Why Are We Supposed to Be Baptized?

.
● 1Cor 12:13 . . 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.

That baptism is quite a bit different than the standard baptism with H2O.

● 1Cor 10:1-2 . . All our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; and were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;

In that baptism, nobody got wet; there wasn't even any mud to get on their shoes.

● 1Pet 3:20-21 . . Eight souls were saved by water. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us.

Noah was nice and dry. His ark got wet from the water, but not him.
_

3Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

Honestly baptism is full of opinions and church doctrine, debating weither baptism is even needed at all or what it even does. People like to push their own beliefs and opinions.

I can say Paul was alot more in the spirit then the vast majority of Christians today. Paul didnt just read the bible and make his own opinion, these things were revealed to him through the spirit.

Therefore i would trust Pauls words, more then anyones here, as we know he was not blind and the things he wrote, came from the spirit and not the flesh.

We might not fully understand it yet, however we can see something significant does happen during baptism.

People say you dont have to be baptized anymore, well i can say that Paul didnt feel this way as he continued to baptize people into christ.

.

Chris35 said:

Paul . . continued to baptize people into christ.

Click to expand...

If ritual water baptism were so all-fired essential, then surely Paul would've included it with every one of his evangelistic sermons without fail; but didn't. In point of fact, it wasn't even a priority.

● 1Cor 1:14-17 . . I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius-- I also baptized the household of Stephanas --beyond that, I don't remember if I baptized anyone else. For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel.
_

I take that statement back, that Paul baptized. However.

12What I mean is this: One of you says, “I follow Paul”; another, “I follow Apollos”; another, “I follow Cephas b ”; still another, “I follow Christ.”

3Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Were you baptized in the name of Paul? 14I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. 16(Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) 17For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel

Yes, paul was only called to preach the gospel unto the gentiles, however to say he was against baptism, or didnt see it as important is still not right, as he did write about it, and assumed the people who he wrote to had already been baptized.

Why is paul thanking God that he wasnt the one to baptize this church? 15so no one can say that you were baptized in my name.

37When the people heard this, they were cut to the heart and said to Peter and the other apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?”

38Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39The promise is for you and your children and for all who are far off—for all whom the Lord our God will call.”

40With many other words he warned them; and he pleaded with them, “Save yourselves from this corrupt generation.” 41Those who accepted his message were baptized, and about three thousand were added to their number that day.

I think its actually pretty clear, that needing or not needing baptism, wasnt even a discussion back then, else Paul would of addressed it. Everyone was baptized and they didnt question weither it was needed or not, it was accepted, it was the normal. Repentance and baptism.

Weither essential for salvation or not is irrelevant anyway, all who repent should be baptized. Jesus was baptized, the apostles baptized and Paul did also baptize. Im not sure why anyone would preach against it.



This whole thing brings up a much harder question though. Some are called to preach, some are called to lead, and others are called for other things.

I can say for certainty, that most the posters here are not called to preach or to teach, so why are they posting their opinions and beliefs as this is what is causing most the confusion.

.
● Acts 2:38-39 . . Peter replied: Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Peter omitted the Father and the Holy Spirit that Jesus instructed in Matt 28:19

"Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"

Peter's chronology was off too. He made baptism a prerequisite for the reception of the Holy Spirit, but in Cornelius' home, people got the Spirit prior to baptism.

● Acts 10:44 . .While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message.

● Acts 10:47 . . Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

And once again Peter's formula omitted the Father and the Holy Spirit that Jesus instructed in Matt 28:19.

● Acts 10:48 . . And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

A sharp-eyed Bible student would no doubt be justified to suggest that Peter's baptism formula was wrong; thus all the baptisms performed on the day of Pentecost and in Cornelius' home were invalid and would have to be done over.
_

Most Christians consider Peter's words here to be a basic statement about the Sacrament of Baptism, not a Baptismal formula.

WebersHome said:

.
A sharp-eyed Bible student would no doubt be justified to suggest that Peter's baptism formula was wrong; thus all the baptisms performed on the day of Pentecost and in Cornelius' home were invalid and would have to be done over.
_

Click to expand...

First you say arguing about baptism is childish and now you claim such nonsense? Wow.

