Return

Is baptism required for salvation?

On many occasions, Jesus made statements like this one: "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life." (John 6:47) Therefore, if a person who believes in Jesus Christ HAS everlasting life, it is clear that nothing else is required.

Jesus also made it clear, as pointed out in the baptism article by Reese Currie Is Baptism Necessary for Salvation?, that believing in Him is only made possible by repentance. He never said that baptism made it possible to believe in Him.

The word "baptize" is a transliteration of the Greek word "baptizo" which means "completely immerse". However, it does not always mean "immerse in water". In Matthew 3:11 John the Baptist says "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire".

Paul points out that "...by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body" (1 Corinthians 12:13). We are "baptized" (immersed) into the body by the Holy Spirit - not by water. Note Galatians 3:26, "For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus" and Romans 5:1 "Therefore having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ". We are children of God by "faith in Jesus Christ".

I believe that a person who professes faith in Christ should be baptized because we should be obedient to God; but I do not believe that a person will be denied everlasting life because they fail to see the need for baptism. If God says that we are "justified by faith", then faith is all that is required.

Return

Does Hebrews 6:4-6 mean that a believer can fall away?

The words of Jesus assure us that any person who truly repents and believes in Him has everlasting life. "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life." (John 6:47) "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life." (John 5:24)

So, if a person is a true believer, it is not possible for them to fall away. Hebrews 6:4-6 is not talking about true believers but rather of those who have "tasted the heavenly gift" and then fell away before coming to complete repentance. For them it is "impossible to renew again to repentance". Thinking of Jesus' words in John 5:24, these are not true believers.

Then the writer says to the true believers "we are confident of better things concerning you" (Hebrews 6:9).

Return

What is the "sin unto death"?

The words of Jesus assure us that any person who truly repents and believes in Him has everlasting life. "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life." (John 6:47) "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life." (John 5:24)

In 1 John 5:16, the writer mentions a "sin leading to death". I have no idea what this means except that I would think that it is a very serious sin and, even though a believer would be forgiven, the person who committed it would be removed from this world.

Return

In Hebrews 10:26, we read "For if we sin willfully..." How do we know that we have commited this sin?

The words of Jesus assure us that any person who truly repents and believes in Him has everlasting life. "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life." (John 6:47) "Most assuredly, I say to you, he who hears My word and believes in Him who sent Me has everlasting life, and shall not come into judgment, but has passed from death into life." (John 5:24)

So, if a person is a true believer, it is not possible for them to sin "willfully". In Hebrews 10:26, we read "For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins..." Again, thinking of Jesus' words in John 5:24, I would say that the writer is not referring to true believers. Real believers are tempted and do commit sins but they are always remorseful and confess the sins and are forgiven. They do not purposely set out to commit a sin without caring about the consequences.

So the writer is talking about people who have received the knowledge of the truth but have not come to complete repentance. If God has revealed the truth to them but they reject it, they are worse than those who rejected Moses' law (Hebrews 10:28,29).

Return

Where can I get a reasonably priced Bible?

You can obtain a Bible for a very reasonable price at www.discountbible.com - Click on "BIBLES & BOOKS" and then select the version you want. We recommend the New King James Version and a paperback copy of this Bible is only $2.49.

You can obtain a good copy of the King James version for a very low price through the International Bible Society on the world wide web. Go to www.gospelcom.net. Click on "Shopping", then click on "I B S online scripture catalog", then click on "English Versions". The KJV paperback is $2.75 ($2.15 or less in bulk quantities) and the KJV softcover is $3.99 ($3.50 or less in bulk quantities).

Return

What determines the dates on which Good Friday and Easter Sunday fall on?

As you know, the crucifixion was on the Preparation for the Jewish Passover. (John 19:14) This was on the fourteenth day of the first month in their year (Exodus 12:6).

The Jews base their calendar on the phases of the moon (they add a thirteenth month to their year every so often in order to keep things in sync).

So the Preparation for the Jewish Passover is fourteen days after the third new moon of our calendar year. The date of the third new moon will, of course, vary from year to year because new moons occur about twenty nine and a half days apart.

In 2006, for example, the third new moon is on March 29th, so the Preparation for the Passover is on April 12th (the Jewish day begins at sunset).

