I have asked many questions on here. I apologize.  i know you are extreemly busy.

One thing i have consistantly heard about the Church of Christ is that they beleive "they" are the only ones who are truly saved. Meaning that baptist, methodist, etc. are not.
 
do you believe that being a part of a different denomination disqualifies you from salvation?

Is there validity to this?

Thanks!

Again, I cannot say it enough that I really appreciate your questions.  This is probably more than I have ever discussed with someone over a "post."  I am usualy one who does not spend much time on the internet or sending emails - however, I have enjoined this.

To answer your question - "Do we believe we are the ONLY ones who are truly saved?"  The Bible teaches that the only ones that are saved are those who have obeyed the gospel (2 Thess. 1:8-9). 

No doubt as I look to the religious world and see all the confusion and various teachings and doctrine - the question comes up - how can everybody be right?  If each denomination is teaching something different as it pertains to salvation, then who is right?

I just want to  do what the Bible teaches.  I have never stated that I believe we are the only ones right, but at the same time, there are many who I truly believe contradict the word of God in doctrine and life.

Why would anyone want to be a part of a denomination?  I want to be a part of the church we read of in the Bible.  The church of Christ is NOT a denomination, we are just Christians!

i wholeheartedly agree about denominations. I believe some churches are trying to break the denominational barrier. I enjoy pastors such as Mark Driscoll, pastor of Mars Hill church in Seattle. He wants no denomination and will not be a part of any denomination. He seeks to simply do what the Word says. What would you say to someone like this? He woudnt be a part of the church of Christ (as far as name), but he would be a part of the church of the Christ, the church. - whats your thoughts on this?

I am not fully aware of all he teaches or believes, but if an individual truly is doing what the word teaches and only the word. Yes he would be accepted.  However, it is not what I would do, if he does what the Bible teaches, he would be a part of the chruch of Christ as we read in the Bible.  We need to understand that there are no denominations in the Bible.

Let me ask you as question - Why are you a member of the "Baptist" church and not some other denomination?  And do you believe that all denominations are right and that their members are saved?

why baptist? well i do not consider myself baptist. i am a follower of Christ. I happen to be in an established "baptist" church but we do not follow baptistic rituals. We believe that baptists have added "man made" rituals. (EX: walk an aisle and say the sinners prayer and your eternally secure) This type of teaching is false. I believe that it doesnt matter the name of your church because the church is the people not the buidling. Our church has many people who have been misled. They reign under a baptist building but simply changing the name wont do. They need Jesus. He is the answer. When people see Jesus they tend to drop tradition. It does me well to go into this church and preach the truth of the gospel rather than trying to convert them out of their buidling. God still cares for them and is using peopel to reform the, for lack of better terms, "denomination." I do not believe all denominations are right. However i believe that there are people in certain denominations who have a realtionship with Jesus. I have close relationships with prespeterians, methodist, penecostal, reformed, etc. and in these relationships i see people who love God and bear much fruit. Do i think their denominations have flaws in doctrine? yes. Does this mean i cant love them and communie with them, no. It depends on teh individual not denomination. God uses the foolishnes of preaching to bring people unto himself. I know many denominations are not right. As a matter of fact, i believe we are all wrong to some extent. Even the "non-denomniational" churches have become a denomination all on their own. The calvanist/arminain debate will go on, the baptism debate will go on, the speaking in tounges will go on, however i beleive their are things we can unite on. the answer is Jesus. he is enough. I dont need everyone to believe my systematic theology in order for me to unite with them. Some things yes, Jesus is the only way, he rose from the dead, etc. But some theological differences can be viewed openely. EX: I would like to think, although you never met me, that you would belive i loved Jesus and had a relationship with Him even though i dont think baptism is a requirement for salvation. We should be able to have fellowship. We are having fellowship. i am typing this fast because i have to get to church but i hope it made some sense to you. What are your thoughts?

You are truly an encouragement to me.  I have really enjoyed this discussion.  I hope you do not miss understand me and think I believe all people in denominations are nuts.  I have some very close friends and family members in various denominations.  I love them dearly, although I do not agree with their view on religion. 

