Is the Church of Christ a cult because of their particular view of baptism?

[LoveofTruth]

They believe that water baptism effects forgiveness and justification. Thus, if you do not submit to full-immersion baptism you will not receive forgiveness and justification from God and you will eventually be sent to hell.

I find this pernicious doctrine heretical and no Bible-believing Christian will believe this nonsense. Discuss.

I agree with you they are borderline cult. Adding works of righteousness which they have done to the gospel. Here are some verses to consider. The saving baptism is into Christ, (Mark 16;16, 1 Peter 3:21) not water. When someone believes the gospel they are baptised into Christ.

"17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect."(1 Cor 1 :17)

"One Lord, one faith, one baptism,"(Ephesians 4:5)

"13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit."(1 Cor 12:13)

"27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ."(Galatians 3:27)

"Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"(1 Cor 15:1-5)

"8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."(Galatians 1:8)

Nothing else added to the gospel, they heard the word preached and believed

"it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe."(1 Cor 1:21)

"24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life."(John 5:24)

"63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."(John 6:63)

If we add anything to the gospel, we make another gospel, some add Sabbaths, circumcision, water baptism, the law of Moses, etc. If we add anything for salvation to the gospel 1 Cor 15, we make another gospel.

 

[LoveofTruth]

I have attended Churches of Christ most of my life. They are not “uniform” in their practices since all are independent. Water baptism is not a “requirement” for salvation since God does the saving, but is something Christians get to do in order to help them.

Being “born again” is what Jesus told Nicodemus he need to do. This requires some thinking, because Jesus does not address the questions or comments that are verbalized, but directs his comments to the persons next step in their personal spiritual development (what is on their heart spiritually). Jesus is not making some general philosophical statement (like Buddha might make) but is always addressing the audience He is talking to. We have to get into the context.

What did Nicodemus need to do next in his spiritual development?

What does Nicodemus need to be doing next? (study the Old Testament, become one of the followers of Jesus right then and there, Confess, repent, etc.)

The first thing Nicodemus might do at least is what he already knows he should do? Is that not where you would start? So what is that?

Since Nicodemus is still part of the Sanhedrin, he would not have been immersed baptized by John’s baptism. That would have got him thrown out of the Sanhedrin.

John’s baptism would have been a hot topic among the religious scholars, yet the answer was obvious and they all know it (remember Jesus using it against them and causing them to quit asking him questions?)

Jesus is not going to blare the answer out to Nicodemus, since Nicodemus knows the answer, but he will make Nicodemus think about it hard, since it would already be on his mind.



Christian water baptism as seen in scripture: Is always adult (there are only two examples that “might include infants” but nothing definite, all the others are adult believers) water immersion to be a physical outward representation of what had or is happening spiritually in the person being baptized. It is mainly to help the individual being baptized to better grasp what is going on, but it can “witness” to others observing the baptism. It has the elements of going down under the water (burying the old man), placing your dependence in another; the person baptizing you (surrendering your life to God), being washed (having your sins washed away), rising out of the water (rising from the dead), and stepping forth out onto the earth (a new person). The person is walking out into the hugs of his new family. It is also a sign of your humility, since it is a humbling act anyone can simple allow someone to do it to them (so not a work) and since humility has been shown in the accept of charity (God’s free gift of undeserving forgiveness) it should just support and add to the memory of that acceptance. To refuse Christian water baptism when it is readily available might mean you are not ready to handle other responsibility like having the indwelling Holy Spirit.

The Western “Christian” Churches are all over the board, but other countries experiencing sever persecution of Christians (Underground churches: China, Southeast Asia, some of India, Iran) are for as far as I can see consistently requiring adult believer immersion baptism. These churches are growing rapidly (estimated at 100 million in China).


Is the real problem with humility, since adult water baptism is a humbling act?

Is the problem with “witnessing” since baptism help other Christians remember what they went through?

The whole “argument” about the “one” baptism having to be “spiritual baptism” so we do not need to (or even shouldn’t) be water immersed is not supported by scriptural examples, since everyone that was “baptized” by the Holy Spirit seems to have also been water baptized.

In an effort to emphasis God’s unconditional (salvation), water baptism of believers has been avoided as a subject. People have “argued” that water baptism is a work and since “works” are not required for salvation, water baptism must be avoided. Most “Christian” religious groups “allow” immersion of believers if they want it.