So Easter Sunday is the Sunday following the Preparation for the Passover and, obviously, in the year that Jesus was crucified it would have been three days after the Preparation for the Passover.

I have no idea why the crucifixion is celebrated on the nearest Friday to the Passover. It is a church tradition the origin of which I have no knowledge.

Return

What is your doctrinal position, theologically speaking?

We don't include a doctrinal statement on our website because we don't consider our organization to be a specific denomination.

We are just a couple of men who have earnestly studied the Bible and, based on our involvement with various denominations, have seen the need to proclaim the correct salvation message.

However, it is clear from our writings that we believe in the Divine Inspiration of the Scriptures and the fact that they teach the deity and virgin birth of Jesus Christ, His substitutionary atonement for the sins of the world, His bodily resurrection and the fact that He will return to judge the living and the dead.

We believe that salvation is through faith in Jesus Christ and the fact that a person must repent and turn to God in order to receive this faith. In other words, our doctrine is simply what the Holy Bible says.

Return

What is your understanding of the Johanneum comma (1 John 5:7)? Do you think it is authentic apostolic scripture or an addition?

Regarding 1 John 5:7, it is strange that so many manuscripts do not contain this statement but, as Reese Currie points out in his article Textual Choices and Bible Versions, D.A. Waite listed twenty manuscripts containing the text, and noted its inclusion in the writings of four church fathers, Tertullian, Cyprian, Augustine and Jerome. I am not dogmatic about it but I tend to believe that it is authentic because it is in harmony with other scriptures that speak of "the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ" (2 Corinthians 11:31, Ephesians 1:3, 1 Peter 1:3 for example) and the "Spirit of God" (Romans 15:19, Ephesians 4:30, 1 John 4:2 for example).

Return

What is the best Bible version?

This is a question that the person who sent it answered himself ! Here is his answer:

I have been in the Fundamental Baptist movement for a few years, and coming from a less doctrinally sound movement (Pentecostal/Charismatic) I ate up the Baptist teachings that are so plentiful on the web, like Terry Watkins, David Cloud, Jesus-is-Lord.com, Jesus-is-Saviour.com etc...

Now I have always told God that I would go wherever the truth would lead me, and am diligent to study and to even go against feelings of attachment to beliefs and doctrines to follow God's leading-- He promised to guide us into all truth: that's a lifelong journey. Some people latch on to denominational doctrines and never continue in the Spirit to follow Him.

So God has recently spoken to me regarding the King James Bible, and I was also getting tired of the archaic language and the -eth's. So what if the KJV really is the most accurate? It's locked away in 17th Century English now, and because of that is less accurate than the "devilish" modern versions!

I am still a textus receptus "Received text" believer to this point, as the arguments seem sound and cut and dried, but not so with the KJV arguments. So it is interesting that I have recently switched back to the NKJV. I found this site, right after my prayer time with the Lord. I too had been using Strong's and found the NKJV better or at least as accurate, AND with refreshing and understandable modern English!!!!

New believers and younger people, and people who don't want to check things out are very susceptible to convincing arguments, but as I have grown and gotten older (only 36 yrs old) I have found that what seems so sure and cut and dried is not always true! The other side needs to be examined, we just want to believe what seems comfortable don't we? But God would have us less comfortable than that when it comes to His truth!

God wants us conformed to Jesus' image and filled with His love, with changed lives and hearts, trusting, delighting in Him and obeying from the heart, doing the good works He foreordained, loving Him and our neighbour. Not to be wild eyed fundies like Pharisees splitting doctrinal hairs instead of sharing Christ!

Well thanks again for the amazing inquiry article The Reliability of the New King James Version confirming to me what God was teaching me about Bible versions, I will be sharing it. -sincerely -an ex-KJV Onlyist

Return

How can I get excommunicated from the Roman Catholic church?

This required a little bit of research on our parts, and here is what we have come up with.

