Is baptism neccesary for salvation?

thoughtful-

we both agree on something...we both believe that baptism isnt a prereq for salvation. If i didnt make myself clear on that I sincerly apologize.

Where it becomes foggy is that theres talk about two different baptisms in the Bible, baptism by water, and baptism by the Holy Spirt.
Once we repent of our sins, and confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, then we receive the Holy Spirit. the key thing isnt to believe, because as Paul says, even the demons believe, the thing is to confess, to acknoweldge with our lips. There are myriads of verses that say confess that Jesus is the Son Of God, or somethign on that line. Read Acts 2, to me its very clearly that the people at the Day of Pentecost were unbelievers at the start, they received the Holy Spirit upon listening to Peters message (i.e. they were saved right then and there...reference back to that verse in Romans that I cant think of right now...forgive me) and then, they were baptized by water. which reminds me of something else I want to say, but will save for a new thing...

Ok the other thing I wanted to say is this...well there is several more things I want to say, but I want to focus on this.

In Galatians 5:1-4 2Mark my words! I, Paul, tell you that if you let yourselves be circumcised, Christ will be of no value to you at all. 3Again I declare to every man who lets himself be circumcised that he is obligated to obey the whole law. 4You who are trying to be justified by law have been alienated from Christ; you have fallen away from grace.5But by faith we eagerly await through the Spirit the righteousness for which we hope. 6For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision has any value. The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love.

alright, why in the world am i talking about circumcision? a) to draw the point in what the Jews practice as an outward sign of being saved, and what Christians practice as an outward sign of being saved. Jews thought they had to be circumcised in order to be "saved." And we are talking about an outwardly show of circumcision. And as you will see in the up coming verses this wasnt the case. That there was, and still is an inwardly sign of circumcision that God himself ordains.

Galations 6:12-15
12Those who want to make a good impression outwardly are trying to compel you to be circumcised. The only reason they do this is to avoid being persecuted for the cross of Christ. 13Not even those who are circumcised obey the law, yet they want you to be circumcised that they may boast about your flesh. 14May I never boast except in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, through which the world has been crucified to me, and I to the world. 15Neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything; what counts is a new creation.

Romans 2:29
29No, a man is a Jew if he is one inwardly; and circumcision is circumcision of the heart, by the Spirit, not by the written code. Such a man's praise is not from men, but from God.

WOAH, stop right there, circumcision is of the heart, and by the Spirit. and inwardly. Why cant this mean baptism, this makes me like convinced that it is. If you want me to explain, I can...

Colossians 2:11
11In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature,[not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ

translatoin In him you were also baptized, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a baptizmal done by the waters of men, but by the waters of the Holy Spirit.

Thats it for now...

wow..someone that gets it!!! I totally agree.

The great question to ask is would Jesus ask us to do something that all men could not do. If a man accepts Christ in a submarine can he be baptized? No!!! He would drown. If a man in the desert accepts Christ can he be baptized? No!!! There is no water.
What then if the man dies of dehydration? What if the submarine falls under attack and the man dies? Does his faith in Christ fall short. Was God unable to save. Did the requirements of Old Testament Salvation of Faith and Obedience pass away? No.
Salvation in the Bible is founded on faith and obedience. Baptism did not save in the understanding of either the Jews or Gentile minds from the beginning of Judaism to the rise of Christianity. To add a rung to salvation leaves unanswerable questions.
Where did John the Baptist go? What about the thief on the cross? What about the people forgiven their sins by Jesus without the requirement of Baptism? In cases of this size History is the standing bar; the burden of proof falls upon the new rise of Baptismal Salvationism.

Originally posted by closer
...What about the thief on the cross? What about the people forgiven their sins by Jesus without the requirement of Baptism? In cases of this size History is the standing bar; the burden of proof falls upon the new rise of Baptismal Salvationism.

Click to expand...

Good point and good post!

Ephesians 2:8-9


<DIR>8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: <I>it is</I> the gift of God:9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.</DIR>Baptism is a work and works do not save.

Originally posted by closer
The great question to ask is would Jesus ask us to do something that all men could not do. If a man accepts Christ in a submarine can he be baptized? No!!! He would drown. If a man in the desert accepts Christ can he be baptized? No!!! There is no water.
What then if the man dies of dehydration? What if the submarine falls under attack and the man dies? Does his faith in Christ fall short. Was God unable to save. Did the requirements of Old Testament Salvation of Faith and Obedience pass away? No.
Salvation in the Bible is founded on faith and obedience. Baptism did not save in the understanding of either the Jews or Gentile minds from the beginning of Judaism to the rise of Christianity. To add a rung to salvation leaves unanswerable questions.
Where did John the Baptist go? What about the thief on the cross? What about the people forgiven their sins by Jesus without the requirement of Baptism? In cases of this size History is the standing bar; the burden of proof falls upon the new rise of Baptismal Salvationism.

