The Church of Christ and necessity of Baptism

[Guest]

Titus 2:13
While we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. (NIV)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1. Scholars debate the exact translation of this verse, and the two sides of that debate are seen in the various translations. Some scholars believe that “glory” is used in an adjectival sense, and that the verse should be translated as above in the NIV. Versions that follow suit are the KJV and the Amplified Version. Many other versions, such as the Revised Version, American Standard Version, NAS, Moffatt, RSV, NRSV, Douay, New American Bible, NEB, etc., translate the verse very differently. The NASB is a typical example. It reads, “…looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus.” The difference between the translations is immediately apparent. In the NIV, etc., we await the “glorious appearing” of God, while in the NAS and other versions we await the “appearing of the glory” of God our Savior (this is a use of “Savior” where the word is applied in the context to God, not Christ. See the note on Luke 1:47), i.e., we are looking for the “glory” of God, which is stated clearly as being “Jesus Christ.” Of course, the glory will come at the appearing, but Scripture says clearly that both the glory of the Son and the glory of the Father will appear (Luke 9:26). God’s Word also teaches that when Christ comes, he will come with his Father’s glory: “For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory” (Matt. 16:27). Keeping in mind that what is revealed in other places in the Bible about a certain event often clarifies what is being portrayed in any given verse, it becomes apparent from other scriptures referring to Christ’s coming that the Bible is not trying to portray God and Christ as one God. In this case, the glory of God that we are waiting for is Jesus Christ.

2. It has been stated that the grammar of Titus 2:13 forces the interpretation that Jesus is God because of the Granville Sharp Rule of grammar. That is not the case, however. The Granville Sharp rule has been successfully challenged, and an extensive critique of it occurs in this appendix in the notes on Ephesians 5:5. The point is that when Scripture refers to “our Great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,” it can mean two beings—both the “Great God,” and the “Savior,” Jesus Christ. The highly regarded Trinitarian Henry Alford gives a number of reasons as to why the grammar of the Greek does not force the interpretation of the passage to make Christ God. [36]

3. The context of the verse helps us to understand its meaning. The verse is talking about saying “no” to ungodliness while we wait for the appearing of Jesus Christ, who is the glory of God. Its purpose is not to expound the doctrine of the Trinity in any way, nor is there any reason to assume that Paul would be making a Trinitarian reference here. It makes perfect sense for Scripture to call Christ “the glory of God” and for the Bible to exhort us to say “no” to ungodliness in light of the coming of the Lord, which will be quickly followed by the Judgment (Matt. 25:31-33; Luke 21:36).

Buzzard, p. 129

Norton, pp. 199-203, 305 and 306

Snedeker, pp. 452-457

[Guest]

Titus 2:13
While we wait for the blessed hope—the glorious appearing of our great God and Savior, Jesus Christ. (NIV)
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


1. Scholars debate the exact translation of this verse, and the two sides of that debate are seen in the various translations. Some scholars believe that “glory” is used in an adjectival sense, and that the verse should be translated as above in the NIV. Versions that follow suit are the KJV and the Amplified Version. Many other versions, such as the Revised Version, American Standard Version, NAS, Moffatt, RSV, NRSV, Douay, New American Bible, NEB, etc., translate the verse very differently. The NASB is a typical example. It reads, “…looking for the blessed hope and the appearing of the glory of our great God and Savior, Christ Jesus.” The difference between the translations is immediately apparent. In the NIV, etc., we await the “glorious appearing” of God, while in the NAS and other versions we await the “appearing of the glory” of God our Savior (this is a use of “Savior” where the word is applied in the context to God, not Christ. See the note on Luke 1:47), i.e., we are looking for the “glory” of God, which is stated clearly as being “Jesus Christ.” Of course, the glory will come at the appearing, but Scripture says clearly that both the glory of the Son and the glory of the Father will appear (Luke 9:26). God’s Word also teaches that when Christ comes, he will come with his Father’s glory: “For the Son of Man is going to come in his Father’s glory” (Matt. 16:27). Keeping in mind that what is revealed in other places in the Bible about a certain event often clarifies what is being portrayed in any given verse, it becomes apparent from other scriptures referring to Christ’s coming that the Bible is not trying to portray God and Christ as one God. In this case, the glory of God that we are waiting for is Jesus Christ.

