What do we think about Tim Keller?

[JesusFan]

As would I. However, the distinction goes far deeper than semantics. Salvation happens FIRST. Baptism happens AFTERWARDS. Baptism is a step of obedience which ought to happen soon after conversion. If the act of baptism is a requirement for salvation, then salvation is no longer a work of grace. If you're coming out of an SDA background, you should be very familiar with the work of GRACE through FAITH as outlined in Ephesians and Galatians. This also has huge implications on the eternal security of the believer, which is labeled as Once Saved Always Saved. I've heard some good reasoning for a distinction between OSAS and the eternal security but suffice to say that when grace saves you, YOU ARE SECURE! You can't back out of it. If you want to back out, I can't say you were ever saved. There's also a great study in (I believe) Hebrews ch. 9 that shows if someone backs out of salvation, there's no longer a sacrifice for that individual.

Sda theology has those 2 damnable doctrines of Ellen White, first being must keep Jewish Sabbath, and other is Investigative Judgement, which would mean none would ever get saved

 

[JesusFan]

For Christ also suffered once for sins, the righteous for the unrighteous, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive in the spirit, in which he went and proclaimed to the spirits in prison, because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water. Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, with angels, authorities, and powers having been subjected to him. (1 Pet. 3:18-22)​

The first half of that is confusing and unclear what it means. I've left it in for context. It's the latter half--vv. 21-22--that's significant. While Peter says "baptism ... now saves you," he goes on to say it's not the physical act, but what it represents: an appeal to God.

Like communion, baptism is a sacrament--properly understood, a symbol or sign. It represents something else. The sign is the physical washing of the body. The thing signified is the washing of the spirit by the blood of Christ. Baptismal regenerationists, such as Roman Catholics, Lutherans or Campbellites, confuse symbol and substance.



But it is a big deal, because Christ commanded it. It is not a necessity for salvation, but it is a necessity for obedience. If the regenerationists conflate the symbol and the substance, people who say baptism is no big deal (implying it's something entirely optional) divorce them. If baptism is the sign of that good conscience before God, then the Christian ought to embrace it as a testimony to what God has worked in him. But leave the credit to Christ for the saving work that he has accomplished; don't credit it to the water.

On ther practical side also, many churches would require that for membership and being in leadership

 

[JesusFan]

I take it you're calvinist. Since you said you can't be Christian until....but that doesn't mean we aren't sinners so I don't get the distinction. That's why Jesus died for us. We have sin nature. And yet we can be raised Christian our entire life not sure how that's a red flag to believe in God.

No issue with saying was traised in a Christian home, or in a Christian church, but we should not say always been a Christian

 

[Ransom]

On ther practical side also, many churches would require that for membership and being in leadership

Baptism is the rite of initiation into the Christian community. So this makes consistent sense. Although my own church is effectively Baptist, my denomination is historically an alliance of independent churches that were not all credobaptists from the beginning, so that while the denomination is now officially credobaptist, baptism for members is not pushed as emphatically as I would like.

 

[Devout_Christian]

Sda theology has those 2 damnable doctrines of Ellen White, first being must keep Jewish Sabbath, and other is Investigative Judgement, which would mean none would ever get saved

SDA is damnable doctrine. But also I struggle with some nice people I knew in the denomination that have passed because IV (investigative judgment) is a gigantic red flag and yet people still consider it "christian". Im disappointed Walter Martin in The Kingdom of the Cults didn't straight up denounce them as a cult.

 

[Devout_Christian]

I dislike labels. There are many things Calvinists get right and I largely hold the Calvinistic position myself but I also see how God has used other groups to keep Calvinists "Fair and Balanced" regarding their influence throughout Church history. The Pietists and Wesleyans both stress the necessity of a "conversion experience" of which Bro Caines was trying to articulate here. Lutherans were slipping into Scholasticism and Calvinists (especially with Beza's influence) were becoming Supralapsarian and fatalistic often in reaction to the threat of the Jesuits basically saying "If you are not as Calvinistic as we are, you must be collaborating with the Jesuits" and such it was when the Remonstrants raised their objections. None of this is of any real significance here though aside from the fact that God often uses our imperfect theological application and understanding in order to "change and correct" the couse of the ship (church).

Bro Caines is well-balanced in his statement here stressing both God's sovereignty and man's responsibility. Often we are "Raised Christian" and assume we are so because of this. Fact of the matter is that we must be born again (Regenerate) and this is something that is supernatural and solely the work of God! We are born not of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man but of God. We may "Decide" we need to be saved but it is God who brings us to such a decision! I believe that Bro. Caines and I (as well as most others) would be in agreement here.

You keep speaking of OSAS. Rather than giving my opinion, perhaps I should ask what your objections might happen to be to such a position?