Click to expand...

I think we can come up with some of the most outrageous and rediculas objections for a person to not follow the commands of Jesus.&nbsp; Sorry, but baptism is part of the salvation experience!&nbsp; Can a person get saved by faith alone?&nbsp; Or how about hearing?&nbsp; Hearing is considered a work, so I guess we won't be able to hear the gospel in order to be saved.&nbsp; Is being baptised a work?&nbsp; You bet it is!&nbsp; Is it part of the salvation process?&nbsp; You bet it is!&nbsp; In Mark's account of the great commission (Mark 16:15-16): "And he [Jesus] said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." Here Jesus made baptism a condition of salvation. Some argue that since Jesus did not say "he that believeth not and is not baptized shall be damned," only faith is the condition. However, if there were two conditions for non-salvation, one could be baptized without believing and still be saved. This would be nonsense. Of course, Jesus could have said "he that believeth not or is not baptized shall be damned." However, this would imply that it is possible to have faith without being obedient.&nbsp; This is never taught in the bible, and so we can see the reason that it is not implied here. The Holy Spirit brought to Mark's memory exactly what Jesus said and it was exactly what He meant. Both faith and the clear indication that that faith is alive (baptism) are commanded, and they are conditions of salvation. The person who refuses to be baptized does so because s/he does not believe the clear commands of God.


&nbsp;

I am replying because my post was that baptism was a work. If I'm out of line, please accept my apologies.

Originally posted by franklin


I think we can come up with some of the most outrageous and rediculas objections for a person to not follow the commands of Jesus.&nbsp; Sorry, but baptism is part of the salvation experience!&nbsp; Can a person get saved by faith alone?&nbsp; Or how about hearing?&nbsp; Hearing is considered a work, so I guess we won't be able to hear the gospel in order to be saved.&nbsp; Is being baptised a work?&nbsp; You bet it is!&nbsp; Is it part of the salvation process?&nbsp; You bet it is!

Click to expand...

This part of the reply is a False Dilemma. The argument is not whether to follow or not follow the commands of Christ. It is a debate of when salvation is imparted. Clearly if you are saved, you will attempt to be baptized. You will attempt to follow all the commands of Christ. Most of your argument misses this point.

In Mark's account of the great commission (Mark 16:15-16): "And he [Jesus] said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." Here Jesus made baptism a condition of salvation. Some argue that since Jesus did not say "he that believeth not and is not baptized shall be damned," only faith is the condition. However, if there were two conditions for non-salvation, one could be baptized without believing and still be saved. This would be nonsense. Of course, Jesus could have said "he that believeth not or is not baptized shall be damned." However, this would imply that it is possible to have faith without being obedient.&nbsp; This is never taught in the bible, and so we can see the reason that it is not implied here. The Holy Spirit brought to Mark's memory exactly what Jesus said and it was exactly what He meant. Both faith and the clear indication that that faith is alive (baptism) are commanded, and they are conditions of salvation. The person who refuses to be baptized does so because s/he does not believe the clear commands of God.

Click to expand...

In Mark 16:16 it is very clear that it is unbelief that brings damnation. Not a lack of baptism. Presenting a complicated argument does not change this.&nbsp; Just because baptism is commanded and often associated immediately with belief in the New Testament, does not make it a pre-condition of salvation.&nbsp; In Acts chapter 10, it is clear that Cornelius was saved. Further, Acts 10:43 states clearly that belief is the only condition required for Salvation.


In the case of the thief on the Cross (Luke 23:43), the thief's salvation was clearly stated and yet he was not baptized. How can this be reconciled with your assertion that that baptism is a condition of salvation? It cannot be. This is a clear example of where baptism is not associated with salvation.

The bible is God's word and does not contradict itself. We should use clear examples to explain difficult passages not the reverse.&nbsp;The only consistantly required attribute for salvation is the belief and acceptance of God's gift.&nbsp;Baptism will come through&nbsp;obedience.&nbsp;
&nbsp;

&nbsp;&nbsp; Originally posted by cthoma11
I am replying because my post was that baptism was a work. If I'm out of line, please accept my apologies.

Click to expand...

cthoma, I agree, baptism is a work, no need to apologise...... Is faith a work?&nbsp; Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.&nbsp;Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. (Js2:17-18) Faith and works go hand in hand......