2. It has been stated that the grammar of Titus 2:13 forces the interpretation that Jesus is God because of the Granville Sharp Rule of grammar. That is not the case, however. The Granville Sharp rule has been successfully challenged, and an extensive critique of it occurs in this appendix in the notes on Ephesians 5:5. The point is that when Scripture refers to “our Great God and Savior, Jesus Christ,” it can mean two beings—both the “Great God,” and the “Savior,” Jesus Christ. The highly regarded Trinitarian Henry Alford gives a number of reasons as to why the grammar of the Greek does not force the interpretation of the passage to make Christ God. [36]

3. The context of the verse helps us to understand its meaning. The verse is talking about saying “no” to ungodliness while we wait for the appearing of Jesus Christ, who is the glory of God. Its purpose is not to expound the doctrine of the Trinity in any way, nor is there any reason to assume that Paul would be making a Trinitarian reference here. It makes perfect sense for Scripture to call Christ “the glory of God” and for the Bible to exhort us to say “no” to ungodliness in light of the coming of the Lord, which will be quickly followed by the Judgment (Matt. 25:31-33; Luke 21:36).

Buzzard, p. 129

Norton, pp. 199-203, 305 and 306

Snedeker, pp. 452-457

You missed my point entirely and ignored almost all my scripture references.

First of all we can conclude that Jesus is the saviour spoken of by simply cross referencing:

2Pe 1:11 For in this way there will be richly provided for you an entrance into the eternal kingdom of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ.

2Pe 2:20 For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world through the knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and

2Pe 3:18 But grow in the grace and knowledge of our Lord and Savior Jesus Christ

Tit 1:4 To Titus, my true child in a common faith: Grace and peace from God the Father and Christ Jesus our Savior.

So in Titus 1:4 we have Christ our savior and in Titus 2:10 it's God our Savior and in 2:13 people suddenly aren't sure?

Could you comment on this verse:

Joh 1:3 All things were made through him, and without him was not any thing made that was made.

If Jesus was made, how did me make himself? Since all things were made by Him.

You said: "he is the first born of all creation"
This means He is the firstborn from the dead, not the first created being:

Rev 1:5 and from Jesus Christ the faithful witness, the firstborn of the dead

Col 1:18 And he is the head of the body, the church. He is the beginning, the firstborn from the dead, that in everything he might be preeminent.

Col 1:16 For by him all things were created, in heaven and on earth, visible and invisible, whether thrones or dominions or rulers or authorities--all things were created through him and for him.
Col 1:17 And he is before all things,

So how can Jesus be created if Jesus created all things? If you are the creator of all things made you can't be created.


Anyway, back on topic.

You wanted an answer to Ephesians 4:3-4?

If you go back I posted this passage:

Act 19:2 And he said to them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" And they said, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."
Act 19:3 And he said, "Into what then were you baptized?" They said, "Into John's baptism."
Act 19:4 And Paul said, "John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus."
Act 19:5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Act 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they began speaking in tongues and prophesying.

So why did Paul baptize them again in the name of Jesus and then, after that, lay hands on them to give the Holy Spirit. In other words, why would you interpret Eph 4:3 as eliminating water baptism when Paul waterbaptised people?

Is Paul inconsistent? I don't think so. The "one baptism" Paul is speaking about is the baptism into Christ.

We can see that in Acts;
Act 8:14 Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John,
Act 8:15 who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit,
Act 8:16 for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Act 8:17 Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit.

So from a biblical standpoint you can be "baptized into Jesus" but not recieve the Holy Spirit. They laid hands on them for that, Just as Paul did in Acts 19.

This is proven by what Paul said here;

1Co 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel

Paul is talking about water baptism here, and even admits to doing that to a few people.

[Guest]

Excellent call Evangelion.