In your post you made mention that "the answer is Jesus, He is enough" and I agree that Jesus is the answer, but if you will remember it was Jesus that prayed that "we all might be ONE" (John 17:21).  The only way we can become one is come out of denominatinalism and man made religions and follow His word (John 12:48).  I also believe the answer is Jesus, but onoe cannot preach Jesus and leave out the importance of the church.  The church is the body of Christ and it was so important that He purchased it with His own blood (Acts 20:28).  Remember when Philip was in Samaria preaching (going back to what you said about how God uses the foolishness of  preaching) - The Bible states that, Philip went down there and preached Christ unto them (Acts 8:5) yet later in that same chapter (vs. 12) it says that, "But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God (church) and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women."

I find it interesting that yes Philip preached Jesus, and yes Jesus is the answer, but at the same time this preaching Jesus included preaching about the church.  We cannot just stop at Jesus!

Concerning whether or not the name of the church is important, I must disagree with you.  I believe it is one of our identifying characteristics that shows we belong to Christ.  For example:  I am a married man - just suppose my wife wanted to take some other man's name, I would be greatly offended.  By the fact that she carries my name shows she is mine.  And the same is true with the church - the church is the "bride" of Christ.  Should not the bride carry the name of the groom?

Where in the Bible do you ever read of a "baptist," "methodist," etc...  In Acts 11:26, the were "called Christians" - this is all we should be.

Final thought:  In your post you made this statement - "I don't need everyone to believe my systematic theology in order for me to unite with them."  I understand what you are saying, and I agree you don't have to agree wioth me, but you do have to agree with the Bible and if the Bible contradicts what a particular denomination teaches - then yes I believe they are wrong. 

I do believe you love God and are sincere ans yes I believe we can have a degree of fellowship together.  But I am still bothered about your view on salvation.  What do you teach that man must do to be saved?

Do you believe in the so called "sinners prayer?"  If not, what do you teach?
Thanks

Hey - thanks for your post. This is very educational for me, and encouraging. No i do not beleive in the sinners prayer - i can find it nowhere in scripture. My view on salvation - Man can do nothing. God must draw, we must respond in faith, however our faith comes from the grace of God. It is all a work of God. There is no specific formula. What i feel is often missed is the holiness of God. Jesus' wasnt sweating blood and in agony for God to take the cup from Him over the physical death he was to partake in. Not to neglect the horrific, physical pain Jesus went through. However, Jesus was in agony because He bore the sin of the world on Himself. God could not even look upon Him because of this. Salvation is all grace through faith that God allows us to have. Many churches try to downgrade Christ's work and place the emphasis on what "they" can do. This is works. You should work because you are saved not to be saved. We have created many hoops for people to jump through as if we were a pope of sorts. All people need to do is fall on thier face before a holy God realizing they can do absoloutly nothing to earn Him. In return they will desire to live for Him. As far as denominations, names, etc. Do you think the church of Christ has become a denomination on its own? It seems that you believe others can be saved and not be a part of your particualr body. if this is true why the strong emphasis on names? What if our church was named the church at lake city? Would this suffice? We see teh church at Ephesus, Philipi, etc. I believe we should bear the name of Christ in our lives. If our builidng bears a name but our people do not it is pointless. We could have church at Waffle House and call it "the church at Waffle House" and still be in love and bear the name of Jesus. I agree that it all goes back to the Word. We follow the Word of God. Interpretation is our difference. You interpret the text differently than i would. We teach people to Love God and Love people - The greatest commandments. We teach peopel to wrestle with God's Word. To seek God. IF you seek HIm you will find Him. Many times i think we can be just like the Pharisees and offer God our religiousity before our hearts. We have our creeds and relgiion but miss our great Savior in whom we did nothinig to gain! I do believe i can have fellowship with you. If you believe that it is not about you and all Jesus and by HIm and Him alone are you saved. as Paul says in - 2 cor 2:2"i am determined to know nothing among you but Christ and Him crucified." Then we can have fellowship. How do you teach salvation? Does it lean more on mans work or God's work? Thanks! i am learning a ton thanks

