Water Baptism - Is It Really Necessary?

[BroGinder]

Well on that note we will agree to disagree. I re-read my post and the context of the scripture is covered in the post.

Taking a Quote from you that I could clearly throw just as much "That is what is happening here in many debates in the forum when false teaching is defended at all cost. Ultimately, it comes down to killing the Word of God in one's soul when the truth is clearly revealed from Scripture, which one refuses to accept. "

Lets just stick with the scriptures and not have thee negative conversations such as refuses and such. If I were refusing to see anything, if I was not sekeing truth, do you think for one second I would spend time reading, researching and posting? If you do then you are sadly mistaken.

The facts are that you are not quoting the scripture in the context it was being given. Peter was describing to Jews what was up and that they need not be concerned for it was from the Lord.

You show me in any 1 place that they stopped baptising in Water. Show me EVEN 1 place that Jesus said the Baptism of the Holy Ghost REPLACES the Water I will be happy to concede. It never syas that not once. It continues in teh water even after the cross.

Jesus is baptized and God says I am proud of my son. Lets look at the simplistic lay out of the scripture and stop trying to turn it into something that is left to interpretation. The scripture is not left to personal interpretation. You are only making assumptions that this was to replace the Water when infact he command them to continue baptising them after the cross.

I am truly trying, contray to what you continue to say about my posts and others, to see your point. Its not that I do not se eyour point, its that it is not written as you explain it. If it is not written it can not be seen.

God Bless
Broginder

 

[sawdust]

You are only making assumptions that this was to replace the Water when infact he command them to continue baptising them after the cross.

And you are only making assumptions that Christ's command after the Cross was to baptise in water. He never said "in water", He said "in the name of...."

Besides, it is not an assumption it is the way it is written.

If I say to you "feed your cyclamen a nitrogen based fertilizer in autumn but in spring fertilize with a phosphorous based fertilizer."

What will you do, feed both fertilizers in spring? No. You will do one in autumn and the other in spring.

But then again, maybe you will and then wonder why your cyclamen don't produce the blooms they should.

I am truly trying, contray to what you continue to say about my posts and others, to see your point. Its not that I do not se eyour point, its that it is not written as you explain it. If it is not written it can not be seen.

You say you do see his point then claim you can't because it is not written the way he explains it? Which is it? You see or you don't see. If you see, then it's not his explanation at fault. If you don't see then it just needs more explanation. It can't be both ways at the same time. Don't kid yourself that another's explanation is faulty when you see their point yet refuse to believe. That's just plain dishonest.

As I stated above your perception sees the verse being written one way but my perception sees it written exactly the way Genez explains it. So until you can explain how a "but" can mean "also" and make sense?????

The ball's in your court. If you are dinkum about trying to understand (and I have no reason to doubt your word) then let's stick with this one verse and you explain the meaning of "but".

peace

 

[BroGinder]

And you are only making assumptions that Christ's command after the Cross was to baptise in water. He never said "in water", He said "in the name of...."

We do not have the authority to Baptize them in the Spirit. The only way we can baptize them in his name is the water.

If I say to you "feed your cyclamen a nitrogen based fertilizer in autumn but in spring fertilize with a phosphorous based fertilizer."

What will you do, feed both fertilizers in spring? No. You will do one in autumn and the other in spring.

But then again, maybe you will and then wonder why your cyclamen don't produce the blooms they should.

Had he said once I ascend there iwll not be the need for the water, or that the water would replace, or if he said they will be baptised in the Spirit INSTEAD. But he did not.

You say you do see his point then claim you can't because it is not written the way he explains it? Which is it? You see or you don't see. If you see, then it's not his explanation at fault. If you don't see then it just needs more explanation. It can't be both ways at the same time. Don't kid yourself that another's explanation is faulty when you see their point yet refuse to believe. That's just plain dishonest.

The message I sent was clear. DO not mix my words. Anyone coming in knows the point that is being attempted to be made. It is pointing toward something that is not to me written.

I will ask you as I have asked in this very forum before. Please do not assume someone is being dishonest. I have not accused anyone of false doctrine, or being a false prophet or lying or anything. I am seeking truth. If I am missing it so be it, but I am seeking it regardless.

You must remember that just because something is clear to one does not make it clear to another, hence for reasoning together. The Word of God can not be learned it must be revealed to you. Lets remember to deal with one another a little more Christ like please.

I am truly looking at scripture, praying, about to start a fast over the subject. I want clarity and I am not finding it in the scriptures that have been provided. When I read before or after it changes the context of the scripture as it has been presented was all I was saying.