[Guest]

Sean, comment on John 1:3 here http://www.wvss.com/forumc/viewtopic.php?p=9243#9243

[Guest]

Maybe you all know this already, but I would like to share a link that describes the Jewish mikvah - immersion - and may enhance your understanding of our baptisim roots. although very legalistic, the mikvah was a intricate part of Jewish law.

http://www.answers.com/topic/mikvah

[Guest]

Allyn, I understand Water immersion as being a Jewish ritual, you must not be paying attention. That is the reason anyone was water baptized after the day of Pentecost, they did not give up their ritual, and did not understand what Jesus had told them.

Acts 11
15"As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. 16Then I remembered what the Lord had said: 'John baptized with[a]water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' 17So if God gave them the same gift as he gave us, who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could oppose God?"
Sounds like he caught himself then he remembered the words of the Lord. No water, spirit. You Heretic.

[Guest]

Jesusfollower,

You said:

That is the reason anyone was water baptized after the day of Pentecost, they did not give up their ritual, and did not understand what Jesus had told them.

Did they misunderstand Jesus?

You then quoted:

Acts 11
15"As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. 16Then I remembered what the Lord had said: 'John baptized with[a]water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' 17So if God gave them the same gift as he gave us, who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could oppose God?"

And then you said:

Sounds like he caught himself then he remembered the words of the Lord. No water, spirit. You Heretic.

No water baptism in this story, huh? You are either being disingenuous or extremely careless, for in relating this story in the previous chapter we find Peter saying, Acts 10:47-48: "Can anyone forbid Water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.

These men were not Jews, and Peter most emphatically did not misunderstand Jesus.

Allyn, I hope you will excuse me for butting in here.

[Guest]

No Homer, quite alright. I am through conversing with jf as I am sure he really is not a follower of the Jesus of the Bible. He will simply have to work out his own salvation because it is very very apparent that he is making it up as he goes along. Some people just don't understand the bible. We have seen it here before with Crusader and any amount of words will not set them free. It has to be a heart thing, a relationship thing towards the true Christ.

The story of the man who just could not understand the needs of his wife is very similar to the way jf is. No matter how we say it. No matter the convincing evidence. We are like the Doctor who gave the man's wife a hug in an effort to show the man what the wife needed. The Doctor pointed out how well the wife received the hug and told the man she needed a hug at least 3 times a week. The man responded by saying, "I can bring her in on Tuesdays Wednesdays and Thursdays."

This man just did not get the plain language of the Doctor and so, I see, neither does jf.

[Guest]

You have described yourself perfectly big A, at least I am not making the call of dis fellowshipping you with your salvation although I think the Bible is perfectly clear on all these matters. You are walking a razors edge of Idolatry.
Homer you really don't get it at all, that is the story Peter is recounting to the apostles, and he did recount remembering the words of the Lord and correcting himself. Any way the whole thing does not depend on that passage alone. You sort of sound like you think none of the Apostles ever did anything wrong. Kind of a Catholic thing. First you tell me not to quote the Bible and now this. You are most certainly wise beyond any on earth, similar to Jobs friends. Gotta love that!

[Guest]

You have described yourself perfectly big A, at least I am not making the call of dis fellowshipping you with your salvation although I think the Bible is perfectly clear on all these matters. You are walking a razors edge of Idolatry.
Homer you really don't get it at all, that is the story Peter is recounting to the apostles, and he did recount remembering the words of the Lord and correcting himself. Any way the whole thing does not depend on that passage alone. You sort of sound like you think none of the Apostles ever did anything wrong. Kind of a Catholic thing. First you tell me not to quote the Bible and now this. You are most certainly wise beyond any on earth, similar to Jobs friends. Gotta love that!

Acts 11:15-18
15 As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them just as on us at the beginning. 16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ 17 If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?” 18 When they heard these things they fell silent. And they glorified God, saying, “Then to the Gentiles also God has granted repentance that leads to life.”

Context, context, context. The point of this passage is that the apostles were coming to an understanding of the Gentile inclusion into the body of Christ. It is foreign to the passage to see Peter making a point about water baptism vs. Holy Spirit baptism.

Also, Peter's quote of the words of Jesus doesn't necessarily mean that water baptism is to be discontinued but that the baptism of the Holy Spirit is a sign of an individual's placing their faith in Christ.