I'll try to break down your reply section at a time. 
1.  I agree 100% that the sinners prayer is not found in the scriptures, and therefore it is not a valid teaching concering salvation. But I disagree with what you said concerning that there is "no specific formula."  I believe God did give us a "formula" in order to be saved.  But again, it is not that I am working or trying to earn my salvation - but at the same time, I must obey God and His word.   The only way we can know what it is God wants us to do, is through His word.  When one studies and reads his Bible, they realize there are many examples of individuals being saved.  I believe this is God showing us the "formula" for our own salvation.
             
With that in mind - look at Acts 2:36-47.  Notice the sequence of events:  (vs. 37) "Now when they heard this..." - what had they heard?  The heard the preaching of the Gospel (Rom. 1:16, 10:17) and it pricked their hearts, and they asked Peter, "what must we DO?"  I emphasized the "do" becasue there is something we must "do".  Jesus said "not everyone that saith unto me, Lord, Lord, shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven; but he that DOETH the will of my father which is in Heaven." (Mt. 7:21) - James 1:22 - "But be ye DOERS of the word and NOT hearers ONLY." -

What was is that they had to "DO?"  (vs. 38) Peter told them to "Repent and be Baptized, everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins..."

(vs. 40) Peter told them to "save yourselves" - this shows that we have a responsiblity in our salvation.  Again, Yes I believe Jesus did His part, but I must save myself, and I do that by my obedience to what He has said.

(vs. 47) those who did all that Peter told them to do - (3000 were baptized that day - vs. 41) they were added to the "Lord's church" (vs. 47).

I also want to make the point concering the "formula" that the book of Acts is called the book of history or the book of conversions.  If you read every conversion in the book of Acts - the pattern is that they "heard" the word, they "believed" what Jesus had done for them (John 8:24) they "confessed" that Jesus was the Christ (Rom. 10:9-10) they "repented" of their sins (Lk. 13:3; Acts 2:38) and they were ALL baptized (all conversions in Acts).

Even when you look at the verse you quoted from 1 Cor. 2:2 - (you had put 2 Cor.) - but the point is that yes Paul stated that he determiined not to know anything among them but Christ and Him crucified. But I think it is important to look at the whole context of what Paul was saying, if you go back to Acts 18 which records the establishement of the church at Corinth, Paul instructed them concerning their salvation and in (vs. 8) it says, "and many of the Corithians hearing, believed and were baptized." And drop down a few more verses and it says (vs. 11) that he remained there 6 months, "teaching the word of God."

My point is if we follow the Bible, which should be our desire, how can we teach that there is nothing for us to "DO" - we have to obey God, this is not work - this is obedience. You said, "all people need to do is fall on their face before a holy God realizing they can do absolutely nothing to earn Him." 

Please give me ONE example of this in the Scriptures, it is no more there than the sinners prayer.  Please correct me if I am wrong.


2.  Concerning the question on whether or not I believe the "church of Christ" has become a denomination of its own - absolutely NOT!!  I am completely against denominationalism.  Our goal and dsire is to restore the church of the Bible.  Allow the Bible to be our guide and follow the pattern that God has given.

Addressing the name - if you go back and look at the churches which met in Galatia, Corinth ect...they were called the churches of God (1 Cor. 1:2) or the kingdom of God, the churches of Christ (Rom. 16:16) the family of God, etc...my point is that no matter where they were they were simply Christians.

The building is just that, a building!  The church is the people!  But the name is a identifying characteristic.  We are the church of Christ which meets in Lake City.  If the building burned down and we had to meet in the Waffle House - we would still be the 'church of Christ" - God's people meeting to worship Him.

I know this is a lot of material - it is hard trying to address or answer questions in writing, I am trying to be as specific as I can, but it is hard in the space provided.  I hope you understand.