The problem with this reasoning is adult believer immersion is not something you “do” (work), but is something you allow to be done to you. It is not something “done” as some requirement, but is something you get to do for your sake (to help you) and the sake of others.

"...Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,"(Revelation 1:15)

He washed us from our sins in His own blood, not water.

also in John 3 Jesus is simply speaking of the two births there, one of water ( the flesh, when a baby is born of water) and the other of the Spirit ( by the word of God 1 peter 1 and many other places).

 

[LoveofTruth]

As water baptism is a symbol of "the baptism that now saves you", according to Peter in 1 Pet 3:21 (and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ), one cannot conclude from Acts 2:38 that Peter meant that both repentance and water baptism were required for forgiveness. And other Scriptures state that one is forgiven through faith, where baptism isn't mentioned:
Acts 10:43 "Of Him all the prophets bear witness that through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins.
Acts 15:9 and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith.
Acts 26:18 to open their eyes so that they may turn from darkness to light and from the dominion of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who have been sanctified by faith in Me.'

A search of Acts regarding the mention of believing and being baptized, there are 23 accounts of believing without any mention of baptism, and 9 accounts where water baptism was mentioned with believing.

I believe the key to understanding water baptism is found in 1 Pet 3:20 and 21.

v.20 - who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.

The bolded phrase makes clear that the 8 persons weren't immersed or even touched water. They were brought safely through the water, by being in the ark. Who did get fully immersed? Everyone else on the planet; they got the full dunk treatment, and they died.

Then, v.21 clarifies: and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of agood conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ

Notice that Peter didn't say that "this water saves you". He said "this water symbolizes the baptism (Holy Spirit) that saves you".

He makes it clear that he wasn't talking about physical water by the phrase "not the removal of dirt from the body". That water cleans the skin but does not save.

Yes and in Hebrews 9 we read that no outward washings ( baptism in the Greek) could make a person perfect as pertaining to the conscience, only through the eternal Spirit could our hearts be sprinkled by the blood of Christ. This is an inward work and we can now have a good conscience because of the full assurance of hope by the resurrection of Christ and our being risen with him to the newness of life and we have the witness in ourself. The outward ordinances could never make a person clean in their heart. And only through faith in the blood of Jesus is remission of sins found.

 

[Jesus First]

The thief on the cross wasn't baptized in any fashion, and was saved.

Respectfully, how do you know? Do you have a crystal ball? Honestly, I doubt he was baptized. But I don't know as an iron clad fact. Regardless, he lived before the church started at Pentecost. You are right that he was saved. I love how a worthless sinner can go from a hell he deserved to a heaven he didn't. What a picture of God's grace!

 

[Jesus First]

Yes and in Hebrews 9 we read that no outward washings ( baptism in the Greek)

Lover of Truth,

Can you please expand on your claim that the "outward washing" is "baptism in the Greek"?

You have taken a passage out of context that is not describing water baptism.

In Christ!

 

[Jesus First]

They believe that water baptism effects forgiveness and justification. Thus, if you do not submit to full-immersion baptism you will not receive forgiveness and justification from God and you will eventually be sent to hell.

I find this pernicious doctrine heretical and no Bible-believing Christian will believe this nonsense. Discuss.

Should the Bible be one's authority for faith and practice? If so, the burden is for you to prove from Scripture that the "doctrine [is] heretical and no Bible-believing Christian will believe this nonsense." [end of your quote].

I encourage you to go to each passage that deals with water baptism in the NT church and allow the context and grammar to define its meaning for you. A few questions may be helpful. Was water baptism optional or was it commanded? Is water baptism part of salvation, including the the forgiveness of sins? What faith and repentance a prerequisite?

In Christ!