It's why I left non denominational churches and baptists churches. I knew several members who wanted there kids to get baptized. They pressured them just 13 years old dome younger. The reason it was important was this OSAS doctrine. In there mind, this young impressionable kid, now being pressured to be baptized; who can backside as an adult, now is a Christian. Who if he was to die is automatically saved. So the idea is you pressure kids young and then you lovk them in. I heard another story of a "Christian" who got baptized as a kid died of a drug overdose and everyone kept saying well he was baptized young. Though clearly he was unregenerate doing drugs consistently. I kept hearing more stories like that from the OSAS crowd and had pushy Christians tell me why I'm wrong and God is sovereign so I'm wrong they are right case closed. I dunno I'm tired I'll leave it there tonight.

 

[Baptist Renegade]

It's why I left non denominational churches and baptists churches. I knew several members who wanted there kids to get baptized. They pressured them just 13 years old dome younger. The reason it was important was this OSAS doctrine. In there mind, this young impressionable kid, now being pressured to be baptized; who can backside as an adult, now is a Christian. Who if he was to die is automatically saved. So the idea is you pressure kids young and then you lovk them in. I heard another story of a "Christian" who got baptized as a kid died of a drug overdose and everyone kept saying well he was baptized young. Though clearly he was unregenerate doing drugs consistently. I kept hearing more stories like that from the OSAS crowd and had pushy Christians tell me why I'm wrong and God is sovereign so I'm wrong they are right case closed. I dunno I'm tired I'll leave it there tonight.

Knee-jerk reactions should always be avoided although our past experiences often shape our biases. There is much lunacy going around in the name of "Once Saved Always Saved" resulting in some really horrible orthopraxy - especially among "Suthren Babtists" of which I am loosely affiliated (because I happen to be a member of a Southern Baptist Church). What we must not do is allow such biases to dictate our doctrinal positions!

For many "Suthren Babtists," their understanding of OSAS never goes beyond Jn 10:27-29 ("No man can pluck them from my hand...") and what they fail to realize is if you are safe in your "Father's Hand," you are also OWNED by the Father meaning that your life has been indelibly changed and you will not just do whatever you want or "use your salvation as a license to sin" or whatever. When the scriptures talk of being "raised to a new life in Christ," it is not speaking figuratively or theoretically!

 

[abcaines]

For many "Suthren Babtists," their understanding of OSAS never goes beyond Jn 10:27-29 ("No man can pluck them from my hand...") and what they fail to realize is if you are safe in your "Father's Hand," you are also OWNED by the Father meaning that your life has been indelibly changed and you will not just do whatever you want or "use your salvation as a license to sin" or whatever. When the scriptures talk of being "raised to a new life in Christ," it is not speaking figuratively or theoretically

If "OSAS" stuck to this standard, I wouldn't have an issue with it. It's when someone takes this idea to mean that as long as you have claimed your "fire insurance" with a prayer and a mental ascension of facts and calls it eternal security, that I take umbrage.

 

[illinoisguy]

Here is my version of "Once Saved Always Safe:" "For we are made partakers of Christ, IF we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end." - Hebrews 3:14

See also Romans 6:1-2: "Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?"

 

[subllibrm]

Tim Keller.

Nope. Don't really think about him that often.

 

[Baptist Renegade]

If "OSAS" stuck to this standard, I wouldn't have an issue with it. It's when someone takes this idea to mean that as long as you have claimed your "fire insurance" with a prayer and a mental ascension of facts and calls it eternal security, that I take umbrage.

I was out "Street Preeching" in downtown San Diego and one of our members talked with a young man who said "I used to be a Christian just like you but now I worship Satan!"

My fellow street preecher had the audacity to tell this young man he believed he was "saved" because once upon a time he "prayed a prayer!" This is the epitome of sloppy, brain-dead theology at work except this wasn't "Suthren Babtist" but a hard-core "INDEEEEPENDANT FUND-EYE-MEN-TAL KING JAMES BIBLE BEE-LEE-VING" Babtist who ought to have known better right?

Hey man, we were doing the "Lord's Work" waving around our King James Bibles and shouting at cars stopped at the stoplight!

 

[abcaines]

I was out "Street Preeching" in downtown San Diego and one of our members talked with a young man who said "I used to be a Christian just like you but now I worship Satan!"

My fellow street preecher had the audacity to tell this young man he believed he was "saved" because once upon a time he "prayed a prayer!" This is the epitome of sloppy, brain-dead theology at work except this wasn't "Suthren Babtist" but a hard-core "INDEEEEPENDANT FUND-EYE-MEN-TAL KING JAMES BIBLE BEE-LEE-VING" Babtist who ought to have known better right?

Hey man, we were doing the "Lord's Work" waving around our King James Bibles and shouting at cars stopped at the stoplight!

Right!?

 

[JesusFan]

Baptism is the rite of initiation into the Christian community. So this makes consistent sense. Although my own church is effectively Baptist, my denomination is historically an alliance of independent churches that were not all credobaptists from the beginning, so that while the denomination is now officially credobaptist, baptism for members is not pushed as emphatically as I would like.