.
● Acts 10:44 . .While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message.

● Acts 10:47-48 . . Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Supposing some of those folks informed Peter that right then was not a convenient time for them to get baptized; for whatever reason. For example one of the ladies had spent an hour on her hair and make-up, and/or one of the men was late for a business meeting. They would get around to it later.

Well; it turns out that the Holy Spirit is both a seal and a good-faith deposit (Eph 1:13-14). Seals were usually made by impressing hot wax with an item of jewelry called a signet ring. A mechanical tool was sometimes used too. In other words: It is by the Holy Spirit that God puts his signature on the dotted line; so to speak. (cf. John 6:27 and 1Cor 1:22)

Home buyers know that good-faith deposits are a token sum of money submitted with the escrow papers. Should a prospective buyer back out of the deal, they forfeit the good faith deposit. Well; should God renege, recipients of the Holy Spirit get to keep it regardless because He would forfeit the Spirit.

So the gift of the Holy Spirit is a really big deal because it places God under an obligation that He dares not fail to honor.
_

WebersHome said:

Peter's chronology was off too. He made baptism a prerequisite for the reception of the Holy Spirit, but in Cornelius' home, people got the Spirit prior to baptism.

Click to expand...

Im going to say that the holy spirit was poured out on them on pentacost, to prove to the jews, that indeed God had accepted the gentiles in the covenant. Again after they were commanded by Peter to be baptized.

Acts 10:48 . . And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

Why would Peter command them to be baptized if if wasnt needed?

WebersHome said:

Jesus instructed in Matt 28:19

"Go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"

Click to expand...

Peter wasn't only one, Paul also omitted.

Did you receive the Holy Spirit when a you believed?”

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

3So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”

“John’s baptism,” they replied.

4Paul 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.” 5On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

We often rely on our own understanding as right, and then come from a viewpoint, well Jesus said this, so they infact didnt do it that way so they were wrong. However im going to say, Paul and Peter knew and understood more then we do today, im going to assume they are right, and we are wrong. If they both ommited then there is probably a reason why.

Then we change doctrine to suit our understanding rather then praying for wisdom and understanding from God, and try to see what they saw.

The only possible conclusion i can see is that indeed the name of Jesus actually covers all three.

30 I and my Father are one.

But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name.

43I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not accept me

All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me

Im going to go out on a limb here and say, that Jesus must represent the Father, the son, and the holy spirit. Not in a worldly way but a spiritual way.

Chris35 said:

Im going to say that the holy spirit was poured out on them on pentacost, to prove to the jews, that indeed God had accepted the gentiles in the covenant. Again after they were commanded by Peter to be baptized.

Acts 10:48 . . And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

Why would Peter command them to be baptized if if wasnt needed?




Peter wasn't only one, Paul also omitted.

Did you receive the Holy Spirit when a you believed?”

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

3So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”

“John’s baptism,” they replied.

4Paul 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.” 5On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

We often rely on our own understanding as right, and then come from a viewpoint, well Jesus said this, so they infact didnt do it that way so they were wrong. However im going to say, Paul and Peter knew and understood more then we do today, im going to assume they are right, and we are wrong. If they both ommited then there is probably a reason why.

Then we change doctrine to suit our understanding rather then praying for wisdom and understanding from God, and try to see what they saw.

The only possible conclusion i can see is that indeed the name of Jesus actually covers all three.

But the Advocate, the Holy Spirit, whom the Father will send in my name.

43I have come in my Father’s name, and you do not accept me

All that belongs to the Father is mine. That is why I said the Spirit will receive from me

Im going to go out on a limb here and say, that Jesus must represent the Father, the son, and the holy spirit. Not in a worldly way but a spiritual way.

Click to expand...

Agreed. God never judges by simple words, He judges by the heart. God knows exactly whether a baptism is in the name of the one and only God or not. Whether you say "in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit", "in the name of Jesus Christ" or even "in the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob" - all of these describe the triune God and when it's done in an honest way God will know and approve it.