Thank you my friend

God Bless

 

[sawdust]

Had he said once I ascend there iwll not be the need for the water, or that the water would replace, or if he said they will be baptised in the Spirit INSTEAD.

instead

–adverb 1. as a substitute or replacement; in the place or stead of someone or something: We ordered tea but were served coffee instead.
2. in preference; as a preferred or accepted alternative: The city has its pleasures, but she wished instead for the quiet of country life.
—Idiom3. instead of, in place of; in lieu of: You can use milk instead of cream in this recipe.


Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.0.1)
Based on the Random House Unabridged Dictionary, © Random House, Inc. 2006.

(Note the bold and underlined word used in the examples above.)

But he did not.

But He did.

peace

 

[GenemZ]

Well on that note we will agree to disagree. I re-read my post and the context of the scripture is covered in the post.

Taking a Quote from you that I could clearly throw just as much "That is what is happening here in many debates in the forum when false teaching is defended at all cost. Ultimately, it comes down to killing the Word of God in one's soul when the truth is clearly revealed from Scripture, which one refuses to accept. "

I was not directing that towards you directly. For, I mentioned that it happens in many debates. I was stating a principle of what takes place when one defends false doctrine. I am sure I have slipped into that camp from time to time. Those opposing would be then helping me. I spoke of the seriousness of what takes place when false doctrine is defended at all cost.

You show me in any 1 place that they stopped baptising in Water. Show me EVEN 1 place that Jesus said the Baptism of the Holy Ghost REPLACES the Water I will be happy to concede. It never syas that not once.

That is correct.

Not once. But numerous times.

Matthew 3:11 niv​

"I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.​

Mark 1:8 niv​

I baptize you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit."​

Luke 3:16 niv​

John answered them all, "I baptize you with water. But one more powerful than I will come, the thongs of whose sandals I am not worthy to untie. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.​

John 1:33 niv​

I would not have known him, except that the one who sent me to baptize with water told me, 'The man on whom you see the Spirit come down and remain is he who will baptize with the Holy Spirit.'​

Acts 1:5 niv​

For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit."​

Acts 11:16 niv​

Then I remembered what the Lord had said: 'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.'​

The only problem I can see you are having, is grasping that the Apostles were capable of making mistakes as they went along. As if God made them mercy-proof.

There were moments when they could do no wrong. When they had been fully prepared by God, and were carried along by the Spirit. But they also were given space to make their own decisions. They made mistakes. And, were allowed to. God always knew that some reading the Scripture would be able to grasp the scope of what had taken place.

Acts 19:1-3 (New International Version)​

"While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" ​

They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit." ​

So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?" ​

"John's baptism," they replied."​

In Christ, GeneZ
​

​

 

[Rich48]

We do not have the authority to Baptize them in the Spirit. The only way we can baptize them in his name is the water

This is the point that this side of the debate has been attempting to make!

WE cannot baptize in the Spirt!

Acts 2:

37. Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren, what shall we do?"
38. And Peter said to them, "Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (NASB)

Note the 3 steps:

1. Repent--meaning to be sorry for AND to turn away
2. Be baptized. Literally, in the Greek, be immersed. Also, note the change in verb tense here. Repent is plural, but be immersed is singular.
3. Receive the Holy Spirit. This verse alone fully proves that baptizm and the receiving of the Spirt are two distinct events. In the Greek, by the way, this last event is again in the plural!

Peter is speaking under the inspriration of the Spririt here-there can be no doubt about that. When speaking under such inspiration, no one can "make a mistake." He very clearly states that AFTER water baptism, one receives the Spirit.

Rich

 

[Carlos Vigil]

No-one has attempted to say that the Matthew passage is Christ commanding men to baptise other men "in the Spirit". He is telling them to go and make disciples by immersing them in His full nature and character and works. This is done every time the Gospel is proclaimed.

Yet you turn around and say "No. This is not what it means, you have to have water to baptise someone." Well if this is true then explain to me how someone can be baptised into Moses. What do you think Moses is, a swimming pool?

It is as you say, the command is to baptise. John baptised with water BUT YOU (that means YOU) will be baptised in the Spirit because those who were faithful to Christ's command to baptise in His Name spoke the truth of who GOD is and those things He has done in Christ. To those who believed this truth the Lord baptised in His Spirit. And He did it without one drop of water. Go ask Cornelius how much water he went under before he received the promise of God unto eternal life.

When I see Cornelius I will ask him,
I am confident he will say something like "While Peter was delivering the KERYGMA, we were overwhelmed with a divine power from heaven and began speaking in tongues and glorifying God.
Peter ordered that we be Baptized in the Name of Jesus after we had been Baptized in the Holy Spirit, so being that we were at the shore of the Mediterranean Sea we all were BAPTIZED IN THE WATER at Peter's orders.
We were all submerged into the Med... as we were beginning to be INITIATED INTO CHRIST.

