I hope this will encourage those who would refute the error of legalism and mis-interpretation of Scripture to keep up the good fight...you never know who might be "lurking" and discover the truth for themselves!

Carry on.

-- Nunyo Beeswax (just_say_no_2_neopharisees@hotmail.com), January 08, 2002

Answers

By the way, this is a BRILLIANT idea !!!

-- Connie (hive827@cs.com), January 11, 2002.

Here is your answer, Nelta.

I'm sure you will keep everything on a Christian, loving level.

Blessings,

-- Connie (hive827@cs.com), January 30, 2002.

Interesting that you say that, Connie. I don't see a principle in scripture that says "attack others when they have offended you". Yet your name is all over posts in this forum attacking people from another forum. Is that a loving Christian attitude?

Understand, I'm not trying to defend anyone. My concern is proper behaviour. Let others act worldly by meeting (perceived or real) slander for slander, disception for deception.

"It is not to be that way with you".

-- Mark Winstead (JesusIsMarksLord@netscape.net), January 30, 2002.

Well it looks like this forum may be getting it's act together, thanks to Nelta and Mark. I understand from having followed conversation here and at the other forum, that they (Mark& Nelta) do not agree with oneanother on the plan of salvation. Perhaps if we (you all) can keep it friendly, Nelta and others will be able to persuade you to see the light.

And to you both (M&N), your Christian behavior here is like a breath of frsh air!

-- Lisa (lrcjohnson@yahoo.com), January 30, 2002.

Actually, I don't recall ever spelling out my full belief on what the plan of salvation is in any concise form anywhere. Reading Nelta's concise version, I don't know that one can find a clear difference.

I don't believe any one action saves us, but rather our general submission to Christ as our Lord and Saviour. Now, submission includes obedience, but obedience isn't necessarily submission. But that's another topic for another thread.

Submitted to Christ, giving our life away in order to gain eternal life, we then obey him. A single, isolated act of disobedience won't separate us from Christ as long as we walk in the light, as he is in the light (I John chapter 1). But a continued rebellion is not walking in the light.

When it comes to baptism, we see 1) Jesus did it (an example), 2) those who turned to Christ all did it in Acts 2:38 3) Cornelius and his household did it. Jesus instructed the disciples to baptize all those who come to believe. Is baptism necessary? One only needs to be baptized once, to continuously refuse to do it sounds like rebellion to me. Should we baptize others who come to believe? Well, the Great Commission tells me to baptize, so I will do that. Otherwise, it's rebellion.

Moreover, Romans 6 shows us that one purpose of baptism is an object lesson. Baptism symbolizes that we are dead, buried and raised anew.

Obviously we can debate in circles for years when the moment of salvation comes. And if you want to do it, fine, go ahead without me. But I know that assurance of salvation comes when I submit to God, walk in his ways, striving to obey all that he commands. I may stumble, but if I am continuously seeking relationship with Him, I know the blood of Jesus flows over me, cleansing me. But if I openly disobey, I damage the relationship.

The bible uses the analogy of marriage alot, and I tend to think of it that way. My wife likes me to put the toilet seat down. I love her, so I do. When we were first married, I regularly forgot, but I was forgiven because I made the effort -- and eventually I never forgot. Now if I had purposely left it up, and she figured that out, that would start a rift between us.

Baptism is a one time thing. A few years back, Lagard Smith wrote the book "Baptism: the believer's wedding ceremony". I believe that is a great analogy. A wedding cermony is performed once, like baptism. Two people (generally) love one another and have a relationship before the ceremony, much like God and us and baptism.

I've rambled long enough, and this was suppose to be concise, wasn't it?

-- Mark Winstead (JesusIsMarksLord@netscape.net), January 31, 2002.

Well, it seems I agree with mark on immersion. But i would like to re-post the following to comment:

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Interesting that you say that, Connie. I don't see a principle in scripture that says "attack others when they have offended you". Yet your name is all over posts in this forum attacking people from another forum. Is that a loving Christian attitude? Understand, I'm not trying to defend anyone. My concern is proper behaviour. Let others act worldly by meeting (perceived or real) slander for slander, disception for deception.

"It is not to be that way with you".

-- Mark Winstead (JesusIsMarksLord@netscape.net), January 30, 2002.

++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++

Have you forgotten how this played out?