 

[LoveofTruth]

the word "washings" is "baptismos" ( transilteration)

and yes hebrews is not speaking specifically about Johns water baptism, but Johns water baptism was part of the old covenant also and under the law as a type and shadow. The word diverse washings (baptismos) still applies to outward washing or cleansing by immersion (any of them and the word "diverse" relates to the many various kinds), and these are still carnal ordinances no matter how it is done or where, it still cannot make the person clean as pertaining to the conscience as any washing outwardly can do. That was my point.

these washings were of the priests and Israelites, and were related to sacrifices, and garments, the holy vessels and other things; they were done by immersion,and so are called "baptisms"but these only sanctified to the purifying of the flesh, and what was outward, they could not perfect the conscience, they were carnal ordinaces. . Peter said the conscience is cleaned by the baptism he spoke of, showing that it is not an outward flesh aspect but an inward work by the blood of Christ as we read in Hebrews 9. This is done through the Spirit.

compare the verses,

"21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:"(1 Peter 3:21 KJV) Notice that peter first says what the saving baptism IS NOT, and it is NOT an outward washing of water, plain and simple.

and

"9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.11 ...14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" (Hebrews 9:9-14 KJV)

"...and washed us from our sins in his own blood," ( Revelation 1:5 KJV)

 

[LoveofTruth]

Should the Bible be one's authority for faith and practice? If so, the burden is for you to prove from Scripture that the "doctrine [is] heretical and no Bible-believing Christian will believe this nonsense." [end of your quote].

I encourage you to go to each passage that deals with water baptism in the NT church and allow the context and grammar to define its meaning for you. A few questions may be helpful. Was water baptism optional or was it commanded? Is water baptism part of salvation, including the the forgiveness of sins? What faith and repentance a prerequisite?

In Christ!

No you have to go beyond the passages in Acts and see them from Pauls perspective in the new Covenant. Acts is more of a transitional book from the old to the new. The Jews did many things still under the law, the jewish believers that is. In Acts 21 many many years after Christ death some 63 or more so, the believing Jews the many thousands of them, were still going into the temple and offering animal sacrifices and oaths and keeping the law etc. They were not free from it yet, the law and old covenant was fading away slowly and decaying waxing old, but they were not free from it yet. Johns baptism, ( which belonged to the Old Covenant) was close to them and so it did not go either . But God seems to have allowed the transition for the Jews. Paul did not want to bring the Gentiles under the old Covenant that was fading away decaying and ready to vanish. So he said that his commission from God was not to baptize, but to preach the gospel. Jesus himself even told the Believers in Acts 1 that John baptized ( past tense) with water, but ye shall be baptised with the Holy GHost. Showing that Johns water baptism belonged to the Old Covenant. John himself said that he must decrease ( his ministry).

The Jews did many things in Acts that were not directly part of the commission, they kept dietary laws, the law of Moses circumcized, sacrificed etc etc. and water baptized from John or following the
Halakhah law, (oral traditions of the Jews regarding full submersion for gentile converts).


"Immersion, or baptism, did not simply begin in the 1st century A.D. It was a common practice ever since the Torah was given at Sinai. Whenever an individual contracted uncleaness (טֻמְאָה), they were required to immerse in a mikve (מִקְוֶה), or a bath of "living water" (מַיִם חַיִּים) (Lev. 15:13). "Baptism" or "immersion" is tevila (טְבִילָה) in Hebrew. In most cases, after immersion, they would be clean again after sunset (Lev. 22:6-7) (some may not be clean until after eight days for certain defilements)."

" According to the famous evangelical historian and Jew, ‘Alfred Edershem’, who taught Jewish history in the University of Oxford, that Gentiles who became ‘proselytes of righteousness,’ or ‘proselytes of the covenant’ were to be admitted to ‘full participation in the privileges of Israel by the threefold rites of circumcision, baptism, and sacrifice - the immersion being, as it were, the acknowledgment and symbolic removal of moral defilement, corresponding to that of Levitical uncleanness.’. Therefore, although it had never before been proposed that Israel should undergo a ‘baptism of repentance,’ like the Gentiles, John was using an existing rite in a dramatic way to ensure the way was clear for Messiah, by repentance and readiness for the gospel of forgiveness. It was only in preparation of Messiah, as a forerunner should be. Even the righteous under this baptism must consider themselves as Gentiles at this most historic transition from law to gospel.
There was some debate whether this full immersion Baptism, used to convert Gentiles, ‘predated Christ’ but Alfred Edersheim provides ample proof in his appendix on the subject, in the book 'The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah'- Appendix XII. He quotes that the subject was actually debated by Hillel and Shammai (the great competing schools of traditionalism at the time of Christ). Shammai allowed proselytes to partake Passover ‘after baptism’ but Hillel forbid it. "

 

[Butch5]

I agree with you they are borderline cult. Adding works of righteousness which they have done to the gospel. Here are some verses to consider. The saving baptism is into Christ, (Mark 16;16, 1 Peter 3:21) not water. When someone believes the gospel they are baptised into Christ.