The only argument I have seen presented for water baptism is the insistence that the word "baptism" has to mean "in water"
in spite of the fact that you readily recognise there are exceptions. (ie in the Spirit) That and the fact the Church has always taught this. Well let's hope this hasn't been at the insistence of the Laodicean type Church because they never got anything right.

peace

There are no exceptions.
Christian Baptism ALWAYS Has been as the KERYGMA begins and progresses;
(1). Baptized in water
(2). Baptized in the Name of the FATHER
(3). Baptized in the Name of the SON
(4). Baptized in the Name of the HOLY SPIRIT

"IN THE NAME" unfolds as;
The NAME of Jesus Christ,
The CHARACTER of Jesus Christ,
The AUTHORITY of Jesus Christ
If you have the "name"... but not the CHARACTER, nor AUTHORITY... "you aint got nuthin !"


(1). Baptism in water is Baptism UNTO CHRIST'S DEATH.
(equivalent to residing in Noah's Ark ...during the GREAT FLOOD.)

(2, 3, 4). Baptism into the FATHER, the SON, the HOLY SPIRIT is to continue LEARNING submerged in;
The MESSAGE,
The FELLOWSHIP,
The EUCHARIST,
The WITNESS... all as God progressively reveals himself to us.

BAPTISM itself unfolds as we walk in it.
BAPTISM itself is THE EXODUS.... THE NEW LIVING PATH.
In water Baptism we are CLOTHED IN CHRIST.
Without Baptism we are still naked, with a little "head knowledge" of scripture. maybe.



Don't try to dismantle it, dichotomize it, disassemble it.
IT IS ONE.

"There is One Faith, One Lord, One Baptism"
Eph. 4: 5

I am under the impression some of the protestians here are not BAPTIZED IN WATER, (BIW)
so they have come up with the story that Jesus Christ intended BIW... to exist only during the
"TRANSITION PERIOD" between John the Baptist through Pentecost, after that it would no longer be necessary.....
That way they are "legally righteous, saved, sanctified & glorified"


How convenient !
for those who are in REBELLION and despise AUTHORITY, yet want to go to heaven.


Saint Paul sez;
"Similarly, if one takes part in an athletic contest, he cannot recive the winners crown unless he has kept the rules."
2 Tim. 2: 5

But people here are good at "HUMAN TRICKERY" ...they are always busy looking for ways to
"climb in some other way..."
John 10: 1


Have a GOOD NIGHT'S SLEEP.

 

[GenemZ]

When I see Cornelius I will ask him,
I am confident he will say something like "While Peter was delivering the KERYGMA, we were overwhelmed with a divine power from heaven and began speaking in tongues and glorifying God.

You are so close. But so far from seeing what it is you just said. They had been baptized in the Holy Spirit.

Peter ordered that we be Baptized in the Name of Jesus after we had been Baptized in the Holy Spirit, so being that we were at the shore of the Mediterranean Sea we all were BAPTIZED IN THE WATER at Peter's orders.

Peter was till living in the old way of thinking. He had yet to see that this was new wine that he was pouring into the old wine skins.

Acts 19:1-5 (New International Version)​

"While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" ​

They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit." ​

So Paul asked,"Then what baptism did you receive?" ​

"John's baptism," they replied. ​

Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus."​

On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus."​

Paul was differentiating between two different types of baptisms. Water, and the Holy Spirit. He was telling those who had received water baptism that they needed now to receive the Holy Spirit baptism.

They were baptized into the person. Name could also mean person in the Greek. They already had been water baptized. Paul asked if they received the Holy Spirit when they believed. He did not ask them if they were water baptized when they believed. If what you claim were true, he would have asked them if they were water baptized when they believed.

We were all submerged into the Med... as we were beginning to be INITIATED INTO CHRIST.

No, they were just getting themselves wet. They were already initiated into Christ. How could they be speaking in tongues if they were not already initiated into Christ?

There are no exceptions.
Christian Baptism ALWAYS Has been as the KERYGMA begins and progresses;
(1). Baptized in water
(2). Baptized in the Name of the FATHER
(3). Baptized in the Name of the SON
(4). Baptized in the Name of the HOLY SPIRIT

Funny...... I was brought up Jewish. Had no pulpit to misguide me concerning the truth about salvation. Had no preconceived notion as to what was to happen at the point of salvation.

One day someone handed me a tract. I read it. I asked Jesus to save me. I admitted I was a sinner.

Did I go out and get water baptized? Never entered my mind.

But what I did enter into was an intense spiritual state of mind that baffled and perplexed me. I made no connection with the prayer for salvation.

I began having dreams and visions over a period of several months. I was shown parts of my life flash before me. Potentials and possibilities.