Yes it is alot to comprehend. First let me say that i beleive we must be obedient to the Word of God. James 1:22 tells us to "be "doers" of the word and not hearers only." With this in mind we must understand that James was speaking to the church, not the lost. Also in Matt. 7. Jesus in no way was suggesting that salvation is a meritorious event. He was saying that true faith will not fail to produce fruit of good works. A lost person acts lost. They are not doers of the word. They may have a faith by words and even beleive, (as you referd to James, the demons even believe)but this does not mean they know Christ. Before coming to a saving knowledge of Jesus you are lost, whether you "act" like a Christian or not. How can an unregenerate, lost person make a righteous decision to save themselves? As Romans 3:10 qoutes from the OT, "There is none righteous, no, not one; There is none who understands; There is none who seeks after God." Romans 5:6 says; "Christ died for the ungodly" v10 how are we reconciled to God; "through the death of His SOn" 11 - "through Jesus we have now receieved the reconciliation." The Bible never teaches that we recieve salvation by our actions - Ephesians 2:8-9 "For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of YOURSELVES; it is the gift of God, not of works, lest anyone should boast." Ephesians 1:4-7 shows us that Salvation is Completley God's work. For your salvation who do you give the credit? You said, "i believe Jesus did His part, but i must save myself." This is impossible! Paul did not seek after God on the Damascus road. God was not sitting back waiting for Paul to make a good decision. God made Himself known to Paul - paul understood this grace He has recieved. Romans 8:14 "for as many as are led by the Spirit of God, these are the sons of God." who does the leading - God does. 15 - "you did not receive the spirit of bondage again to fear, but you receieved the Spirit of adoption by whom we cry out, Abba, Father." (undestanding that we are not under the bondage of sin and fear but we are adopted by Christ, all we can do is be thankful and cry out Abba, Father.) As far as the denomonationalism. I could care less about denominations myself. however i am not one to say that if your churches name has "baptist, methodist, community church, etc." in it that you are lost and sinning. The people are the church. I dont refer to myself as a "baptist" or a "community church goer". I refer to myself as a Chrsitian. That is what i am, and that is what the "true" beleivers in our church are. Our buidling does not say it. Our sign doesnt say it. However, our lives do. I know a church named, "Abundant Grace." - Awesome name! They understand the grace they have recieved in Jesus. The love Jesus, they are chrisitans not "abundant gracers". They do not outreach their community by calling themselves "abundunt gracers". No, they tell of the grace they have recieved in Jesus. They are Christians. I think that in our relgiousity we become pharisaical in semantics. hence, "old music, new music, suit and tie, no suit and tie, meet at 11 or 12, take up an offering or let them bring the offering" We can over spiritualize anything but it all comes back the heart. Do we honor God with our lips or with our hearts and lives? Greatest commandments - Love God, Love people. Are we doing that? Just some thoughts - (i dont think i have typed this much since college)ha! question: Would you consider me an evagelistic oppurtunity for you? Or would you consider me a brother in Christ? God Bless

To begin with I believe we are running in circles.  I want to make it clear that I do not believe I can save myself without Jesus and His blood.  There is not enough time, money or distance that can take away my sins - there is no WORK I can possibly do in order to be saved.  Yet at the same time, I do believe one MUST OBEY whatever it is that God told one to do to be saved - and He said to believe, repent and be baptized.  Doing what God said do is not work, it is obedience.

Example:  If you go to the doctor because you are sick and you are depending on him to help you feel better and not be sick.  The doctor gives you medicine to fix the problem.  You have a choice to make - either continue to keep on going like you have been and hope for the best or "DO" what the doctor said and take the medicne.  By taking the medicne you are not "working" to make yourself feel better, you are simply "doing" what the doctor said to do to take away the sickness.  The same is true with the sickness of sin - the Great Physician has given us a prescription to take away the sin  - it is up to us to decide whether or not to take it.  Therefore, when we "do" what God said "do" it is not "working" it is "obeying."