To be excommunicated, you need to be a Catholic who is in violation of a Roman Catholic Canon law that requires excommunication. Here is a page that contains the Canon law concerning excommunication: http://www.ourladyswarriors.org/canon/c1364-1399.htm

The most likely one you are violating is Canon 1364 section 1, "An apostate from the faith, a heretic or a schismatic incurs a latae sententiae excommunication, without prejudice to the provision of Can. 194." If you are a member of a "schismatic" church (for instance, any Protestant church), you are technically in violation of Canon 1364. You may also attempt to demonstrate your disbelief in various Catholic doctrines to prove that you are "apostate" from Catholicism. This will be especially necessary if you are not a member of a "schismatic" church. If you are a member of a schismatic church, excommunication is supposed to be automatic.

Here are the basics of what you must do:

An atheist/humanist has a page chronicling his attempts to get out of the Roman Catholic church that you may find interesting. Obviously we disagree with his statements against the true things of Christianity in general, but it may provide you with some more guidance in your own efforts to leave. http://www.geocities.com/Athens/Olympus/5599/excomm/excomm-home.html

Return

Do you agree that Christmas is basically of mankind's secular tradition? Note Jeremiah 10:2-4.

The celebration of Christmas does have some secular traditions. Actually, there is a mixture of God's truth (the virgin birth and the fact that Jesus is the only begotten Son of God) and pagan symbols. I see no point in making an issue of this. People don't actually "worship" mistletoe or Christmas trees. (The passage in Jeremiah 10:2-4 is not talking about something like a Christmas tree. It is talking about making an idol out of wood overlaid with silver and gold).

There are a large number of Biblical ideas that have become distorted and mixed with other ideas. Most of them do not affect the basic Christian doctrine so I don't feel that it is worth the bother of making too much of an issue about them because this would detract from the more important issue - making people aware of the really serious heresies that are plaguing Christendom.

The things that we should be making an issue about are things like teaching people that sprinkling infants with water turns them into Christians or that a person can work their way to heaven by means of sacraments or by "doing the best that they can" or that a person can have salvation simply by "accepting Christ".

In my family we look on Christmas as a time of fellowship and don't even connect it with the birth of Christ. (I celebrate the birth of Christ every day of the year).

Return

There are several non-Greek New Testament manuscripts . How does one, for example, find all of the textual variants of the Latin and Armenian manuscripts?

I think the general consensus among scholars is that the "original" manuscripts of the New Testament, with the possible exception of Matthew, were written in Greek. So they tend to concentrate on the Greek variants, assuming that any variants in other languages from the Greek must simply be errors in either transmission or translation. So I don't really know how one would find all the variants in languages other than Greek.

Having read several of the church fathers, not including Clement of Alexandria I must note, I have found that many times they have paraphrased the Scriptures rather than quoting exactly. When one thinks of how difficult it would be to find a particular text in a group of scrolls with no chapter or verse numbers, and typically in scripto continua (no spaces between words, hope my recollection of Latin is good there) this is understandable, but it does mean that we can't take a variant from the church fathers as seriously as a variant in the Greek manuscripts themselves. Unfortunately in some cases the misquotations of church fathers made it into the manuscript families as corrections by scribes who remembered the church fathers' versions.

There's another side to that which I think is rather important to today's Christian. We today are desperate to find the most accurate rendering of a given verse and give ourselves over to extreme angst when the true rendering is not certain. The church fathers, on the other hand, seem to have paraphrased quite a bit, evidently thinking that conveying the principle in "some words" was as good as conveying the principle in "the exact words." The Christians of the era must have trusted the church fathers (perhaps more than was warranted, in some cases) because many couldn't read the Scriptures in any language, or wouldn't have had the means to acquire a copy of the Scriptures even if they could.

I think what we ourselves must come down to is this: there is a moment in which we have to trust the scholars, and we have to base that trust on our own agreement with their principles in ascertaining the right text. Do we agree with the principles underlying Consensus Scholarship? Well, then, it would be hard to do better than NASB. Do we agree rather with Majority Text or Received Text principles? Then it would be hard to do better than NKJV.

And if we are off by a few words here or there, does God really mind? Jesus apparently quoted the Septuagint which was missing entire chapters out of Jeremiah. As long as the differences don't fundamentally distort the meaning of Scripture, as sometimes happens with dynamic equivalency translations, I think God finds gladness in that we read His Word even if flawed in places by a human "best guess" going wrong. In the OT there are even words here and there for which the meaning is lost entirely. Does that invalidate all of our translations? Heaven forbid.

Return