I was shown a place I did not know what it was. I found myself in that place ten years later. That place was a Bible college I attended for three years. Guess what? That Bible college did not exist when I was shown it in a dream.

Guess what? I still had not been water baptized. Yet, I was taking a full course in Bible classes and grasping teachings of God's Word on a consistent basis. Did God goof? Did he save me too soon?

"IN THE NAME" unfolds as;
The NAME of Jesus Christ,
The CHARACTER of Jesus Christ,
The AUTHORITY of Jesus Christ
If you have the "name"... but not the CHARACTER, nor AUTHORITY... "you aint got nuthin !"

Wrong. If you do not have LOVE, you are nothing. LOVE comes from the filling of the Spirit.

1 Corinthians 13:2 niv​

"If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but have not love, I am nothing."​

If you have the filling of the Spirit, you HAVE Christ! We have the filling of Agape love which comes from God!

(1). Baptism in water is Baptism UNTO CHRIST'S DEATH.
(equivalent to residing in Noah's Ark ...during the GREAT FLOOD.)

The Ark was not immmersed, sir. It was instead, raised above the water. It was the condemned that were baptized into water.

And, we too are raised up when we are baptized into the Body of Christ! This is the baptism that saves us and raises us up above what is condemned in the world.

Ephesians 2:6 niv​

"And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus."​

THAT is the baptism that saves us! Just like the water saved Noah by RAISING him up above what was condemned to die below.

1 Peter 3:19-21 (New International Version)​

"through whom also he went and preached to the spirits in prison who disobeyed long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 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."​

Not the removal of dirt (water). But by our consciences being purified by the Water of the Word!

The water that saved Noah (raised up Noah above the destroyed) symbolizes the baptism that now raises us up above what is to be destroyed.

If your rendition were to be accurate? God had Noah build the first submarine.

Too bad you are not seeing what I am getting at. Its beautiful to behold.

Grace and peace, GeneZ

 

[Carlos Vigil]

Funny...... I was brought up Jewish. Had no pulpit to misguide me concerning the truth about salvation. Had no preconceived notion as to what was to happen at
(1). the point of salvation.

One day
(2). someone handed me a tract. I read it. I asked Jesus to save me. I admitted I was a sinner.

Did I go out and get water baptized? Never entered my mind.

But what I did enter into was an intense spiritual state of mind that baffled and perplexed me.
(3). I made no connection with the prayer for salvation.

I began having dreams and visions over a period of several months. I was shown parts of my life flash before me. Potentials and possibilities.

I was shown a place I did not know what it was. I found myself in that place ten years later. That place was a
(4). Bible college I attended for three years.
Guess what? That Bible college did not exist when I was shown it in a dream.
Guess what?
(5). I still had not been water baptized.
Yet, I was taking a full course in Bible classes and grasping teachings of God's Word on a consistent basis. Did God goof? Did he save me too soon?

(2). You were saved by a TRACT ? ... is that Scriptural ?

(3). "made no connect with the prayer for salvation?"...
does that mean your "prayer" for salvation was not answered ?
or ...does it mean you never prayed to be saved?

(4). So you got "bible college"... is that where they smuggle in pernicious heresies ? (2 Peter 2:1)
That college will not exist when Jesus returns.

(5). If you have not been Baptised properly, you have not obeyed Jesus Christ.
You may have aquired a lot of "bible knowledge", but I suspect that "knowledge" could be filthy rags ?

The Ark was not immmersed, sir. It was instead, raised above the water. It was the condemned that were baptized into water.

"ABOVE THE WATER? ...you mean like a helicopter?


Go look at any boat in the water....
you will see that SOME OF IT is underwater, and SOME OF IT is above water sir.

The condemned were not Baptized in water, ...they were drowned in water... do you know the difference ?

And, we too are raised up when we are baptized into the Body of Christ! This is the baptism that saves us and raises us up above what is condemned in the world.

Grace and peace, GeneZ

You sure seem to enjoy "condemning the world".
Jesus didn't come to condemn the world, but to SAVE the world.

No one can enter into THE BODY OF CHRIST without the Prescribed Baptism.
"Whoever does not enter the sheepfold through the gate but climb s in some other way is a thief and an impostor."

any other "raising" is purely IMAGINARY.

.....there is a lot of that floating around.

::MI

 

[heymikey80]

The only argument I have seen presented for water baptism is the insistence that the word "baptism" has to mean "in water" in spite of the fact that you readily recognise there are exceptions. (ie in the Spirit) That and the fact the Church has always taught this.

In the absence of any context excluding it the term "baptize" is in water much as "bathe" means "in water" when the context is silent. Both also have other meanings when the context demands it. The term has a Greek usage pattern, it's not solely Christian in usage.

