mental and inward and that does not express itself in overt obedience to Christ (Heb. 5:8,9; Matt. 7:21). Salvation is by faith truly, and everyone who believes shall be saved. But faith is not complete or real, or alive or effective until it is expressed and actualized by a total surrender and a submissive obedience to the will of Christ our Lord (Heb. 5:8,9).

For James has made it abundantly clear:

“Was not Abraham our father justified by faith when he offered his son Isaac upon the altar? Seest thou how faith wrought with his works, and by works was faith made perfect? And the scripture was fulfilled that saith, Abraham BELIEVED GOD and it was imputed to him for righteousness: and he was called a friend of God. Ye see then how that by works a man is justified and NOT BY FAITH ONLY.” (James 2:21-24).

For you see, from the example of Abraham again the word “believed” is used to encompass and include Abraham’s obedience to God when he offered his son Isaac upon the Altar. And it is also used to include our obedience to the commands of Christ in the gospel.

Now Brethren and Friends that is the truth of God upon this matter and it is my fervent prayer that all who have not yet done so will accept the will of God. And obey the precious gospel of Christ, which is the power of God unto salvation to all them that believe! (Romans 1:16).

For Christ and those who love the truth in Him,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

So much for Darrell's plea to "Let's NOT turn this into another 'immerson is needed' / 'immersion is not needed' thread, please!" *Sigh*

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

Brother John:

You have said:

“So much for Darrell's plea to "Let's NOT turn this into another 'immerson is needed' / 'immersion is not needed' thread, please!" *Sigh*”

Brother, if you were not so prejudiced against E. Lee Saffold. And if you would take the time to READ what he had written above you would see that this particular post was written in answer to his very specific question concerning the verses which speak of “believing” and make no mention of immersion. And in my answer I actually dealt with the very two passages that he specifically mentioned and dealt with the issue of his concern in his question quite to the very point of it. And I have said nothing that would have in any way whatsoever was designed to “turn this thread into another “immersion is needed thread” as you have ignorantly and stupidly implied. Your egregious ignorance in this matter speaks volumes about how you allow your prejudices against one whom you do not particularly like run away with you. For you assumed that this is what I must have said in my post but you do not point or quote any words whatsoever which were designed to turn this thread into any direction. My above post was entirely related to the comprehensive use of the word “believe” and I proved that it has been used in such a way in many cases to include all that one does in obedience tot he gospel of Christ including repentance confession and baptism.

Now, if you would like to answer the argument that I have made in my above post then get busy and do the best that you can. But to do nothing more than assert without evidence that I have sought to turn this thread into a “immersion is needed thread is just plain stupid, isn’t it? But what else could we expect from one who knows in advance that he cannot answer the scriptural argument put forth therein!

Your Brother in Christ,

E. Lee Saffold

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

Brother E. Lee,

I absolutely agree with the definition you have shown us for the Biblical meaning of belief. For all practical purposes, belief without the accompanying signs of said belief (i.e. obedience), is no belief at all. At least not in God's eyes anyway.........which is all that really matters!!

However, as I think Darrell was trying to point out, there are those who would want to play the "semantics game" with the passages he quoted. Taken only in their immediate context, without using any cross references to other scriptures (which of course is poor hermeneutics), one COULD try to make a point of salvaton without the mention of Baptism. But, as I tried to point out, even if you discard all other scriptural references; their argument cannot logically fly - one simply cannot logically prove a point when they present no evidence to back themselves up....and those 2 texts make make no specific "yea" or "nay" mention of Baptism.

-- Anonymous, January 14, 2002

Darrell, thanks for the interesting point. Here is a consideration that might help. I believe we must take into account here the "oral Gospel" of the early church. In Colossians the apostle Paul instructs the church to hold onto/embrace/engage the "word of truth, the gospel (1:5)" that you have already heard about and you know to be true. The context of Colossians points to the core of the Gospel and the church's understanding of that Gospel without it being written down before hand. Peter's sermon on Pentecost had the core of the Gospel in it and it was understood and continued in the early life of the church. The written word recorded the truth that the early church already had and understood. (I understand that the written word covers much more than just a recording of what was understood before.) If the core of the Gospel is 1) recognizing Jesus as the Son of God who comes to redeem man and 2) that salvation comes through the person of Jesus Christ according to God's terms (faith, repentance, confession, baptism, living Christian life) then there is no reason to doubt that the accounts and episodes that we have recorded in the NT would not include the core of the Gospel, even when it is not explicit in the text. The silence about immersion in the accounts Darrell mentions does not exclude the idea that the Gospel was and is the Gospel and was surely presented in its entirety even though the written record may not record the entire exchange that took place. Hope this helps. God bless.

-- Anonymous, January 15, 2002

My apologies, Lee, if I misread your intent. And I have no personal prejudice against you, despite what you may think.

-- Anonymous, January 15, 2002