"17 For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect."(1 Cor 1 :17)

"One Lord, one faith, one baptism,"(Ephesians 4:5)

"13 For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit."(1 Cor 12:13)

"27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ."(Galatians 3:27)

"Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"(1 Cor 15:1-5)

"8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."(Galatians 1:8)

Nothing else added to the gospel, they heard the word preached and believed

"it pleased God by the foolishness of preaching to save them that believe."(1 Cor 1:21)

"24 Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life."(John 5:24)

"63 It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life."(John 6:63)

If we add anything to the gospel, we make another gospel, some add Sabbaths, circumcision, water baptism, the law of Moses, etc. If we add anything for salvation to the gospel 1 Cor 15, we make another gospel.

What is the Gospel that nothing can be added to?

 

[LoveofTruth]

What is the Gospel that nothing can be added to?

I quoted it in the notes i made. Here It is again

"Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"(1 Cor 15:1-5)

and read Galatinas 1 warning of not adding to it

""8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."(Galatians 1:8)

 

[Butch5]

I quoted it in the notes i made. Here It is again

"Moreover, brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand; 2 By which also ye are saved, if ye keep in memory what I preached unto you, unless ye have believed in vain. 3 For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; 4 And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"(1 Cor 15:1-5)

and read Galatinas 1 warning of not adding to it

""8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed."(Galatians 1:8)

But 1 Cor 15:1-5 isn't all that Paul taught them. In Galatians 1 Paul doesn't say don't add anything to what I wrote in 1 Cor 15:1-5. He says if anyone preaches another gospel than that which he had preached unto them. That begs the question what Gospel.

 

[Albion]

They believe that water baptism effects forgiveness and justification. Thus, if you do not submit to full-immersion baptism you will not receive forgiveness and justification from God and you will eventually be sent to hell.

I find this pernicious doctrine heretical and no Bible-believing Christian will believe this nonsense. Discuss.

You can agree with this perspective that the Churches of Christ are known for...or you can reject it...but to answer your question, no, it doesn't mark the Churches of Christ as "cults."

OTOH, and as Aijalon said a few posts ago:

A guy I used to work with was in a serious state of anxiety all the time, medicated because of it, and it was due to the social elements of his controlling church, and the way they managed all the socialization. He talked about being a "disciple" etc... as this was the Church of Christ. Yeah, I told him he needed to move on to a different church, he admitted he worried about his salvation a lot. He would evangelize people in the most awkward ways.. he was kind of a laughing stock at the office.

Great guy, and yeah, he seemed as if he was on the edge of a cult. I do not call it a cult though, but it is cultish.

The guilt-tripping and control that is also characteristic of the Churches of Christ, according to many former members, is similar to the way some bona fide cults operate. A term like "cultish" or "cultic" might be appropriate, therefore, meaning "similar to the cults." Religiously speaking, though, the doctrines and religious practices (such as Baptism by immersion) do not qualify them as cults.

 

[LoveofTruth]

But 1 Cor 15:1-5 isn't all that Paul taught them. In Galatians 1 Paul doesn't say don't add anything to what I wrote in 1 Cor 15:1-5. He says if anyone preaches another gospel than that which he had preached unto them. That begs the question what Gospel.

Paul said what he preached and the gospel he preachedin1 Cor15. Paul taught the same truth everywhere and he summed up the gosel . Warning men about the law and sin etc is not the gospel

 

[Butch5]

Paul said what he preached and the gospel he preachedin1 Cor15. Paul taught the same truth everywhere and he summed up the gosel . Warning men about the law and sin etc is not the gospel

He taught more than is recorded in 1 Cor 15:1-5. Paul said,

22 "Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come--
23 "that the Christ would suffer, that He would be the first to rise from the dead, and would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles." (Acts 26:22-23 NKJ)

Paul said he preached nothing other than what Moses and the Prophets said would come. We have to conclude that Paul's gospel comes from Moses and the Prophets. So, we have to see what Moses and the Prophets said would come.