&nbsp;&nbsp;
This part of the reply is a False Dilemma. The argument is not whether to follow or not follow the commands of Christ. It is a debate of when salvation is imparted. Clearly if you are saved, you will attempt to be baptized. You will attempt to follow all the commands of Christ. Most of your argument misses this point. [/B]

Click to expand...

&nbsp;

This argument has everything to do with following the commands of Christ!&nbsp; That's just my point, I think you missed my point,&nbsp;Don't you&nbsp;think God is merciful when it comes to some of these objections?&nbsp;You have to&nbsp;use some level of common sence and logic don't you think?&nbsp;If a person gets killed on his way to be baptised, I believe God can see that that person had all the intentions of following the commands of Christ to follow Him in obedience.&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;

...it is clear that Cornelius was saved. Further, Acts 10:43 states clearly that belief is the only condition required for Salvation. [/B]

Click to expand...

And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days. (Acts10:48) Let's read the entire context of the passage when trying to make a point from the scripture!&nbsp; What part of commanded do you not understand?

In the case of the thief on the Cross (Luke 23:43), the thief's salvation was clearly stated and yet he was not baptized. How can this be reconciled with your assertion that that baptism is a condition of salvation? It cannot be. This is a clear example of where baptism is not associated with salvation. [/B]

Click to expand...

aaah yes, the thief on the cross!&nbsp; I was wondering when someone was going to bring that one up! &nbsp;&nbsp; I used to use the same objection&nbsp;years ago until someone revealed to me how false this minor premise is!&nbsp; This is another example of lack of common sence and logic when applying the scriptures to the salvation experience.&nbsp;&nbsp;Let' examine your premise: Major premise: If one "exception to baptism" can be found, then baptism cannot possibly be essential to salvation,&nbsp;Minor premise: The thief on the cross is an exception; therefore,&nbsp;Conclusion: Baptism cannot possibly be essential to salvation.&nbsp;Your argument doesn't hold water.... no pun intended! Those who make the argument based upon the thief on the cross do so in full recognition that they cannot identify one other individual in the New Testament who was stated to have been saved who had not allowed himself or herself to be subjected to scriptural baptism. This&nbsp;in itself is very powerful evidence in favor of baptism being a condition of salvation, especially if the argument based upon the thief is not valid.

&nbsp; The bible is God's word and does not contradict itself. [/B]

Click to expand...

your argumment does contradict the scripture! Scriptural baptism is a requirement.&nbsp;

&nbsp; We should use clear examples to explain difficult passages not the reverse.&nbsp;[/B]

Click to expand...

I showed you some of&nbsp;the scriptures that commands us to be baptised......

&nbsp; The only consistantly required attribute for salvation is the belief and acceptance of God's gift.&nbsp;Baptism will come through&nbsp;obedience.&nbsp;&nbsp;[/B]

Click to expand...

Belief is more than just raising your hand at a Carmen concert!&nbsp; Jesus himself defined “belief” as a work of God!&nbsp;&nbsp; John 6:28-29, "Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." Mark 16:16, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;"

Cheers

&nbsp;

Baptism is not a work, and not all works are bad.

Why would Jesus command us to do something that is a work or is bad??!! Yet he commanded baptism.

Originally posted by lambslove
Baptism is not a work, and not all works are bad.
Why would Jesus command us to do something that is a work or is bad??!! Yet he commanded baptism.

Click to expand...

Lambs, I'm referring to Godly works (Baptism) not worldly works, as in trying to earn salvation.... the bible commands us to repent and be baptised!&nbsp; Don't you believe the scripture references I posted?&nbsp; If you don't, your problem is with God's word not me!&nbsp; Mark 16:16, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;"

Hi Franklin,

Originally posted by franklin &nbsp;

Click to expand...

cthoma, I agree, baptism is a work, no need to apologise...... Is faith a work?&nbsp; Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone. Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. (Js2:17-18) Faith and works go hand in hand......

Click to expand...

Is faith a work. Good question, but not part of this thread. Your quote "Faith and works go hand in hand" has full agreement on my part.

Originally posted by franklin
This argument has everything to do with following the commands of Christ!&nbsp; That's just my point, I think you missed my point, Don't you think God is merciful when it comes to some of these objections? You have to use some level of common sence and logic don't you think? If a person gets killed on his way to be baptised, I believe God can see that that person had all the intentions of following the commands of Christ to follow Him in obedience.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Click to expand...

I'm not sure what you mean in the sentence that begins "Don't you think...".

In&nbsp; reply to your question that I should us logic. I am! In applying John 3:16 and Acts 16:31, the person killed was saved when he believed. He was demonstating his belief as he was in obedience to Christ's command in that he was on his way to be baptized. He was following Christ's commands.