It's not so much that "baptize" has to mean, "in water", either. It's that "baptism", being "one baptism" in Christian faith, must unify and connect its various meanings so that there is indeed but "one baptism". Hence whatever the meaning, when referring to Christian baptism it connects with water baptism as well as with Spirit baptism. The two aren't separate -- otherwise there is not one baptism, but two baptisms.

The churches the Apostles founded indeed did have water baptism, and they connected it directly with Spiritual baptism. The idea comes explicitly from the Apostle. And it's not something over which there was huge opposition, either. You'd search in vain for an early orthodox church that didn't practice water baptism as connected to Spirit baptism. One of the simple ways to distinguish early churches archaeologically is simply to track down their baptistries.

From what I can tell, Roman Catholicism sees this connection as elemental-regeneration. Lutherans see the Spirit as accompanying the element. Presbyterians see the connection as spiritual-covenantal, the Spirit making covenant using the water to sign the covenant. Other Reformed views see the connection as symbolic, but still connected.

 

[GenemZ]

(1). I question whether you have yet to reach the point of salvation.

(2). You were saved by a TRACT ? ... is that Scriptural ?

The tract was filled with Scripture.

Go look at any boat in the water....
you will see that SOME OF IT is underwater, and SOME OF IT is above water sir.

So? You use an example of a boat being partially submerged in water? To make it a point about baptism?

And, that's your point to prove baptism?



Baptism requires total immersion into something as to become identified with it.

Like, we have been baptized into Christ.

Ephesians 2:4-6 (New International Version)
"But because of his great love for us, God, who is rich in mercy, made us alive with Christ even when we were dead in transgressions—it is by grace you have been saved. And God raised us up with Christ and seated us with him in the heavenly realms in Christ Jesus."
​

IN Christ Jesus? In Him? Baptized into Him?

1 Corinthians 12:13 niv
"For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit."
​

Just as Adam's bride was in his side before she was revealed?

We are now IN Christ, awaiting to be revealed at the resurrection!

We have been baptized into his body! We are the BRIDE of CHRIST! We are now seated IN Him, in Heaven! As Eve was to Adam, we are now to Christ! We (our new body) is IN Christ right now as I write.

I pray somebody out there gets what I have just shown you.....what the Lord has shown me.

For I was stunned by the beauty of having this mystery unfolded by grace before my eyes. Its the LORD honoring the believer to have such a beautiful truth revealed to us.



Wishing you a nice Day, GeneZ

 

[Schroeder]

It is fruitless to contine this debate, because the meaning of the origianal Greek has been totally ingnored. IMMERSE--That is what it says, and that is what it means. The other side keeps repeating the same verses, often taken out of context, to attempt to refute water baptism.

Also, no one here has refuted the command of Chirst to BAPTISE--and that means in water, not a Spiritual thing, as no man can do that. This argument is yet to be refuted, because it cannot be done.

Phillip taught the eunich that he should be baptised in water. Where in scripture is it said that he was wrong? Nowhere, because he was not!

Rich

you amaze me, you say we ignore what it actually means, that it MUST be water, YET scripture uses it in three different ways. and you have been shown them all. sxcripture says in ONE verse baptize with WATER and baptize with SPIRIT. matt. 3:11. SOOOOOOOO if your right then he is saying that jesus would "water" baptize with the SPirit. DONT YOU SEE THE PROBLEM HERE. apparently NOT. and you say we ASSUME, YET your the one saying the eunich taught water baptism WHEN SCRIPTURE doesnt say that he did. why should WE even bother answering your posts.

 

[Schroeder]

[FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1]

Infant Baptism​

[/FONT]

[FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1]is [/FONT][FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1]necessary!![/FONT]​

[FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1]The Lord Himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation. He also commands His disciples to proclaim the Gospel to all nations and to baptize them. Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament. THE CHURCH DOES NOT KNOW OF ANY MEANS OTHER THAN BAPTISM THAT ASSURES ENTRY INTO ETERNAL BEATITUDE; this is why she takes care not to negelect the mission she has received from the Lord to see that all who can be baptized ARE [/FONT]“[FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1]REBORN OF WATER AND THE SPIRIT[/FONT]”.[FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1] GOD has bound salvation to the sacrament of Baptism, but He Himself is not bound by His sacraments. CCC 1257[/FONT]
[FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1]Besides, NO one knows when another will pass-on (die) and infant deaths do occur . . . [/FONT]
[FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1]If there is danger that someone will/ [may] die, without Baptism (318). . . Baptism is necessary for salvation . . . Because CHRIST has said: [/FONT]“[FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1]Unless a man be born again of water and the spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of GOD[/FONT].”[FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1] SJBC 320 [/FONT]
[FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1]. . .only Baptism of water actually makes a person a member of the church. SJBC 321[/FONT]


[FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1]Please read Wiki[/FONT]
[FONT=StoneSerif SBIN SmBd v.1] [/FONT]

(1) john 3:5 is not the ONLY verse in that passage. read the WHOLE THING. verse 3 verse 6 verse 8. they ALL say born of the SPIRIT dont mention water. other passages say we receive the SPirit on belief eph 1:13-14 gal 3:2. the SPirit is what give us our rebirth. as john 3:8 says SO IT IS WITH THOSE BORN OF THE SPIRIT. did you not see that he did not say born of water and spirit. APPARENTLY NOT. (2) to say water baptism is the ONLY way into the Church is sad. read 1 cor 12:13. "FOR we were ALL baptized BY the Spirit into the BODY." the BODY being the Church. AND you can NOT NOT NOT give one passage that states this. NOT ONE. (3) to say GOd would send a innocent child to hell because there parents did not water baptize them is insane. that makes God unmercyful. i notice you use the ccc as evidence and not scripture. there is a reason for that.

 

[sawdust]

When I see Cornelius I will ask him,
I am confident he will say something like "While Peter was delivering the KERYGMA, we were overwhelmed with a divine power from heaven and began speaking in tongues and glorifying God.
Peter ordered that we be Baptized in the Name of Jesus after we had been Baptized in the Holy Spirit,.......

.... because he had forgotten what the Lord had told him regarding being baptised in the Spirit. Eventually Paul would teach the doctrine that Peter needed to know but until then Peter would experience the truth of God without fully understanding its' ramifications. For being raised a Jew he was still in the mindset that, for a gentile to be acceptable to God, he had to become a jew. But the Lord was telling him what he now had, that is, ...

"if any man be in Christ, he is a new creation" (2 Cor 5:17) and that "there is neither jew nor gentile in Christ" (Gal.3:28)

Peter was still being a "jew in Christ" which, in reality, no longer existed. No longer under the condemnation which was aroused by the Law but set free in Christ. For some, the pill was strange to swallow, for others it was as poison to them (hence a whole epistle to the Hebrews). But the Lord is faithful even to those who are not and eventually Peter and (some of) the other jews would come to learn that being a jew no longer held any significance for they had been made into something and someone far greater than any jew or any gentile could be. They had become as one flesh with Christ, His body, His Bride.

Why do you think Paul fights so diligently, passionately and with determined courage against those who would teach the gentiles they must come under the Law and the rituals? Because it counts for absolutely nothing! Indeed, not only does neither Jew nor Gentile not gain in embracing the things of the past but they both stand in danger of never becoming what they could be, that is, the manifested excellence of being a new creation in this world during this age.

There is but One Jewel in the crown of the victor and His name is Jesus Christ the LORD. Him and Him alone is to be treasured above all else.

"Not by might nor by power but by my Spirit says the Lord".


peace

 

[Carlos Vigil]

.... because he had forgotten what the Lord had told him regarding being baptised in the Spirit

WHERE did you pick up this..."CHOICE bit of gossip" ?

This is simply "HUMAN TRICKERY".
That St. Peter ..."forgot "......

Why do you think Paul fights so diligently, passionately and with determined courage against those who would teach the gentiles they must come under the Law and the rituals?

Because it counts for absolutely nothing!

I think you have been deceptively taught that "they (Rituals) count for nothing". .....
So , someone MUST invent some "human trickery" to justify this preposterous fabrication !


TRUTH IS: Christ MANIFESTS himself in the Rituals.

(A). The Jews were brought into THE COVENANT through CIRCUMCISION.
They were "Maintained" in God's righteousness through SACRIFICES of bulls and goats.

When Christ OFFERED HIMSELF as a Ransom for many, THESE sacrifices became no longer necessary.
He replaced them all with ONE.

(B). Christians are BORN FROM ABOVE... into THE NEW COVENANT through Baptism. as Christ was and Paul was.
We are sustained ALIVE, through the body and blood of Christ OFFERED at every ASSEMBLY. Heb. 10: 25-29.../... John 6: 53


Indeed, Jew or Gentile..... both stand in danger of never becoming what they could be...
If they discard BAPTISM ......(Mark 16: 16)
If they discard THE ALTAR ..(Rev. 11:1)
If they discard The body and blood of Christ. (Heb. 10: 26-29)


There is but One LORD, One FAITH, One BAPTISM .
HE is to be treasured above all else.

"Not by might nor by power but by my Spirit says the Lord".


peace

Peace of Christ to you

 

[Carlos Vigil]

The tract was filled with INTERPRETATIONS + some Scripture.

So? You use an example of a boat being partially submerged in water? To make it a point about baptism?