.
Modes Of Baptism

Total Immersion
Dipping
Sprinkling
Splashing
Pouring
Wet cloth (forehead)


Water Quality

Salt
Fresh
River
Creek
Pond
Lake
Well
Cistern
Pool
Canteen
Holy Water
Natural water
Treated water
Glacial melt
Rain Water
Snowmelt


Baptizers

Ordained minister
Reverend
Elder
Deacon
Deaconess
Sunday school teacher
John Q and/or Jane Doe rank and file pew warmer


Garb

Clothing Optional
Fully clothed
Underwear
Swim suit
Robe
Shroud
Pajamas
Bath towel
Beach towel
Bare headed
Shower cap
Shoes
Flip Flops
Barefoot
Gloves
Covid-19 mask
_

Chris35 said:

I don't believe its symbolic at all.

13Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan to be baptized by him. 14And John tried to prevent Him, saying, “I need to be baptized by You, and are You coming to me?”

15But Jesus answered and said to him, “Permit it to be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he allowed Him.

16When He had been baptized, Jesus came up immediately from the water; and behold, the heavens were opened to Him, and He saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove and alighting upon Him. 17And suddenly a voice came from heaven, saying, “This is My beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.

Jesus was sinless, he didn't need his sins washed away yet he still come to get baptized and says it was about fullfilling righteousness.



Obviously God was watching, and present during Jesus baptism, as he spoke and was well pleased with his baptism.



There he found some disciples 2and asked them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when a you believed?”

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

3So Paul asked, “Then what baptism did you receive?”

“John’s baptism,” they replied.

4Paul 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.” 5On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6When Paul placed his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came on them, and they spoke in tongues b and prophesied. 7There were about twelve men in all.

From this verse I can see that baptism is an act of faith or belief in Jesus.


26So in Christ Jesus you are all children of God through faith, 27for all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

Click to expand...

Does this view imply believers who were not baptized do not have the Holy Spirit?

Yes it does, it is also the way that i received the holy spirit. I can't testify to any other way, as this is the way that happened for me.

If you have doubts that you have received the holy spirit, go and get baptized, and then ask God for it.

However if you have come to preach against it, and say there is another way. What good can it do? As this is scripturally sound, and being in line with scripture and increases faith on the matter.

In short, Baptism is:

1) Forgiveness of our sins by the once-and-done atoning work of Jesus Christ (Acts of the Apostles 2:38).
2) Participation and union with Jesus, His life, death, burial, and resurrection (Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:27, Colossians 2:12-13).
3) New birth from God, which makes us new creations, new people in Jesus (John 3:5, Titus 3:5).

Baptism does not mean that we will stop sinning. It means that we can confess with confidence that we are forgiven, because Christ suffered, died, and rose again, and that we are freely justified by God, by His grace alone, through faith which He has given us and this is all pure gift.

Baptism does not mean an outward change, but an inward one (1 Peter 3:21)--the old man dies and is dying, and there is a new man (2 Corinthians 5:17, Colossians 3:10).

Baptism is not a public demonstration for other people. Baptism is the sacramental working of God upon us, by His word which He has attached to the water. If it were mere water then it would not be baptism, it would just be getting wet. Baptism is not a work we do for God's benefit, God doesn't need our baptism. But rather Baptism is God's own work on us, by attaching His own word and promises to the water of Baptism, He has cleansed us and made us holy as His people (Ephesians 5:26).

-CryptoLutheran

It is noteworthy that anytime one speaks of 'Baptism' on CF, there is a flurry of debate; so, let us just read ALL Scripture concerning the subject and be settled in our own mind. If one wishes to discuss this with me, I will then share my understanding of Holy Scripture privately; but not in debate. Keep looking up, dear saints, for our "redemption draweth nigh".

.
According to Heb 6:1-2, baptism is an elementary portion of Christianity. In other words; baptism is for beginners-- it's sort of like primary colors and the ABC's, which are things most of us learned in the first grade of grammar school; and some of us even in kindergarten.
_

That's not the way to look at it. To the extent that Baptism is "the elementary portion of Christianity," it is the beginning. That doesn't mean it's of trivial importance or something to be improved upon.

Baptism is believed to forgive sin, give Grace for living the Christian life, and make one a member of Christ's church.

None of that is "elementary" in the sense of being low-level. But you might call it "elementary" if what it meant is that it is the start of something great, and that's also how it is represented in the New Testament.