We belive in baptism as the lord commanded. You have the Jews that already in Abrahamic covernant through circumcisn recovenented. Unscritural!

Paedo's say see it says 'children'! It's talking about Abrahams promise.
Had Peter STOPPED at 'children', this would have limited the scope of the promise and paedo's could have seen a specific call to action to a child.
But Peter goes on, ' to all...far off ...as many as God calls'.
This is the opening of the Gospel to all, no longer Just the Jews.
'Whosoever shall call shall be saved' V21
This is refering to Joel's prophesy V16,17. That in the last days, God will pour out His Spirit on Jew& Gentile.

Paedo's, in 2013 America, to an exclusively gentile audience, say we need to baptise to appropriate Abrahams promise.
But ACTS 2:39 was spoken in Jerusalem where there were Jews, and lots of em, from all over the Empire V9,10.
They and their children were already circumcised in Abrahams tradition. Imagine Peter telling them, 'oh, don't forget to baptise your children so ya all can appropriate Abrahams promise.' If paedo's are right, then Peter's telling them that their circumcision is void and a changeover to baptism happens. When & how? Were they ok yesterday?

Murdo P. wrote:
'Evangelicals and Catholics together' came about because Christians are panicking about losing the struggle to the secular side of society. With the church dying in numbers and doctrine ECT was an attempt by some to try to build upon a basis which hope, faith and love sought to overcome error with. Society gets worse and the future looks bleak, anything is worth a try and a united front might have had some good effect. Mans responsibility exists under a sovereign God.

There, need we say more.

Mike, don't forget your grumpy, ornery old grandpa whose too senile to confess it all. Ugly mean spiritedness is a sin and he'll die that way. To hell that he goes after retiring from the mission fields. Right?

Can you tell me what about suicide that lands you in hell? It all reduces to the last act for which you cannot confess of

Unconfessed sin that you do not have the opportunity to confess. That's all

My concern is that we can get so caught up in in letter but not the intent of Gods heart. I am all too guilty of that.

I know how dangerous the last statement can be given the liberal redefining of sin.

"And meanwhile, every second, another sinner drops into hell for ever"

Only saints moved by the power of the Holy Spirit can have this burden.
From Gen to Rev, on whomever Gods hand anointed, it moved the saint to tearful intercession for His people. It brought Daniel to fast and pray in sackcloth & ashes. Moses, Elijah, David, even our Lord wept. Paul, even the chains of prison couldn't hold him back from getting this great message of hope out to the people. Paul had such an urgency to get to as many people as possible, that He left the baptizing to others.

God doesn't need us. The mountains & the trees would declare His name. Yet God chose us to share in His joy.

"Shall I hide from Abraham that thing which I do"

Now who are we that God would want to council with anyway?
So that, like Abraham, we too can plead with God, 'what if there's only 50'.

Somewhere, you will come across a stranger who will think you a nut for sharing Jesus. But somewhere, there's a mother that's praying day & night. What joy to her to know that her loved on has run into a saint. And one day in the darkest hour, the stranger will remember that theirs is inheritance.

mourner wrote:
A successful suicide or self murder doesn't leave much of an opportunity to repent or believe in the blood of Christ for forgiveness

John for JESUS wrote:
1)Yes, but not "on his own" as you say. Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God. (Romans 10:17 NKJV). As God says.

Now you have two people. One accepts the gospel. The other reject it.
This is decicision left to them to make on their own. And it is theirs to make on their own for they have that ability within them.
Ergo....."on their own'

1517 wrote:
"So, to clarify, a person has the ability, within themselves, to be faithful, THEN God saves them?
what is the antecedent CAUSE of that faith?"

GsTexas wrote:
I've explained the Gospel to people as crystal clear as possible, and it had absolutely no effect.
Why is that

J4 will keep repeating his mantra, "we can only boast in the Lord".
Because it sounds biblical.

John for JESUS wrote:
Yes, people have the ability to have faith.
The antecedent cause is the desire of the sinner to be spared from hell or out of love for someone who loved them so much.

Some repent and believe out of love for Jesus and fear of God's judgement.

there is a law of faith that we can obey and it results in righteousness

Why would he do that?
Because the sinner has within himself, on his own, a love for Jesus and a fear of hell.

But we shouldn't boast, for God did everything and we should be nice about it.

