BAPTISM

[Dave-W]

If what you are saying is true, then why was he not called John the Mikvhehst.

Because the NT comes down to us in Greek, not Hebrew or Aramaic.

And that is the same reason he is called John instead of Yochanan.

 

[Danthemailman]

Can we get to heaven if we aren't baptized?

It logically follows that we get water baptized after we believe the gospel and are saved (Acts 10:43-47), but if you are on your death bed and cannot get baptized before your death, you are still saved because you BELIEVE (Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 4:5; 1 Corinthians 1:21 etc..) which is in harmony with Mark 16:16(b) ..but he who does not believe will be condemned. *NOWHERE does the Bible mention "water baptized or condemned."

Certainly, water baptism is an important act of obedience. Any one professing to believe in/have faith in/trust in Jesus for salvation and yet refusing to be water baptized is of questionable sincerity. It's unthinkable that anyone who truly believes the gospel would refuse to be water baptized. I could not wait to get water baptized after my conversion and I cannot think of one Christian that I know who has refused to be water baptized after their conversion.

Water baptism would have no meaning without Christ’s death, burial and resurrection, but Christ’s death, burial and resurrection would still have meaning, even if there were no water baptism. In other words, Christ’s death is the substance and baptism is the sign/symbol/picture. Without the substance there would be no sign/symbol/picture.

Water baptism put it in it's proper place, subsequent to salvation through faith in Christ as all rites and works must be. Baptism is for believers, and believers are already saved the moment that they place their faith (belief, trust, reliance) in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. The Bible says we are saved by grace through faith, not by rites or religious works, or good works (Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9). This does not remove good works/acts of obedience (including water baptism) from the Christian life, it just puts them in their proper place, subsequent to regeneration and salvation.

 

[Dave-W]

Baptism is not just one of a thousand other Rituals, or Ceremonies the Jews carried out without any true meaning, or just a cleansing of the flesh as Mikvehs are.

If it is only a Ceremony to Messianic Jews then, it has lost all meaning.

There is a pre-assumption in there that the ceremonies of the Jews (which were prescribed by GOD) were empty actions. Since GOD commanded them, clearly that is not the case.

Who said anything about it being “only a ceremony?”

 

[Dave-W]

Not the invention of a Messianic bias?

No. A recovery of a truth suppressed by the antisemitism of the early church fathers.

 

[Saint Steven]

No. A recovery of a truth suppressed by the antisemitism of the early church fathers.

Anti-Semitic Jews?
What's the motive? Why would such information be suppressed?
What end does it serve to not consider it baptism?

Furthermore, why did the people go out in the desert to be baptized by John if there was all sorts of baptism already in their day to day life? Were not these founts for ceremonial washing a baptism of repentance before God?

 

[Dave-W]

Anti-Semitic Jews?

No. THe fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries and following. THey were not Jewish.

What's the motive? Why would such information be suppressed?

History lesson: In the years 134-135 ad a false messiah rose up in Jerusalem named Bar Kochba and led a rebellion against Rome. Jewish Belevers fought in that war until chief rabbi Akiva declared Bar Kochba the Messiah. We were not willing to fight for a false messiah and left the battle. Rome won. And since that was the 2nd time they had to level Jerusalem in just over 60 years, they decided to uproot the Jews from the province of Judea and disperse them across the empire. And they were persecuted everywhere.

So the church fathers decided to severe ties with Judaism and change everything in lifestyle and worship services that looked Jewish. They suppressed everything Jewish about early Christianity.

 

[Saint Steven]

There is a pre-assumption in there that the ceremonies of the Jews (which were prescribed by GOD) were empty actions. Since GOD commanded them, clearly that is not the case.

Who said anything about it being “only a ceremony?”

What do you make of this?

Hebrews 9:8-10
The Holy Spirit was showing by this that the way into the Most Holy Place had not yet been disclosed as long as the first tabernacle was still functioning. 9 This is an illustration for the present time, indicating that the gifts and sacrifices being offered were not able to clear the conscience of the worshiper. 10 They are only a matter of food and drink and various ceremonial washings—external regulations applying until the time of the new order.

 

[Dave-W]

We seem to be straying far afield from the OP in this discussion.

What do I make of it? That the author is drawing a clear transition between Temple service and what was done by our Lord on the cross. That supports the idea that there is a distinct connection and smooth transition between the ceremonial baptisms in the Mosaic covenant and Christian baptism in the New Covenant.

 

[Saint Steven]

No. THe fathers of the 2nd and 3rd centuries and following. THey were not Jewish.

History lesson: In the years 134-135 ad a false messiah rose up in Jerusalem named Bar Kochba and led a rebellion against Rome. Jewish Belevers fought in that war until chief rabbi Akiva declared Bar Kochba the Messiah. We were not willing to fight for a false messiah and left the battle. Rome won. And since that was the 2nd time they had to level Jerusalem in just over 60 years, they decided to uproot the Jews from the province of Judea and disperse them across the empire. And they were persecuted everywhere.

So the church fathers decided to severe ties with Judaism and change everything in lifestyle and worship services that looked Jewish. They suppressed everything Jewish about early Christianity.

Thanks, that's very informative.
But didn't we already see this beginning to happen with the Jerusalem Council in Acts chapter fifteen? And in other passages where the Apostle Paul stood against the Circumcision Group and even against Cephas (Peter) for his "hypocrisy"? Not that it was anti-Semitism, but a removal of everything Jewish from Christianity.