And, that's your point to prove baptism?

That THE SAME WATER that destroyed the rebellious in the FLOOD, ... also CARRIED TO SAFETY those who REMAINED IN THE ARK...
The same God who CARRIES THE BAPTIZED along THE NEW LIVING PATH.......
will also CONDEMN those who refuse BAPTISM.

We have been baptized into his body! We are the BRIDE of CHRIST! We are now seated IN Him, in Heaven! As Eve was to Adam, we are now to Christ! We (our new body) is IN Christ right now as I write.

I pray somebody out there gets what I have just shown you.....what the Lord has shown me.

For I was stunned by the beauty of having this mystery unfolded by grace before my eyes. Its the LORD honoring the believer to have such a beautiful truth revealed to us.

Wishing you a nice Day, GeneZ

But aren't you one of the proponents of the heresy that "Baptism is a meaningless ceremony"....
That it accomplishes nothing...
used only to show others" the inner condition of your heart" ?

How can a "meaningless ceremony" transform you into "The Bride of Christ ?

Which is it ?
(A). "The Ceremony is of God, and The Bride of Christ is of God."

or

(B). "The ceremony is meaningless, and the bride is meaningless."

 

[Rich48]

Acts 9

17. And Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him said, "Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit."
18. And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he arose and was baptized;

It does not say that he received the baptism; it says that he was baptized-literally, he was immersed. This is water baptism. Note that again, receiving the Spirit is separate from baptism.

As an aside, let me ask a question to those who deny water baptism--what, just what, if you are wrong? In this thread, we are all expressing our understanding of scripture. If those of us on the water baptism are wrong, there is no harm done; however, this cannot be said of the other side.

Rich

 

[GenemZ]

Acts 9

17. And Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him said, "Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit."
18. And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he arose and was baptized;

I am going to re-do that and highlight what you are not seeing.

17. And Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him said, "Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit."​

18. And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight, and he arose and was baptized.​

​

It does not say that he received the baptism; it says that he was baptized-literally, he was immersed.

He was told what just before? ... That he would regain his sight and be filled with the Holy Spirit. So? He regained his sight, arose (got on his feet) and was baptized.

This is water baptism. Note that again, receiving the Spirit is separate from baptism.

That makes no sense! You are just superimposing your desired outcome on what actually happened!

As an aside, let me ask a question to those who deny water baptism--what, just what, if you are wrong?

Funny.... The Holy Spirit is to lead us into all truth. And, I find myself understanding a great deal more truth in general than those who make water baptism a main issue for them.

If I were wrong? I would be understanding less truth. For to get stuck in an area of traditions of men grieves the Spirit. He is limited in what I can be led into. To get stuck in an area of false doctrine quenches the Spirit. He can not lead at all.

In this thread, we are all expressing our understanding of scripture. If those of us on the water baptism are wrong, there is no harm done; however, this cannot be said of the other side.

Being on the wrong side reveals something. A fear to venture out into the growth of the Spiritual life. Wanting to remain in the established static village of the traditionalists without understanding.

The ones that pioneer the growth of faith see the mainstream traditional thinking will be flooded like New Orleans if a major attack on the Church were to be manifested. For tradition is the easiest thing to attack. Why? God does not protect good intentions. He only protects what he has deposited by the Spirit..... TRUTH.

Mark 7:8 niv​

"You have let go of the commands of God and are holding on to the traditions of men."​

If Jesus put it down, God will not protect the lives of believers who attempt to hide in the traditions which gave them a sense of security. They see, since the traditions stood a long time, that they have proven themselves to be sure. Yet, we are reaching a point in history where those who oppose the church are much better informed than in the past. They can attack and God will not protect what is not truth.

Matthew 5:13 niv​

"You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men."​

Today we see what used to be a land blessed by Christian values is now being trampled on by secularism. Why? The power of God is not to be found in traditions of men. The traditions of men are simply sentimentality being garnished with parts of misplaced and misapplied Scripture.

If we are to ever regain having a principle of being the preservative against decay in our land (salt of the earth).... then we need to do like the auto industry now finds itself doing. Restructure and correct past mistakes that became tradition.

We who are willing, must admit error and correct past false traditions and move into a sound footing in truth. If not? Christians will be trampled on by human secularism. God throws us out! The national blessings and happiness disappear.

Matthew 5:13 niv​

"You are the salt of the earth. But if the salt loses its saltiness, how can it be made salty again? It is no longer good for anything, except to be thrown out and trampled by men."​

Stupidity that is well intended, and stated in the name of God is not protected by the power of God. God is HOLY. He will not represent what is not of himself and bless it just because someone is simply a believer.