Per a Baptist mindset regarding water Baptism, it would do 2 things. First would be a public declaration in Jesus as our Lord and Savior now, a Confession of the faith, but also confessing identification with a local assembly of like minded believers

 

[JesusFan]

SDA is damnable doctrine. But also I struggle with some nice people I knew in the denomination that have passed because IV (investigative judgment) is a gigantic red flag and yet people still consider it "christian". Im disappointed Walter Martin in The Kingdom of the Cults didn't straight up denounce them as a cult.

Sda holds to another gospel, a false one, and Dr martin was lied to by the Sda leadership, and many in top leadership still accepted EW as inspired prophetess and her IJ heresy.
even Dr martin later stated just before he died on John Ackerberg show that if the SDA kept holding to her as their inspired prophetess, then would be labeled now a cult

 

[JesusFan]

It's why I left non denominational churches and baptists churches. I knew several members who wanted there kids to get baptized. They pressured them just 13 years old dome younger. The reason it was important was this OSAS doctrine. In there mind, this young impressionable kid, now being pressured to be baptized; who can backside as an adult, now is a Christian. Who if he was to die is automatically saved. So the idea is you pressure kids young and then you lovk them in. I heard another story of a "Christian" who got baptized as a kid died of a drug overdose and everyone kept saying well he was baptized young. Though clearly he was unregenerate doing drugs consistently. I kept hearing more stories like that from the OSAS crowd and had pushy Christians tell me why I'm wrong and God is sovereign so I'm wrong they are right case closed. I dunno I'm tired I'll leave it there tonight.

My Baptist church leadership has caught some flack i that we will not baptize children before age 12, tied into the concept of accountability

 

[JesusFan]

Knee-jerk reactions should always be avoided although our past experiences often shape our biases. There is much lunacy going around in the name of "Once Saved Always Saved" resulting in some really horrible orthopraxy - especially among "Suthren Babtists" of which I am loosely affiliated (because I happen to be a member of a Southern Baptist Church). What we must not do is allow such biases to dictate our doctrinal positions!

For many "Suthren Babtists," their understanding of OSAS never goes beyond Jn 10:27-29 ("No man can pluck them from my hand...") and what they fail to realize is if you are safe in your "Father's Hand," you are also OWNED by the Father meaning that your life has been indelibly changed and you will not just do whatever you want or "use your salvation as a license to sin" or whatever. When the scriptures talk of being "raised to a new life in Christ," it is not speaking figuratively or theoretically!

Why I prefer the reformed doctrine of The Perseverance of the Saints, as we would see it as one who is confessing have been saved, shall confirm that until death

 

[JesusFan]

If "OSAS" stuck to this standard, I wouldn't have an issue with it. It's when someone takes this idea to mean that as long as you have claimed your "fire insurance" with a prayer and a mental ascension of facts and calls it eternal security, that I take umbrage.

Think Calvin had this right when he stated that while its indeed truth we are saved by grace alone thru faith alone, the faith that saves us will not be alone, as it will be resulting in us having good works as fruit and evidence that we have now been saved

 

[JesusFan]

Here is my version of "Once Saved Always Safe:" "For we are made partakers of Christ, IF we hold the beginning of our confidence stedfast unto the end." - Hebrews 3:14

See also Romans 6:1-2: "Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?"

The Elect of God in Christ jesus shall continue in the Faith, as while will and can sin still, will not reject the Lord who saved them, as Bible admonition to those doing that were all lost persons who never had really been saved

 

[Ransom]

Per a Baptist mindset regarding water Baptism, it would do 2 things. First would be a public declaration in Jesus as our Lord and Savior now, a Confession of the faith, but also confessing identification with a local assembly of like minded believers

Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be unto the party baptized, a sign of his fellowship with him, in his death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into him; of remission of sins; and of giving up into God, through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness of life. (LBCF 20.1)​

We're engrafted into Christ; the confession says nothing about baptism engrafting us into a local assembly.

If that were the case, presumably a new baptism would be required when a believer moved to a new church, to confess identfication with that assembly. But no one actually puts that into practice apart from a few extremists--Baptist Briders and the like. But we don't: we receive people baptized in other churches, even other denominations, provided the believer was baptized as an adult upon his own confession. Because we're baptized into the church, not a church.

 

[Ransom]

If "OSAS" stuck to this standard, I wouldn't have an issue with it. It's when someone takes this idea to mean that as long as you have claimed your "fire insurance" with a prayer and a mental ascension of facts and calls it eternal security, that I take umbrage.

OSAS is true because monergism is true. The God who worked to save you, also works to keep you. Conversely, to say you can lose your salvation, therefore, is actually saying God might lose you.

Semi-Pelagian churches that nonetheless hold to eternal security get the conclusion right but undermine its theogical and logical foundations. Full Arminianism, teaching that you can fall from grace, is more consistent. If through an act of free will you can sign up, then exercising that same free will, you can drop out.