 

[Dave-W]

Thanks, that's very informative.
But didn't we already see this beginning to happen with the Jerusalem Council in Acts chapter fifteen? And in other passages where the Apostle Paul stood against the Circumcision Group and even against Cephas (Peter) for his "hypocrisy"? Not that it was anti-Semitism, but a removal of everything Jewish from Christianity.

If you think that, you fall into the same mistake the New Covenant Jews in Acts 21 did. They said Paul was telling Jewish believers to forsake Moses. Paul and James discuss the situation and James recounts that the decision of Acts 15 applied ONLY to the gentile believers, NOT the Jewish believers. He then prescribes a very JEWISH course of action to prove the rumors false. Which Paul agrees to.

 

[Saint Steven]

We seem to be straying far afield from the OP in this discussion.

What do I make of it? That the author is drawing a clear transition between Temple service and what was done by our Lord on the cross. That supports the idea that there is a distinct connection and smooth transition between the ceremonial baptisms in the Mosaic covenant and Christian baptism in the New Covenant.

That makes sense, but calling it a "smooth transition" seems a bit generous.
The Temple curtain was torn from top to bottom and dead saints were coming out of their graves. Not just another day at the office. lol

 

[Dave-W]

Smooth transition in the sense that it was not starting over from scratch. There were vast areas of continuity, which the post bar Kochba church leaders tried to erase.

 

[Saint Steven]

If you think that, you fall into the same mistake the New Covenant Jews in Acts 21 did. They said Paul was telling Jewish believers to forsake Moses. Paul and James discuss the situation and James recounts that the decision of Acts 15 applied ONLY to the gentile believers, NOT the Jewish believers. He then prescribes a very JEWISH course of action to prove the rumors false. Which Paul agrees to.

I see that as a coverup. Paul was in fact doing what he was being accused of.
They gave him a detailed plan of action to appease the Jewish believers. (zealots)

 

[JIMINZ]

There is a pre-assumption in there that the ceremonies of the Jews (which were prescribed by GOD) were empty actions. Since GOD commanded them, clearly that is not the case.

Who said anything about it being “only a ceremony?”

It's not a pre-assumption.

Everything God commanded the Jews to follow, were not just empty action, there was purpose to everything he said.

But we see time and time again the Jews failed to take God seriously and took everything in the flesh (Physical) not understanding the Spiritual side of what God was doing with them.

Therefore yes, they understood things CEREMONIALLY never understanding the import of what things were.

Baptism is not just some Ceremony, if that is the way you look at it, then you have missed the boat.

Seriously, Baptism is not to be compared with a Ritual Bath repeated over and over again because they could not be cleansed by the Ritual, it takes more than that.

Example.

Heb 10:3,4
3) But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.
4) For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and of goats should take away sins.

Ritual, Ceremony these were just things they did every year, because they were commanded to do it, without any understanding.

 

[Dave-W]

I see that as a coverup. Paul was in fact doing what he was being accused of.
They gave him a detailed plan of action to appease the Jewish believers. (zealots)

No way. Paul never cow-towed down to anyone. Not even his mentor Gamaliel. He was way too outspoken and abrasive to try to appease anyone.

To do what you say would make Paul the worst kind of liar.


Um - the party of the Zealots were NOT believers. They were closely allied with the Pharisees; and would be termed today a terrorist organization, trying to rid Judea of Roman occupation. Their tactics were similar to the IRA back in the 1960s and 70s.

 

[Saint Steven]

No way. Paul never cow-towed down to anyone. Not even his mentor Gamaliel. He was way too outspoken and abrasive to try to appease anyone.

To do what you say would make Paul the worst kind of liar.


Um - the party of the Zealots were NOT believers. They were closely allied with the Pharisees; and would be termed today a terrorist organization, trying to rid Judea of Roman occupation. Their tactics were similar to the IRA back in the 1960s and 70s.

Are we talking about the same Paul that wrote this?

Galatians 5:4
You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.

 

[Dave-W]

Are we talking about the same Paul that wrote this?

Galatians 5:4
You who are trying to be justified by the law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.

Absolutely.

Written to Gentile believers.

 

[Joy]

MOD HAT ON
​

This Thread​

​

From The Junk Drawer​

To Sacramental/Ordinance Theology
​

This is a More Fitting Forum ​

for this subject​

MOD HAT OFF

​

 

[ladodgers6]

Is salvation contingent upon your involvement in a religious ceremony in which something is done to your flesh? No, salvation is not by works, be it water baptism or circumcision, but by faith apart from works. Though those who have been saved get water baptized, water baptism is a work they do neither to obtain nor maintain their salvation status.

While salvation by works Christians treat everything we are to do as if continually trying to satisfy conditions for salvation, those of us who have been saved by faith apart from works go on to do things just because they're the right things to do rather than having to be motivated out of fear of condemnation as if under the law of sin and death.

May I respond, a Reformed Faith believer?

 

[Dan Perez]

Can we get to heaven if we aren't baptized?

Rom 6:3 says that as many as are BAPTIZED // PLACED into Christ were BAPTIZED // PLACED into His Death , PERIOD

Then Rom 6:4 Therefore , we were buried together with Him , through this BAPTISMA // PLACING into his death , in order that just as Christ was raised from the Dead , through the glory of the Father , so also should regulate our lives in Newness of life .

Verse 5 For since we have become united together in the likeness of his death , yet we will be also of the RESERRECTION .

dan p