Johnny Robertson calls Jews "mongrel ...
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#63 Nov 28, 2012
JustChristian wrote:
<quoted text>
This statement contradicts your other statements made on other threads. You either have to claim Repentance is prior to salvation or post salvation. Your trying to have it both ways.
No I never have said one is saved before he repents. If you misunderstand me, I apologize. I merely am stating that EIS is built from a understanding that Jesus shed his blood for remission of sins.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#64 Nov 28, 2012
At the cross, God poured out His judgment on Jesus, satisfying His wrath and making it possible for Him to forgive us. That's why Jesus shed His blood for your sins, my sins, and the sins of the whole world. When a sinner hears this GOOD NEWS, repents and is baptized, he looks back to the work of Jesus for forgiveness of sins, not to a pool of water. The Jews were not told to be baptized in order that they contact Jesus Blood in water baptism. They knew perfectly well that his blood was shed on the cross and had no thought at all that in baptism they could somehow come into contact with his already shed blood. They were told to repent and be baptized ( with regard to, on the basis of, with reference to, in view of ) remission of sins. The preposition rest upon the very gospel they just had received from Peter. This Gospel is what they were looking to for remission of sins, NOT water baptism.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#65 Nov 29, 2012
night-owl-early-bird wrote:
At the cross, God poured out His judgment on Jesus, satisfying His wrath and making it possible for Him to forgive us. That's why Jesus shed His blood for your sins, my sins, and the sins of the whole world. When a sinner hears this GOOD NEWS, repents and is baptized, he looks back to the work of Jesus for forgiveness of sins, not to a pool of water. The Jews were not told to be baptized in order that they contact Jesus Blood in water baptism. They knew perfectly well that his blood was shed on the cross and had no thought at all that in baptism they could somehow come into contact with his already shed blood. They were told to repent and be baptized ( with regard to, on the basis of, with reference to, in view of ) remission of sins. The preposition rest upon the very gospel they just had received from Peter. This Gospel is what they were looking to for remission of sins, NOT water baptism.
Here you go youve contradicted yourself again. You said when a SINNER hears, repents and is baptized, he then looks back to the cross.

Then you said They were told to repent and be baptized on the basis of forgiveness of sins.

You cant have it both ways.

Thanks for this post it shows your confusion.

Since: Nov 12

Location hidden

#66 Nov 29, 2012
JustChristian wrote:
<quoted text>
Here you go youve contradicted yourself again. You said when a SINNER hears, repents and is baptized, he then looks back to the cross.
Then you said They were told to repent and be baptized on the basis of forgiveness of sins.
You cant have it both ways.
Thanks for this post it shows your confusion.
No contradiction at all. You just have yet to understand WHEN sins were forgiven. Sorry to inform you but you do not contact the already shed blood of Jesus in baptism.

Since: May 10

Location hidden

#67 Nov 29, 2012
night-owl-early-bird wrote:
<quoted text>
No contradiction at all. You just have yet to understand WHEN sins were forgiven. Sorry to inform you but you do not contact the already shed blood of Jesus in baptism.
Your post was clear you did say both things.
walkinginlove

Danville, VA

#68 Nov 29, 2012
Mike Conner wrote:
<quoted text>
I answered this in the other thread.
you mean that double speak you called an answer, the question was simple, yes or no and you can't answer it why?
walkinginlove

Danville, VA

#69 Nov 29, 2012
I'll help you, I believe that it is a valid baptism. So my answer is yes.

Now if you agree with me say so, if you don't then tell me why it isn't.

For a denomination that claims to be the only church who stands for the truth you all sure spend a lot of time hiding what you believe!
Mike Conner

United States

#70 Nov 29, 2012
walkinginlove wrote:
<quoted text>
you mean that double speak you called an answer, the question was simple, yes or no and you can't answer it why?
I do believe I answered NO. But since its hard for you to be honest, you post things like this.
Night Owl Early Bird

Earlysville, VA

#71 Nov 29, 2012
walkinginlove wrote:
I'll help you, I believe that it is a valid baptism. So my answer is yes.
Now if you agree with me say so, if you don't then tell me why it isn't.
For a denomination that claims to be the only church who stands for the truth you all sure spend a lot of time hiding what you believe!
He will not tell you why its not valid. He and JC just dance around with each other dodging the points to maintain their damnable baptismal effectual forgiveness doctrine.

Tell me when this thread is updated:

Subscribe Now Add to my Tracker
First Prev
of 4
Next Last

Add your comments below

Characters left: 4000

Please note by submitting this form you acknowledge that you have read the Terms of Service and the comment you are posting is in compliance with such terms. Be polite. Inappropriate posts may be removed by the moderator. Send us your feedback.

Martinsville Discussions

Title Updated Last By Comments
Is Martinsville Church Of Christ a big lie? (Nov '09) Apr 19 JAM 79
News Danville earns top ranking in industry journal Apr 7 Barbara hudson 1
Looking (Jun '17) Mar 28 clinton county 2
Johnny paying millions to bisexual (Mar '11) Mar 26 Mike_Peterson 42
News Winter weather leads to closings and delays Mar 25 Mountain Lover 1
Ruby Stroud Floyd (Mar '10) Feb '18 Rod 5
News Annual coat drive kicks off another year in Dan... Dec '17 Blecchh 1

Martinsville Jobs

Personal Finance

Martinsville Mortgages