Originally posted by franklin
And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days. (Acts10:48) Let's read the entire context of the passage when trying to make a point from the scripture!&nbsp; What part of commanded do you not understand?

Click to expand...

I do not think the last sentence was necessary. I fully understand what commanded means. Changing the subject to attack me as opposed to my arguments is poor form.&nbsp;

&nbsp;
You have taken verse 48 out of context with 44 through 47. They received the Holy Spirit then were baptized. The Holy Spirit is given to the saved.&nbsp; They then followed Christ's commands and were baptized. I believe that my interpretation is in better context than just looking at verse 48.


I am not in any way trying to argue against following the commands of Christ. I am only here to discuss is when you are saved: when you believe; or not until you are baptized.

Originally posted by franklin

aaah yes, the thief on the cross!&nbsp; I was wondering when someone was going to bring that one up! &nbsp;&nbsp; I used to use the same objection years ago until someone revealed to me how false this minor premise is!&nbsp; This is another example of lack of common sence and logic when applying the scriptures to the salvation experience.&nbsp; Let' examine your premise: Major premise: If one "exception to baptism" can be found, then baptism cannot possibly be essential to salvation, Minor premise: The thief on the cross is an exception; therefore, Conclusion: Baptism cannot possibly be essential to salvation. Your argument doesn't hold water.... no pun intended! Those who make the argument based upon the thief on the cross do so in full recognition that they cannot identify one other individual in the New Testament who was stated to have been saved who had not allowed himself or herself to be subjected to scriptural baptism. This in itself is very powerful evidence in favor of baptism being a condition of salvation, especially if the argument based upon the thief is not valid.

Click to expand...

The thief on the cross is by no means the only occurance of salvation by belief only. John 3:16 is the most famous. (At least I see it at almost every sporting match and even on the Simpsons. ) In my last post, I disagreed with you and consider Mark 16:16 to be stating the same point. Acts 16:31 also states this same point.&nbsp; These are not minor premises, they consistantly point to salvation through belief, not belief+baptism. I also argued that is Acts 10, Cornelius was saved prior to baptism.

Yes, baptism is a requirement; but not for salvation, it comes afterwards.

Originally posted by franklin
your argumment does contradict the scripture! Scriptural baptism is a requirement.&nbsp;&nbsp;

Click to expand...

I have not argued that baptism is not a requirement. I stated explicitly in the last post and again in this one.

Originally posted by franklin
I showed you some of the scriptures that commands us to be baptised......

&nbsp;

Belief is more than just raising your hand at a Carmen concert!&nbsp; Jesus himself defined “belief” as a work of God!&nbsp;&nbsp; John 6:28-29, "Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent." Mark 16:16, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;"

Cheers&nbsp;

Click to expand...

The Carmen concert sentence about what belief is, is not the issue being discussed. In your quote of Mark 16:16 you left off the part of the verse that invalidates your argument "but the one who does not believe will be condemned."

Regards,

Clinton

I have a definitiative statement. Can you use any scripture to so aritculate your point other than Mark's Commission? Why I bring this up is because this is not in the best manuscripts and is in most situations not consider to be part of the original text. When the text is suspect we must look to another. Also Phillip and the Ethiopean with regards to the baptismal statement is also missing in the oldest and most complete manuscripts.
If we are saved by faith then we are agreeing to follow the commands of Christ. That is the standard. Still If baptism is a requirement for salvation then it is the case in all cases. God is just and must hold everyone to the same standard. There is no other way to describe just. If God does not then he is not God. Secondly the Bible expressly says that salvation is not of works. Faith yes. Works no. To argue that a work is a requirement of salvation is to violate the scripture. Faith is not a work either. It is the channel through which grace flows. Faith is from God works are from men. Baptism is definately a ordinance and a command but still it is not a requirement for salvation.

&nbsp;&nbsp; Originally posted by closer
I have a definitiative statement. Can you use any scripture to so aritculate your point other than Mark's Commission? Why I bring this up is because this is not in the best manuscripts and is in most situations not consider to be part of the original text. When the text is suspect we must look to another. Also Phillip and the Ethiopean with regards to the baptismal statement is also missing in the oldest and most complete manuscripts.

Click to expand...

Closer, are you saying that Mark contradicts the other gospels?&nbsp; I don't think so pilgrim!&nbsp; that is a poor excuse my friend!&nbsp;

&nbsp;&nbsp;
If we are saved by faith then we are agreeing to follow the commands of Christ. That is the standard. Still If baptism is a requirement for salvation then it is the case in all cases. God is just and must hold everyone to the same standard. There is no other way to describe just. If God does not then he is not God. Secondly the Bible expressly says that salvation is not of works. Faith yes. Works no. To argue that a work is a requirement of salvation is to violate the scripture. Faith is not a work either. It is the channel through which grace flows. Faith is from God works are from men. Baptism is definately a ordinance and a command but still it is not a requirement for salvation. [/B]

Click to expand...