Let me ask a question. In Galatians what is Paul worried might be added to the Gospel he preached?

 

[LoveofTruth]

He taught more than is recorded in 1 Cor 15:1-5. Paul said,

22 "Therefore, having obtained help from God, to this day I stand, witnessing both to small and great, saying no other things than those which the prophets and Moses said would come--
23 "that the Christ would suffer, that He would be the first to rise from the dead, and would proclaim light to the Jewish people and to the Gentiles." (Acts 26:22-23 NKJ)

Paul said he preached nothing other than what Moses and the Prophets said would come. We have to conclude that Paul's gospel comes from Moses and the Prophets. So, we have to see what Moses and the Prophets said would come.

Let me ask a question. In Galatians what is Paul worried might be added to the Gospel he preached?

I'm worried for you , you are trying hard to avoid the clear gospel Paul preached. Yes Paul said Christ died and was buried and rise again according to the scriptures. But the truth of what he preached is clearly stated and no law no sabbath no water baptism no circumcision etc etc. to add any thing to the gospel for salvation is to make another gospel


What do you add to he gospel ?

Sometimes scripture is so clear it just demolished all false cults and doctrines with a few verses

Amen!!!!!

 

[Butch5]

I'm worried for you , you are trying hard to avoid the clear gospel Paul preached. Yes Paul said Christ died and was buried and rise again according to the scriptures. But the truth of what he preached is clearly stated and no law no sabbath no water baptism no circumcision etc etc. to add any thing to the gospel for salvation is to make another gospel


What do you add to he gospel ?

Sometimes scripture is so clear it just demolished all false cults and doctrines with a few verses

Amen!!!!!

Do you deny that Paul taught what Moses and the Prophets said would come?

You didn't answer my question. What is it that you believe Paul was afraid would be added to his Gospel?

 

[LoveofTruth]

Do you deny that Paul taught what Moses and the Prophets said would come?

You didn't answer my question. What is it that you believe Paul was afraid would be added to his Gospel?

Paul didn't want anything added to the gospel for salvation. What do you add? And the death burial and resurrection of Jesus can be seen in the OT

 

[Butch5]

Paul didn't want anything added to the gospel for salvation. What do you add? And the death burial and resurrection of Jesus can be seen in the OT

Do you deny that Paul preached what Moses and the Prophets said would come?

 

[Jesus First]

the word "washings" is "baptismos" ( transilteration)

and yes hebrews is not speaking specifically about Johns water baptism, but Johns water baptism was part of the old covenant also and under the law as a type and shadow. The word diverse washings (baptismos) still applies to outward washing or cleansing by immersion (any of them and the word "diverse" relates to the many various kinds), and these are still carnal ordinances no matter how it is done or where, it still cannot make the person clean as pertaining to the conscience as any washing outwardly can do. That was my point.

these washings were of the priests and Israelites, and were related to sacrifices, and garments, the holy vessels and other things; they were done by immersion,and so are called "baptisms"but these only sanctified to the purifying of the flesh, and what was outward, they could not perfect the conscience, they were carnal ordinaces. . Peter said the conscience is cleaned by the baptism he spoke of, showing that it is not an outward flesh aspect but an inward work by the blood of Christ as we read in Hebrews 9. This is done through the Spirit.

compare the verses,

"21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:"(1 Peter 3:21 KJV) Notice that peter first says what the saving baptism IS NOT, and it is NOT an outward washing of water, plain and simple.

and

"9 Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience;10 Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.11 ...14 How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?" (Hebrews 9:9-14 KJV)

"...and washed us from our sins in his own blood," ( Revelation 1:5 KJV)

Thanks for agreeing that Hebrews 9:10 is not about water baptism. What is your biblical evidence that John's baptism was under the old covenant? Unless you mean that it occurred before the cross? You called the law (ordinances) carnal. Paul stated that the law which was given by God is spiritual (Romans 7:14).

John the Baptist was a prophet under the old covenant (yes), but the baptism he provided for "the forgives of sins", was to prepare the Jew's hearts to accept the coming Messiah. This baptism wasn't part of the law. There was a transition that would take place, very soon.