I am saved because I loved God and I repented. Sam over there is a wretch. I am a better man. I know I shouldn't boast, but I HAVE A RIGHT TO!
J4 is humble & he wouldn't. But I would, & I have a right to.

Where is boasting?
Paul isn't asking us a favor and saying be nice, don't boast.

"Where is boasting?"
Paul is saying you have no leg (of self faith) to stand on. You have no right!

Baker wrote:
1517
the arguments are all from silence and disobedience to the Covenant in which Aberaham was put to sleep , theirby God has sworn by His own Name to accomplish the promises of Gen 17:7
We play no part in it save we are
the gift passed from the Father to the Son

OUR ARGUEMENT IS NOT FROM SILENCE, NOR ARE WE BEING DISSOBEDIENT!!

God has always required 100% compliance of all His laws. Jesus met them perfectly and completely- Mat5:17

Through Christ, WE meet all the requirements of the law perfectly -Phil3:9

Even the requirement of circumcisn Phil3:3.

We do not put any confidence in the works of the flesh. If you keep ANY part of the law, you must keep ALL the laws - Gal5:3,4; James 2:10; Gal3:10-13
Go ahead and do so -Rom10:2,3

We already are heirs to all of Abrahams promise through Christ -Gal 3:14,29

Lets look at your favourite and most quoted passage ACT2:30 next ---

J4 is very clever and deceptive.
He loves the free range of the bible. There are too many rabbit holes for him to pop in and out of.

Nothing he says is in scripture. He just speaks right over the bible yet using the bible.

Hold him in one place and vet his contradiction out thoroughly. J4 loves to scamper around the bible because it hides his contradictions.

Baker wrote:
We will not resolve this Credo Peado division

John for JESUS wrote:
1)
Yes faith comes from God, but how? Is it cast upon people like some kind of Harry Potter spell? Or is it because of the preaching of the gospel? Faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word of God. That's biblical!

2)
John 3:32, 33 KJV
"And what he hath seen and heard, that he testifieth; and no man receiveth his testimony. He that hath received his testimony hath set to his seal that God is true."
I believe the key here is in the tense of the words "receiveth" and "received"

3)
John is saying nobody new currently receives the testimony of Christ, but those who had already received God's word. Those who had never believed in God before the ministry of Jesus were blinded so they could not see and deafened so they could not hear.

2)No! The bible tells us what "recieves" is -and again you over ride the bible!
-Jn 3:27b "... A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven."

John/UK

A church needs to articulate the true clear biblical position, not a blured compromise to accomodate man. People can believe what they want, but the church can give only the biblical position.

A believer can give only the biblical position.

It's not that the Calvinist's go to heaven and everyone else not. God works on people in His time and His ways right up to the end. Salvation is of God and is in His hands.

Baker wrote:
Implicit Expicit is not going to persuade the Presbyterian who would turn that argument on it's ear. Be consistent, tell the Presbyterian where does it say for wemen to partake in the Lord's supper? Be explicit with the verse please.

Would you do an honest sincere examination of the paedo position? Doctrinal errors compound.

helping Bapti wrote:
Baptists need to learn the Covenant of Grace too!!
Especially God's commands in Genesis to Abraham.
[URL=http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=22801202653]]]Covenant Theology & Its Implications Foundations [/URL]
[URL=http://www.sermonaudio.com/sermoninfo.asp?SID=1130123234]]]Infant Baptism as Covenant Keeping[/URL]

Pastor Greg is a staunch regulative principle pastor.

Infant baptism is, at best derived from inferences, and at worst from misinterpretations.

Regulative principle, by definition is an explicit "DO/DO NOT" command principle.

John UK wrote:
The SBC has attempted it by writing a very careful confession which embraces both, which is why they have this sort of problem.
But is it a problem?
Well some would say that the body of Christ comprises Calvinists and none else.
Others would say that the body of Christ comprises saints who have different views.

The body of Christ comprises of those who are clear on what the bible says about who man is and who God is.

Paul was right, sometimes we need to please men and pretend that we can't be sure about the Gospel. That there are many truths!

John for JESUS wrote:
Well isn't that what a lot of Reformed pastors teach? If they hadn't have rejected their Messiah, then there wouldn't have been a holocaust and God has now replaced them?