I want to address some of the passages you quoted:
1.  James 1:22; Matt. 7:21 - I agree this was not speaking about salvation - but I was using them as examples of the fact that God expects us to "do"something.  I believe there is something to "do" before and after we are saved.  This is NOT WORK  it is obedience. Refer back to Acts 2 - (vs. 37) "What shall we do?"  (vs. 38) "Repent and be baptized" - (vs. 40) "save yourselves" - (vs.42) "3000 were baptized"


2.  Romans 3:10 - the context of verese 10 is seen in verses 10-12.  This paragraph describes the character of both the Jews and the Gentiles as a nation and not as individuals.  we know that the word "one" does not mean an individual, for that would contradict other verses of the Bible.  The Bible teaches that Abel and Job were righteous individuals (Heb. 11:4; Job 1:8) and they were Gentiles.  And the righteousness of Daniel and many other individuals of the Jewish nation is numerous.  so the paragraph means that there was "not one" righteous nation as a whole that was righteous.  That is, neither one of the nations was so righteous that God chose it in preference to the other as the Jews pretended.

3.  Rom. 5:6-10 -I agree with you 100% and the Bible is full of passages that teach and show God's love for man and that He tasted death for every man (Heb. 2:9) and it is through the blood of Christ we are reconciled to God and forgiven of our sins.  But just because Jesus died for the ungodly, tasting death for every man - we know that not every man will be saved (Mt. 7:13-14).  WHY?  Because not every man is willing to accept God and "DO" what He says in order to be saved.

4.  Eph. 2:8-9 - I do not believe that this verse does not elimate any human activity in order to one to receive God's grace.  I believe it teaches that it is beyond the abilty of mankind to merit in any way the grace of God's gift in sending His son to die.  Grace always means that He freely gives to an individual some favor which we could not ever design or obtain on our owm thinking or doing.  Yet the reception of that grace is ALWAYS qualified by some response from the recipient(s).   For example:  Noah found GRACE in the eyes of God (Gen. 6:8) and by FAITH Noah did what God told him to "do" - he prepared an ark to the SAVING of his house (Gen. 6:22).  Did Noah's DOING what God told him to "DO" negate the grace God offered?  Absolutely not!  Would God have saved Noah if he had refused to "do" what God commanded him to "do?"  Certainly not.  Only when Noah cooperated by obeying the Lord was he saved  by grace.  Obedience is not earning or meriting salvation, it is receiving or requiring the grace God offers in His appointed way.  Refusing to do what God requires is an insult to His grace!

But before  leave this point, I want to address the book of Romans - When we study Romans diligently it will become obvious that Paul used the idea of justification (salvation) by "works" in two different senses. In chpater 2 Paul clearly teaches that there is justification (salvaiton) which comes by works.  God "will render to every man according to his deeds" (vs. 6); "to that by patient continuance in well doing...eternal life." (vs. 7).  Conversly, God's "indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish" will be for those who "do not obey the truth" nd upon every soul of man that doeth evil, of the Jew first, and also of the Gentile" (vs. 8-9).  Then going back to the rewards of the righteous  doing, Paul promises that God will give "glory, honour, and peace to every man that worketh good, to the Jew first, and also to the Gentile.  For there is no respect of person with God." (vs. 10-11).

I think this is enough - I hope you see the need I have place on the understanding of the Scriptures.  I believe it is important to know the Bible but also to keep it in its context!

My final question is - you never answered my last question concerning one example of your desription of what you tell people to do in order to be saved. I am looking for just one example.

To answer your final quesiton - Would I consider you a brother or evanglestic opportunity?  I view EVERYONE as an evangelsitic opportunity. I hope you view me as the same. Because if you love me and if you believe I am wrong - I hope it is your desire to teach me the truth. 

Again, I hope this is helping you as much as it is me!