For Peter 3:21, you stated "Peter said the conscience is cleaned by the baptism he spoke of, showing that it was not an outward flesh aspect but an inward work by the blood of Christ ..." [end of your quote]. The context for Peter 3:20-21 is water (v. 20) and water baptism (v. 21). In Biblical interpretation context is key. Outside of context God's Word is a platter to serve false theology. In verse 20, Peter wrote, "were brought safely through water" (ESV). This verse describes water (of the flood). In verse 21, Peter goes on to describe water baptism, "not as a removal of dirt from the body". So verse 21 describes water baptism based on the context, grammar, and "plain reading" of Scripture.

You went on to write, "Notice that Peter first says what the saving baptism IS NOT, and it IS NOT an outward washing of water, plain and simple. [end of your quote]. The first thing Peter said is "Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you". Up front, Peter describes salvation. Secondly, the context as provided in the last paragraph describes water baptism, unless you are reading the Bible under a pre-defined grid.

Peter is countering a common objection to water baptism (vs. 21) —that water baptism is a physical act that does not wash sin away. Peter counters this by stating what water baptism is, "but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ". In other words, it's the saving that takes place spiritually behind the scenes, by the "resurrection of Jesus Christ". There is nothing supernatural about the water! Someone can be baptized in a polluted river or a pond, etc.

You then went to quote Hebrews 9:9-14 after earlier admitting that this passage was not about John's baptism. Just because the author of Hebrews used the word "baptismo" you must feel it describes water baptism? Please allow me to provide a quick grammar lesson.

In the English language, as in Hebrew (Old Testament), and Greek (New Testament), words have a range of meaning defined by context. That is, the context of a passage defines the meaning of a word. This is why dictionaries in English, Hebrew, and Greek, have more than one definitions for words.

Please consider the word "ran". Sally "ran" a marathon for the first time. John "ran" the car for 15 minutes because it was freezing outside. Sally "ran" the register for 15 minutes. In each sentence the word "ran" has a distinct definition defined by context.

The author of Hebrews used the word "baptismo" which is used elsewhere in the New Testament for water baptism. But words have a range of meaning defined by context. In Hebrews 9 the word is used for washing that was related to law sacrifices (as you correctly stated) and it was not about water baptism based on the context.

In Christ!

 

[Jesus First]

No you have to go beyond the passages in Acts and see them from Pauls perspective in the new Covenant. Acts is more of a transitional book from the old to the new. The Jews did many things still under the law, the jewish believers that is. In Acts 21 many many years after Christ death some 63 or more so, the believing Jews the many thousands of them, were still going into the temple and offering animal sacrifices and oaths and keeping the law etc. They were not free from it yet, the law and old covenant was fading away slowly and decaying waxing old, but they were not free from it yet. Johns baptism, ( which belonged to the Old Covenant) was close to them and so it did not go either . But God seems to have allowed the transition for the Jews. Paul did not want to bring the Gentiles under the old Covenant that was fading away decaying and ready to vanish. So he said that his commission from God was not to baptize, but to preach the gospel. Jesus himself even told the Believers in Acts 1 that John baptized ( past tense) with water, but ye shall be baptised with the Holy GHost. Showing that Johns water baptism belonged to the Old Covenant. John himself said that he must decrease ( his ministry).

The Jews did many things in Acts that were not directly part of the commission, they kept dietary laws, the law of Moses circumcized, sacrificed etc etc. and water baptized from John or following the
Halakhah law, (oral traditions of the Jews regarding full submersion for gentile converts).


"Immersion, or baptism, did not simply begin in the 1st century A.D. It was a common practice ever since the Torah was given at Sinai. Whenever an individual contracted uncleaness (טֻמְאָה), they were required to immerse in a mikve (מִקְוֶה), or a bath of "living water" (מַיִם חַיִּים) (Lev. 15:13). "Baptism" or "immersion" is tevila (טְבִילָה) in Hebrew. In most cases, after immersion, they would be clean again after sunset (Lev. 22:6-7) (some may not be clean until after eight days for certain defilements)."