We can lose our saltiness. What was once overlooked in the past must end. God is purifying His Church progressively over time. What was tolerated because of ignorance in the past will not continue to be tolerated. Just like Peter's ignorance was tolerated in the very beginning, and water baptized as he always had done before. It came to an end. If Peter refused to be corrected? Then there would have been discipline.

Acts 11:16 niv​

"Then I remembered what the Lord had said: 'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.'​

​

Up until then, Peter did not recall those words as to apply to his situation. That is why he continued to water baptize. Its quite simple to see. But difficult to accept when one has been a part of an organization that has failed to see this for hundreds of years. It only shows how this organization has not been growing spiritually.

Because the imposed traditions of men placed big brakes on growing in truth.This kind of organization has locked itself in a giant room of tradition and refuses to go outside to explore and conquer the ways of evil.

As long as this organization remains the way of political correctness in a people, it has a sense of being in power. That will no longer work today. Secular political correctness is on the rise. Traditions of men are doomed to fail. Only finding truth and walking in it will prevail. Power for life is not to be found in tradition. Power of life will correct past traditions with traditions of correction. There is power in Truth in the Spirit. There is only a sense of human power in the traditions of men, as long as the error in the tradition is not detected. To say this planet is only 6000 years old?

Might as well tell the unbeliever scientist to believe in Santa Claus. And, that is how he sees our belief in Christ to be. Because our tradition of 6000 years is false. Water baptism? Rituals?

All must go if Christians are to know the LORD in the Spirit. Otherwise, they can only learn of 'a' Christ. But, not 'the' Christ.

Grace and truth, Genez​

​

 

[Carlos Vigil]

Acts 9

17. And Ananias departed and entered the house, and after laying his hands on him said, "Brother Saul, the Lord Jesus, who appeared to you on the road by which you were coming, has sent me so that you may regain your sight, and be filled with the Holy Spirit."
18. And immediately there fell from his eyes something like scales, and he regained his sight,
(1). and he arose and was baptized;

It does not say that he received the baptism; it says that he was baptized-literally, he was immersed. This is water baptism.
(2). Note that again, receiving the Spirit is separate from baptism.

As an aside, let me ask a question to
(3). those who deny water baptism
--what, just what, if you are wrong? In this thread, we are all expressing our understanding of scripture. If those of us on the water baptism are wrong, there is no harm done; however, this cannot be said of the other side.

Rich

RICH Your post brings much need CLARITY to this dark discussion, THANKS.

(1). Jesus was BAPTIZED, ...Saul was BAPTIZED, ...That says volumes.

(2). I was BAPTIZED as an Infant, ...I experienced THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT at age 30, one Saturday Morning, right after Mass.

(3). If BAPTISM corresponds to Noah's Ark exactly...(as 1 Peter 3:21 says)...
And REMAINING IN THE ARK carried those in it THROUGH THE FLOOD SAFELY...

then,

I believe it is SAFE TO REST AT EASE... IN MY BAPTISM.......
Which will carry us safely THROUGH GOD'S COMING WRATH to those who do not HEED THE GOSPEL.


(see 2 Thess. 1: 8,9)
..when the Lord Jesus Christ is revealed from heaven with his mighty angels; when "with flaming power he will inflict punishment
on those who do not acknowledge God nor heed" the Good News of our Lord Jesus.
Such as these will suffer the penalty of eternal ruin APART FROM THE PRESENSE OF THE LORD AND THE GLORY OF HIS MIGHT..

"The man who,believes (the gospel) and accepts Baptism will be saved;
the man who refuses to believe in it will be condemned."
Mark 16: 16


St. Peter says "Baptism NOW saves you..."
so .....
it stands to reason that the opposite is also true,

"Denial of Baptism NOW condemns you..."

 

[GenemZ]

RICH Your post brings much need CLARITY to this dark discussion, THANKS.

(1). Jesus was BAPTIZED, ...Saul was BAPTIZED, ...That says volumes.

Jesus was circumsized on the eight day.

Paul was circumsized on the eigth day.

Jesus was Bar Mitzvah'd at age 13.

Paul was Bar Mitzvah'd at age 13.

SO? Were you?

Jesus ate kosher. Paul ate kosher. Do you?

Jesus was baptized not for his sins. He had none. He was not repenting of his sins. Jesus was baptized DURING the age of the Jews, not the Church. His baptism was symbollic of being baptized into his ministry on earth by the will of the Father. Jesus was not baptized like others were. Silly comparison.

(2). I was BAPTIZED as an Infant, ...I experienced THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT at age 30, one Saturday Morning, right after Mass.

Infant baptism? Do you recall your decision to follow Christ when you were? Were you fully immersed? Did you confess your sins and belief in Christ?

REALLY?!!

Trying to make sense out of this.

In Christ, GeneZ
​