I copied and pasted a statement ON AN OPEN FORUM you made, and brought it here because it was being discussed here.

You e-mailed me privately, admonishing me.

To be polite, I e-mailed you back PRIVATELY.

You brought a PRIVATE e-mail here, to embarras me. I have ignored it until now.

I can still let it go, but please cease and desist with the holier- than-thou stance.

You are the one who made the first statement against E. Lee; I wasn't.

What you did is no more holy than what I did, in fact less.

I am sad that I ever found that satanic forum. Before going there, I would never have believed that there are 'Christians' in the world like they are. Of course, the answer is that they are not Christians, and have never been 'born from above by the Spirit'.

But, Boy, have they been immersed! Like Paul, whose comment about being cut off all the way might seem unkind, too bad they didn't go under and stay under.

I know I will get self-righteous responses for saying this, but that's O.K. I believe their gospel is another gospel which the Lord Jesus Christ would not recognize as coming from Him.

I believe that it is correct to refute heresy, so I will do so.

But I shall also TRY to refrain from even mentioning them, if you will also stop.

I re-post from my first response in the PRIVATE e-mail:

Most of the time I forgive them their ignorance, but, like you, I sometimes forget to forgive. Human, you know.

Blessings,

Connie

P.S.

That is why I said to the moderator of the new site that perhaps he might not want to separate them on this matter. It's the only thing they agree on!!!

-- Connie (hive827@cs.com), January 31, 2002.

Connie, I have openly confessed the mistake for the first statement against E. Lee (but not the fake quote -- I didn't do that). That should have been handled privately, and wish to cease the damage started against him. If he ever repents of the attitude that has caused others to be offended by him (not offended by the occasional/rare truth he might say, but by his style that comes off unlovingly), I would love to be able to see him have room to be lovingly accepted again. Comments like I made would prevent that, which is why I wish to see as much as what I said purged. Does anyone understand that?

Now, Connie, I have privately tried to make you see the light of this approach, but you have thus far refused. I have merely shown others my attempts at this and your response. You retain a sense of vengence and a demand for others to repent. And fine, perhaps I should have assumed an invisible disclaimer on your e-mail to me. For now on, I will do so. Feel free to ask the moderator to nominate any posts of mine that you would have deleted that have offended you.

But please remember that sin stains. We can rub in and bake in the stain, making it harder to clean by our actions. I think your actions towards some might just do that. Sin can damage, even after forgiveness. The damage might stop, but healing takes time. Let's stop rubbing salt into the wounds caused by others, ok?

-- Mark Winstead (JesusIsMarksLord@netscape.net), January 31, 2002.

Mark,

In my first response to you I apologized for offending you and have said here that I need to forgive them and have asked the Lord's help in doing so.

If you had not posted my private e-mail to you, I could have dropped it but you seem to want to keep it alive and grind it in.

I responded to your very unfriendly e-mail simply to be polite. You abused your privilege of a private e-mail in posting it.

They have done great damage to the body of Christ, and I do not want that to continue.

Two years ago I would never have even responded to their lies, but I now believe that they should be confronted because of the damage they do.

I would like to see this forum get away from these personal exchanges and onto discussing Biblical truths.

Why bring their garbage here?

I have been as guilty as anyone and am sorry for that.

Blessings,

Connie

-- Connie (hive827@cs.com), January 31, 2002.

Hey,

Is this a new forum? Am I reading this correctly? A place I will not be banned from posting on for telling the truth?

Wow!!! This is almost too good to be true!

Hello, sis Connie - looks like you have fought a good fight of faith and helped to turned this forum around?!

Well, I will make it a point to come back and check this out!

-- Barry Hanson (obci2000@yahoo.com), February 10, 2002.

Hi, Barry,

The fellow who started this was also fed up, but he did something about it.

And if it didn't bother Danny, why did he move his forum to the 'Private Forum' section?

(It is still there, but no one can enter without identifying him/herself).

At first, this forum was right below Danny's. So he moved his to the 'Private Forum' section.

I believe there were two reasons for his closing his forum to just anyone.

One was to keep E.Lee out and one was to keep the rest of us from bringing postings from there to here.

Good to see you back.

Have you ever come across 'Defensor Fidei' from the 'Christian Talk' forum? I know he was wrong, wrong, wrong about an awful lot, but he was interesting.

Blessings,

-- Connie (hive827@cs.com), February 10, 2002.