" According to the famous evangelical historian and Jew, ‘Alfred Edershem’, who taught Jewish history in the University of Oxford, that Gentiles who became ‘proselytes of righteousness,’ or ‘proselytes of the covenant’ were to be admitted to ‘full participation in the privileges of Israel by the threefold rites of circumcision, baptism, and sacrifice - the immersion being, as it were, the acknowledgment and symbolic removal of moral defilement, corresponding to that of Levitical uncleanness.’. Therefore, although it had never before been proposed that Israel should undergo a ‘baptism of repentance,’ like the Gentiles, John was using an existing rite in a dramatic way to ensure the way was clear for Messiah, by repentance and readiness for the gospel of forgiveness. It was only in preparation of Messiah, as a forerunner should be. Even the righteous under this baptism must consider themselves as Gentiles at this most historic transition from law to gospel.
There was some debate whether this full immersion Baptism, used to convert Gentiles, ‘predated Christ’ but Alfred Edersheim provides ample proof in his appendix on the subject, in the book 'The Life and Times of Jesus the Messiah'- Appendix XII. He quotes that the subject was actually debated by Hillel and Shammai (the great competing schools of traditionalism at the time of Christ). Shammai allowed proselytes to partake Passover ‘after baptism’ but Hillel forbid it. "

You wrote for water baptist, "No you have to go beyond the passages in Acts and see them [baptism] from Paul's perspective in the new covenant." [end of you quote]. So you just made up a new rule for the church that the book of Acts cannot be used for Baptism. Who gives you the authority to make up your own rules (I say this respectfully)? Peter stood up full of the Holy Spirit at Pentecost (Acts 2:4), he was not full of wine. Jesus had previously stated:

"46 and said to them, “ Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, 47 and that repentance and forgiveness of sins [see Acts 2:38] should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. 48 You are witnesses of these things. 49 And behold, I am sending the promise of my Father upon you. But stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high.” Luke 24:46-49

Jesus gave the Great Commission in Matthew and Mark. In both instances it includes baptism. In Acts 2 (Pentecost) the baptism that took place was prescribed by Jesus Himself in the Great Commission.

You wrote, "In Acts 21 many many years after Jesus death some 63 or more so, the believing Jews the many thousands of them, were still going to the temple ..." [end of your quote]. The book of Acts covers approximately 30 years of church history according to respected theologians. Can you provide your source of "63 or more so" [End of your quote].

You wrote "So he [Paul] said that his commission from God was to not baptize, but to preach the gospel" [end of your quote]. You made an objection that is commonly used to argue that water baptism is independent of salvation. So let's place your argument under the search light of Scripture.

For a correct understand of this passage it's important to read the entire passage and pay particular attention to the context. Bible verses are correctly understood within context.

Notice what these verses say: "I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name." 1 Corinthians 1:14-15. From this passage it's likely that Paul's letter was written to believers who were already baptized. If one reads the book of Acts which covers approximately 30 years of church history, how can one NOT conclude people were baptized immediately after they believed? That is, unless they view the Bible through a theology that is their authority.

The account of the jailor in Acts 16 details how he and his family were baptized in the middle of the night! What's the urgency, a prudent person should ask if water baptismal is optional. Once the jailor and his family believed, AFTER they are baptized, the jailor rejoices that he had believed (Acts 16:34).

Secondly, please notice that "Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel..." Baptism was to be followed AFTER one listened to the gospel message and believed it. Baptism was the response to the gospel message only AFTER one believes. The unsaved must hear the gospel and believe it first. If the unsaved did not believe the gospel message and trust in Christ, then baptism had no value; it would just make one wet.

Thirdly, because these were carnal believers (1 Cor. 1:12-13), and baptism was an important activity in that culture, Paul did not want to be the one baptizing because it could cause them to elevate Him to a celebrity status. According to the context, they were already elevating Paul to a higher authority than necessary in their carnality. Verse 13 states, "Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?"

Verse 17, "For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel". Paul is speaking of himself specifically ("For Christ did not send ME to baptize but to preach the gospel"). Part of Christ's commission to Paul was for him personally not to baptize after one believed (in most cases). Why did Jesus give this instruction to Paul? This letter says why. The inspired scriptures say, "I [Paul] thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, SO THAT [purpose statement] no one may say that you were baptized in my name [Paul's name]." Paul is not downplaying the importance of water baptism, but rather elevating its importance by stressing he did not baptize them to prevent their claim of higher spirituality. Carnal believers were running around saying, "I am of Paul" (v. 12).

In Christ!