Posted on 11/04/2011 12:06:23 PM PDT by RnMomof7
1. The precious blood of Christ has a REDEEMING POWER. It redeems from the law. We were all under the law which says, "This do, and live." We were slaves to it: Christ has paid the ransom price, and the law is no longer our tyrant master. We are entirely free from it. The law had a dreadful curse; it threatened that whosoever should violate one of its precepts, should die: "Christ hath redeemed us from the curse of the law, being made a curse for us." By the fear of this curse, the law inflicted a continual dread on those who were under it; they knew they had disobeyed it, and they were all their lifetime subject to bondage, fearful lest death and destruction should come upon them at any moment: but we are not under the law, but under grace, and consequently "We have not received the spirit of bondage again to fear, but we have received the spirit of adoption, whereby we cry, Abba, Father."
We are not afraid of the law now; its worst thunders cannot affect us, for they are not hurled at us! Its most tremendous lightnings cannot touch us, for we are sheltered beneath the cross of Christ, where the thunder loses its terror and the lightning its fury. We read the law of God with pleasure now; we look upon it as in the ark covered with the mercy seat, and not thundering in tempests from Sinai’s fiery brow.
Happy is that man who knows his full redemption from the law, its curse, its penalty, its present dread. My brethren, the life of a Jew, happy as it was compared with that of a heathen, was perfect drudgery compared to yours and mine. He was hedged in with a thousand commands and prohibitions, his forms and ceremonies were abundant, and their details minutely arranged. He was always in danger of making himself unclean. If he sat upon a bed or upon a stool, he might be defiled; if he drank out of an earthen pitcher, or even touched the wall of a house, a leprous man might have put his hand there before him, and he would thus become defiled.
A thousand sins of ignorance were like so many hidden pits in his way; he must be perpetually in fear lest he should be cut off from the people of God. When he had done his best any one day, he knew he had not finished; no Jew could ever talk of a finished work. The bullock was offered, but he must bring another; the lamb was offered this morning, but another must be offered this evening, another tomorrow, and another the next day. The Passover is celebrated with holy rites; it must be kept in the same manner next year. The high priest has gone within the veil once, but he must go there again; the thing is never finished, it is always beginning. He never comes any nearer to the end. "The law could not make the comer thereunto perfect."
But see our position: we are redeemed from this. Our law is fulfilled, for Christ is the end of the law for righteousness; our passover is slain, for Jesus died; our righteousness is finished, for we are complete in Him; our victim is slain, our priest has gone within the veil, the blood is sprinkled; we are clean, and clean beyond any fear of defilement, "For he hath perfected for ever those that were set apart." Value this precious blood, my beloved, because thus it has redeemed you from the thraldom and bondage which the law imposed upon its votaries.
Full sermon here
"If you believe ... you may ... "
That alone negates infant baptism.
you say Peter did, then quote Paul in Corinthians?
the verse you cite does not speak of “spirit baptism”, try again.
this verse teaches we are baptized by the Holy Spirit, thru the Church.
My own paraphrase would read ...
Hold fast to the Day of the Lord teaching, whether you heard it from us in person when we were here ... or whether you have read it from this epistle.
1. it says “what prevents me from being baptized?”
IT DOES NOT SAY “what prevents me from being water baptized”
DOES IT?
2. LOL!!!
Like I said yesterday ... they appeal to the broad context when interpreting the church fathers, ignore the broad context when interpreting the Bible.
Infants have not sinned, but they have a sin nature and are under the curse of all humanity. The grace of God through the blood of Christ is sufficient to cover infants or anyone for that matter who is unable to "come to the knowledge of the truth" and receive Jesus as Savior. Some of the "Early Church Fathers" believed unbaptized infants went to Hell. Then some came along, thinking that was too harsh of a merciful God, and invented "limbo" as the place these infants spent eternity. Though apart from the presence of God, they were thought to enjoy "some" semblance of joy. Now, the CCC has dropped the word Limbo from the vernacular and confesses they really don't have any idea where unbaptized "innocents" spend eternity.
I agree with Dartuser, Scripture is extremely clear that we are baptized in the Holy Spirit when we by faith trust and receive Jesus Christ as our Savior and Redeemer. The water ritual comes after such a faith commitment is made but is not what saves in the first place.
So no, all Christians shouldn't support baptism for infants. As signs of the parents or guardians making a commitment to raise the child in the "nurture and admonition of the Lord" and to "dedicate" the child to God is one thing. But to insist that babies MUST be baptized to be saved is NOT Scriptural NOR is it something the Apostles taught.
When all else fails, resort to personal attack. Couldn't see that one coming.........
read 1 Corinthians 15:1-2.
No. You post the Scripture verses like the rest of us do when we cite Scripture. If you have to go look it up for the reference, the verse is right in front of you. Stop sending people off to do the work you should be doing yourself.
If you don't have the courtesy to do that for others, it tells us a lot about YOUR faith.
Does water baptism save or not?
If it does, it does, regardless of whether the person has faith or not. It's the mere mechanics of it that does the saving then.
If it's the heart and faith, then baptism doesn't save after all.
It does not say that it is through the church.
absolutely not. when one understands what baptism is, they understand why the Church received the practice of baptizing infants from the Apostles.
we know from Church history when heresies arose, there was a big debate in the Church and sometimes a Church Council was called. now, if infant baptism was not recived from the Apostles as the Church Fathers tell us, tell me:
1. when did infant baptism start?
2. who started it?
3. what “true” Christians stood up to comdemn this unbiblical practice?
i look forward to your answers.
Read it again. “ye are washed ie baptised……by the Spirit of our God
1 Corinthians 6:11 And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God.
>>this verse teaches we are baptized by the Holy Spirit, thru the Church.<<
Nothing about the church in that passage or verse. Besides, the RCC is NOT the church scripture talks about. The church, the body of Christ, consists of all believers.
Correct. The nonsense that the RCC has foisted on the people is sad indeed. To try to claim that tradition meant something that was not in print was a way the RCC could control not only the people but governments as well. And they will be punished for it also.
Well, just hmmmm. Is Peter actually acknowledging that people received the Holy Ghost (through faith in Christ) even though they HAD NOT yet been baptized in water baptism??? Kinda blows a big hole in that "water baptized to be saved" balloon, don't it? ;o)
Actually it does. When they saw the water the “what prevents me” was eliminated.
Yes, you finally see yourself in the mirror ...
Great minds think alike! ;o)
like so many other areas, this post is not historical, orthodox, biblical Christian doctrine.
I agree with Dartuser, Scripture is extremely clear that we are baptized in the Holy Spirit when we by faith trust and receive Jesus Christ as our Savior and Redeemer. The water ritual comes after such a faith commitment is made but is not what saves in the first place.
please show me where in the Scriptures:
1. where anyone is “baptized in the Holy Spirit” when by faith trust and receive Jesus Christ as our Saviour and Redeemer?
2. where anyone was told to go thru a “water ritual” after they have been saved.
3. how can #1 and #2 be seperate when Paul tells us in Ephesians there is only one baptism?
4. when in history did people teach this “two” baptism theory?
You still haven’t given me the scriptural proof of that. Or did I miss it?
IT DOES NOT SAY “what prevents me from being water baptized”
So you must thing they went down in the water because they wanted to go swimming ? ... Honestly ...
It absolutely HAD to be ...
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.