|

|
|
|
Posts: 118
Joined: July 2025
|
|
|
|
Forums31
Topics8,380
Posts56,580
Members992
| |
Most Online4,295 May 22nd, 2026
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,051 Likes: 286
Head Honcho
|
Head Honcho
Joined: Apr 2001
Posts: 15,051 Likes: 286 |
Joe k said:Wes asked: I'd like to know how you arrived at that conclusion. [that all in the Ark were saved]. Becasue of what the ark represents. All In Christ are saved. What would make one conclcude he was not? Joe, Can you point me to the Scripture(s) which indicate that the Ark which Noah built was a "type" of Christ? I can't seem to remember any. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/shrug.gif" alt="" /> What I do remember is what Peter wrote concerning the Ark and what it represented here: 1 Peter 3:20-22 (ASV) that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water: <span style="background-color:yellow">which also after a true likeness doth now save you, [even] baptism,</span> not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ; who is one the right hand of God, having gone into heaven; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him. Even here, the Ark is not seen as typological but rather the water upon which the Ark floated is a type and the anti-type is said to be "baptism". Secondly, where Peter states that "eight souls, were saved through water", the reference is to physical deliverance or rescue and not spiritual salvation. The anti-type baptism is referential to spiritual salvation however. But even here, much to the error of many, the text is not saying that baptism itself saves. So, help me out here. <img src="/forum/images/graemlins/grin.gif" alt="" /> In His grace,
simul iustus et peccator
|
|
|
|
|
Entire Thread
|
Was Ham elect?
|
Peter
|
Wed Oct 04, 2006 5:05 AM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Reformation Monk
|
Wed Oct 04, 2006 6:07 AM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
John_C
|
Wed Oct 04, 2006 1:51 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Joe k
|
Thu Oct 05, 2006 1:33 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Wes
|
Fri Oct 06, 2006 1:48 AM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Joe k
|
Fri Oct 13, 2006 5:25 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Pilgrim
|
Fri Oct 13, 2006 6:45 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Joe k
|
Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:17 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Pilgrim
|
Mon Oct 16, 2006 6:43 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Joe k
|
Tue Oct 17, 2006 2:31 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Adopted
|
Fri Oct 20, 2006 7:44 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Pilgrim
|
Fri Oct 20, 2006 9:38 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Adopted
|
Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:34 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Pilgrim
|
Fri Oct 20, 2006 11:48 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Adopted
|
Sat Oct 21, 2006 12:47 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Pilgrim
|
Sat Oct 21, 2006 2:42 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Adopted
|
Sat Oct 21, 2006 3:47 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Pilgrim
|
Sat Oct 21, 2006 6:00 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Wes
|
Fri Oct 13, 2006 7:29 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
William
|
Sat Oct 14, 2006 1:51 AM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Pilgrim
|
Sat Oct 14, 2006 2:21 AM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Joe k
|
Mon Oct 16, 2006 3:23 PM
|
Re: Was Ham elect?
|
Wes
|
Sat Oct 14, 2006 3:21 AM
|
|
|
|
0 members (),
80
guests, and
12
robots. |
|
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
|
|
S |
M |
T |
W |
T |
F |
S |
|
|
1
|
2
|
3
|
4
|
5
|
6
|
|
7
|
8
|
9
|
10
|
11
|
12
|
13
|
|
14
|
15
|
16
|
17
|
18
|
19
|
20
|
|
21
|
22
|
23
|
24
|
25
|
26
|
27
|
|
28
|
29
|
30
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|