You've got to be kidding me right? If faith is not a work,&nbsp;then James is a lier!&nbsp;&nbsp;&nbsp;Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.&nbsp;Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. (Js2:17-18)&nbsp; I think you are confusing worldly works (earn salvation by works only)&nbsp;with Godly works Closer!&nbsp; Like a asked and stated in my other posts, are we&nbsp;saved by faith alone?&nbsp; NO!&nbsp;&nbsp;are we saved by belief only?&nbsp; NO! because scripture says belief alone will not save you (James 2:19).&nbsp;Don't tell me there is something wrong with the book of James either!&nbsp; &nbsp;&nbsp; We are saved by faith and baptism (Mark 16:16): "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." Can we be saved by faith if we refuse to be baptized? Can we be saved by baptism if we fail to believe? Ponder this for a while my friend and thanks for your post.

"Can we be saved by faith if we refuse to be baptized?"

Yes

Also, can you please show me where it says in the bible there are different kinds of "works"?

&nbsp;&nbsp; Originally posted by LouisBooth
"Can we be saved by faith if we refuse to be baptized?"
Yes

Click to expand...

WOW!&nbsp;&nbsp; :o&nbsp; huh!&nbsp; Booth!&nbsp; Did you understand my question?&nbsp; I think you need to read it again!&nbsp; Christ shed His precious blood for you and your saying that you have the right to refuse to disobey the first basic commendment that He spelled out in His word?&nbsp; Mark 16:16, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;"&nbsp; What Gospel are you teaching anyway?&nbsp; It certainly isn't the Gospel of Jesus Christ when you give that kind of a response!&nbsp;

&nbsp;&nbsp;
Also, can you please show me where it says in the bible there are different kinds of "works"? [/B]

Click to expand...

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.&nbsp;Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works. (Js2:17-18)

Your question is a joke right?!?&nbsp; Your kidding?&nbsp; What do you see the Apostles doing in the bible booth?&nbsp; Who wrote most of the NT? That in&nbsp;itself is a great work!&nbsp;

Please note: In an effort keep harmony on the forum, let us step back and take a breather. No one wants to see a good discussion go downhill and take a turn for the worse, so please reconsider attitudes and words before posting any further.

Thank you for your cooperation.

"Can we be saved by faith if we refuse to be baptized?"

Click to expand...

Why would you refuse? It doesn't make sense to me to refuse.

Originally posted by lambslove
Why would you refuse? It doesn't make sense to me to refuse.

Click to expand...

Well, Lamb, it seems like someone else in this thread thinks it's ok to refuse to be baptised..... think about it.....&nbsp; Baptism is&nbsp;the only command of God that we only obey once. If a person can't obey that, then he or she is not ready to follow Christ!&nbsp; Of all of the acts that are commanded of us, baptism is the least demanding.&nbsp; I agree with you, why would someone want to refuse, well, believe it or not there are those out there who&nbsp;are teaching it is not a requirement for salvation!&nbsp; It is a false teaching that is opposed to the gospel of Christ!

&nbsp;


&nbsp;

&nbsp;

"What Gospel are you teaching anyway"

So why base an essential docterine on one verse frank? Did you read the foot note about that passage? You can go back and read my talks with ed about this if you would like. You can be saved and not be baptised. Eskimos for example If you shake it and it breaks down, its not of God. This is one of those things. Baptism is not needed to be saved.

I think Louis just made the quote of the year. I want to borrow that for my delivery class this sememster. It also pens a strong truth. If it breaks down it is not of God. The fact also since you insist on using a questionable verse is that if one does not believe he will be damned. That does not say if one is not baptized he is damned. The fact that very little on baptism is given in the New Testament in regards to salvation should raise questions. Secondly there is no distinction between works with regards to lost people. Faith is not a work. Faith is demonstrated by works, but in itself it is not a work. If faith is a work then Calvinist have been right all along and I am not ready to go to that extreme. Only a regenrated man can do works of righteousness. Therefore the man must be regenerated before he can be baptized with the right heart.
Secondly James does not teach that faith is a work mearly the illustration of faith through works. Faith is a gift of God.
Finally I am still waiting for more scriptures from somebody to support this position that is not in a questionable state of canonicity.
Franklin are you a professional. You tend to debate like one.