Yes it is good to converse with you. I think we can conclude that it is a matter of interpretation. Otherwise we will continue to go in circles. I believe i am saved. I am a Christian who attends a Baptist church but i belive i am saved. I will have to study more of the church of Christ's interpretations of Scriptures. I do beleive the teaching of baptism is a false teaching. heres why...In Acts the meaning of Peter's statement that baptism is "for the forgivness of sins" is not proof that we must be baptized to be forgiven. That view ignores the immediate context of the passage. Baptism would have been a dramatic step for Peter's hearers. By publicaly identifying themselves as follwers of Jesus, they risked becoming outcasts in their society (see John 9:22). Peter calls upong them to prove the genuiness of their repentance by submitting to public baptism. A similar instance is when Jesus called upon the rich young ruler to prove the genuiness of his repentence by parting with his wealth (Luke 18:18-27) Surely no one would argue from this passage that giving away all your possessions is necessary for salvation. Salvation is not a matter of either water or economics. True repentence will manifest itself in total submisison to God's will. This teaching also violates hermenuitics. the principle called analogia Scriptura (analogy of Scripture) states that no passage, when correctly interpreted, will teach something contradictory to rest of Scripture. And the rest of Scripture unmistakably teaches that salvation is solely by faith (John 1:12; 3:16; Acts 16:31; Romams 3:21-30; 4:5; 10:9-10; Phil. 3:9; Gal. 2:16) This interpretation is also not true to the facts of Scripture. Throughout the book of Acts, forgiveness is linked to repentance, not baptism. (3:19; 5:31; 26:20) The Bible also records that some who were baptized were not saved (Acts 8:13; 21-23) while some were svaed with no mention of their being baptized (Luke 7:37-50; Matt. 9:2 Luke 18:13-14) The story of Cornelius and his friends very clearly shows the relationship of baptism to salvation. It was only after they were saved, as shown by their recieving the Holy SPirit (Acts 10:44-46) that they were baptized (v. 47-48). It was because they had recieved the spirit (and hence were saved) that Peter ordered them to be baptized. (v. 47) the passage clearly shows that baptism follows salvation; it does not cause it. In 1 Corinthians 15:1-4 paul summarizes the gospel he preachied and by which the Corinthians were saved. There is no mention of baptism. also, in 1 Corinthians 1:14-16, Paul rejoiced that he had baptized none of the Corinthians except Crispus, Gaius, and the houshold of Sephanas. That statment is terrible if baptism is necessary for salvation. If this is true Paul then would be saying that he was glad only a few were "saved" under his minstry. This does not make sense. Rather Paul clearly distinguishes baptism form teh gospel in 1 Cor. 1:17 where he says that "Christ did nto send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel." How could Paul have made such a statemtn if baptism was necessary for Salvaiton? The order is clear in Scripture. REpentance is for forgiveness. baptism follows that forgivenss, it does not cause it. (Acts 8:12, 34-39,; 10:34-48; 16:31-33)Baptism is an important step of obedience for all believers and shoud be closley follow conversion. I appreciate your study and your time with me. I know i have asked many quesitons and responded more than you probably anticipated. You seem to be zealous and inteligent. I beelive the Scritures to be interpreted differntly but i will contine to study the Word and ask God what it says. I know i am saved. I praise God for that. I praise God for your time. I beleive God has used you to create a deeper desire in me to study the Word deeper. God Bless

Without sounding rude - I disagree with your statement at the very beginning of your post that stated, "
I think we can conclude that it is a matter of interpretation." I disagree, it has to be a matter of "misinterpretation."  We both cannot be right. And as far as you studying the "churches of Christ interpretation,"  we have no interpretation, we just believe what the Bible teaches.  I am going to point out some things from your last post that I truly believe will show that you are wrong in your teaching and I hope you will study the scriptures as I have.  I have studied every thing you have said and look at it from every point of view.

You stated, "I do believe that the teaching of baptism is a false teaching." - If this is true, then you should have no fellowship with me as you stated you could in an earlier post.  The Bible teaches that we are to "mark and avoid them that are false teachers." (Rom. 16:16).

But now let us look at your post:
1.  You stated, "In Acts the meaning of Peter's statement that 'baptism is for the remission of sins' is not proof that we must be baptized to be forgiven."  How can you say that?  When they ask Peter what to do to be saved (which is the context) he said, "repent and be baptized...for the forgiveness of sins."  NOw why would you try to "interpret" that any other way?  It was thisa same apostle that stated in 1 Peter 3:21 - the "baptism also now SAVES us."  What more proof cann one want?

2.  Later in your post you stated, "true repentance will manifest totla submission to God's will."  I am very confused.  So far in your other post you stated there was nothing man could "do."  and yet now you are saying man must repent.  If baptism is a work then so is repentance (Jonah 3:10 - states that repentance is a work).  My point is that you cannot have it both ways.  You cannot be saved soley by faith and then also have to repent.  That is you "doing something."

3.  The your statement as adressed concerning Hermenutics:  Go back and look at your own statement:  "no passage of Scripture, when correctly interpretated, will teach something contradictory to the rest of the Scriptures." - then you stated, "the scriptures unmistakeably teach that salvation is solely by faith" - again this contradicts what you had just said concerning "true repentance" -  Baptism does not contradict the scriptures, it shows God's will.  One cannot just take one verese of Scripture and base an entire doctrine on it.  You have to see the WHOLE picture.  Evenn in the verses you used such as Acts 16:31 about belief - just drop down a few more vereses and see he was baptized in the middle of the night - how will this fit your argument as you stated from Acts 2?

4.  You made the statement that "some where even baptized who were not saved" - Where do you get this?  It cannot be from the passage you stated in Acts 8:13, 21-23.  Simon did exactly what the Samaritans had done to be saved.  He had the wrong attitude of Christianity and was told to "repent" (vs. 22).  This is the same for us today that are Christians (1 John 1:7-9).  But to say he was not a Christian is a far assumption.

5.  You also stated that there were some saved where there was no mention of baptism" and you referenced Matthew and Luke.  Both of these books deal with the earthly ministry of Christ.  These individuals lived before the great commission was given (Mark 16:15-16).  One cannot go back to people who lived under the old law and look for a way to be saved.

6.  You also used Paul account in 1 Cor. 15:1-4.  You stated that Pual summarizes the Gospel he preached by which the Corinthians were saved.  You stated, "there is no mention of baptism" - I totally disagree. Number 1 - what is the "gospel?"  It is the death, burial and resurrection - obeying the gospel is the same - we must die (crucify the old manof sin) then bury him (baptism) and be raised to walk in the newness of life (Rom. 6:4-6).  And if you go back and study the Corinthians you will see that is exactly what they did.  Acts 181:8. (vs. 8 - "many of the Coritnhians hearing believed, and were baptized.")  the reason Paul was glad he had not baptized any of them except Crispus, Gaius and the household of Stephans was that they Corinthians had become "preacher followers" and full of pride based on who baptized them.

7.  Last section:  You stated, "The order is clear in Scripture, repentance is for forgiveness.  Baptism follows that forgiveness, it does not cause it."  I request you go back and look at all the verses in Scripture that deal with baptism.  Every conversion in the book of Acts shows they were baptized.  Jesus Himself stated "He that believeth AND baptized shall be saved" (Mk. 16:16).  Jesus taught that salvation followed baptism.  Peter stated, "repent AND be baptized for the remission of sins" *(Acts 2:38)  Forgiveness of sins followed baptism.  And I could go on and on.

My final thoughts:  If baptism is not necessary - why did God command it.  You have aready stated that you believed that baptism was a command.  If it is a command then it is necessary.  If not why then does EVERY conversion after the great commission show baptism?  Why did Peter state that "baptism saves us" (1 Pt. 3:21).

I am also still waiting on your reponse to show me one example from the Scriptures of one who is taught salvation the way you teach.

Thanks for your interest!

I appreciate your time. You are very smart and eloquent. You would beat me in any debate for sure. I will study the Scriptures further. Thanks for your time. God Bless.

It is not about who wins or loses, it is about gaining knowledge of God's Word.  I too have had to look deeper at the Scriptures.  I really appreciate your time, questions and replies.  I look forward to meeting you sometime.  Please let me know if we can ever get together.  Thanks.