Paul's argument against the idea that water baptism saves. (Implied)

Dave... · Friday at 12:13 PM

MarkRohfrietsch said:
It is not about "Catholic" tyrany. If it were, they would not accept our Lutheran Baptism, Orthodox, Anglican, Presbyterian, etc., nor we theirs.

It is about Christian Unity. If your baptism was done properly, following the Trinitarian formula, guess what? You are a member of the "one holy catholic (small c) and Apostolic Church whether you like it or not.

Jesus prayer for us all to be one was answered with the Baptism with the Holy Spirit. That places all true believers into One Body, Jesus, the One True Church, a spiritual Body, by faith, per 1 Corinthians 12:13. When we're 'placed into' Christ Jesus, we're 'immersed' spiritually with and into a spiritual union with Him, being One with Him, the Father and the Holy Spirit, and all true believers. This is what water baptism pictures as a public physical testimony of a spiritual reality that the public cannot see. It's a baptism by faith with the Holy Spirit that places us into Christ, not water. No magic water holds the iron, only genuine faith does. Believe and be saved, that's the Gospel.

Here's Jesus's prayer.

John 17:20-23 "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.

The cool thing is that God ultimately decides according to our faith where the unity ends.

Dave... · Friday at 12:34 PM

The Liturgist said:
Christ commanded us to baptize all nations in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost, and the Apostles baptized in water and the Spirit, and we still do that. Or would you have us invalidate all references to the immersion of Christians in the New Testament along with Matthew 28:19? What else should we set aside in addition to that?

There is not baptism in water and the Spirit. There is Spirit baptism by faith, and water baptism. There is born of water and there is born of the Spirit. Born of water is explained in the very next verses. "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit." As I have shown you many times.

In Matthew 28:19, Jesus commanded them (and us) to make disciples, then baptize them in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit. Also notice the comma after verse 19, verse 20 is part of the same thought.

Matthew 28:19-20 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen.

These are things that disciples should do, not something that should be done to become a disciple.

Dave

Dave... · Friday at 12:40 PM

The Liturgist said:
I am a Orthodox Christian - I am Catholic in the sense of Universal (according to the whole) referred to in the Nicene Creed - not Roman Catholic. Please verify that you understand that.

It is an extreme frustration to see Orthodox Christians and Roman Catholics being grouped together in such a manner that denies the historic agency of the Orthodox Christians and our significant differences that have persisted with Rome since their theology entered what they define as the “Scholastic Era” after St. John of Damascus (who is regarded as the last Early Church Father by Rome but not by the Orthodox).

Likewise there are also substantial differences between Orthodox sacramental theology and that of Lutherans and Anglicans, which we would disagree with except for the fact that we tend to get along, even better than with Roman Catholics since there is no elephant in the room in the form of Papal Supremacy or Papal Infallibility.

Indeed it could be argued that the Orthodox Church lacks sacramental theology per se in that we don’t actually use the term Sacrament in our own internal discussions; Baptism being a sacred mystery of the church but this would be pedantry in my view.

At any rate, please refrain from selectively quoting my posts in an attempt to make a point to a fellow Orthodox Christian ( my pious friend @Lukaris ) as this is a kind of eisegesis.

Are these not your words?

The Liturgist said:
So attempting to invoke St. Paul in an anti-sacramental screed is eisegesis per se. It also presupposes erroneously that Baptism and Communion are works of the Law, which is preposterous; the New Testament makes it clear these are means of grace, of receiving the Spirit, and of obtaining remission of sins (and Christians can still sin despite not being under the Mosaic law).

Dave... · Friday at 1:23 PM

The Liturgist said:
This is a complete mischaracterization. I never used the word “justification” and I do not believe in Purgatory and I require you to retract this statement immediately.

The Liturgist said: So attempting to invoke St. Paul in an anti-sacramental screed is eisegesis per se. It also presupposes erroneously that Baptism and Communion are works of the Law, which is preposterous; the New Testament makes it clear these are means of grace, of receiving the Spirit, and of obtaining remission of sins (and Christians can still sin despite not being under the Mosaic law).

What does "obtaining remission of sins" mean? You said, "these" meaning "Baptism and Communion", were a means of "obtaining remission of sin", and "a means of grace". Did you mean it differently? At the very least I see communion attached to the obtaining remission of sins.

The Liturgist said:
Purgatory is not a component of Orthodox doctrine and never has been.

We pray for the dead, but not on the basis of delivery from purgatory, the existence of which we reject. Rather, our reasons for praying for the dead are an appeal to the unlimited mercy of Christ, which by the way provides a means of salvation, as I sought to explain, that does not require water baptism - rather baptism which is both in water and in the Spirit, which is a unified event, and can be conferred by any Christian, is the ordinary means of reception of this grace, but there are many other forms.

Ok my bad. The communion and everything else is the same, right? The Purgatory thing was not really important to what I said. But, what do Orthodox do when they fall short from say, these works which you claim are a means of grace, like missing the last communion with sin still on the table? You rely on grace, right, like with the dead? So it's a works based salvation, that if you fall short of receiving grace through those works, you rely on grace given for no reason other than an unmerited gift, like mercy, right?

But what if we already failed the first part, and we need that unmerited grace, mercy right out of the gates. It only takes one sin, and you have failed. Romans 3:23. And all we need to do to have that mercy, that unmerited favor is to believe?

The Liturgist said:
And Christ may save anyone who He desires. There is no legalism in this respect, for we believe God is infinitely merciful, and infinitely loving. We also reject the Augustinian idea that infants who die before baptism are damned.

But God cannot lie. Everyone has sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Every sin ever committed will be judged by God. Either we stand alone, and one sin condemns us, guilty. Or, we're in Christ and He took the legal punishment for our sin on the cross. Look at the lengths that God had to go to extend that mercy while not compromising Himself. That's why Jesus had to come as a man, both fully man and fully God, to fulfill the Law for us. To be perfectly righteous. To die on the cross for our sin. Just as Abraham was going to sacrifice Isaac, so the Father did the Son for us. The Law is a reflection of the Character of God. God is perfectly just. Sin is an offense to God, His Character, His Law. The penalty for sin is death. Jesus did what Adam failed to do. He restored our place that Adam lost that separated us from God.

When we stand before God as believers, He sees Jesus' righteousness, the righteousness of God, He see's Jesus' sinlessness. That's the only way . That's why Jesus said that He is the Way, the Truth, and the Life, that no man comes to the Father but by Him.

The Liturgist said:
For example if one dies before receiving Baptism, one is baptized by their desire, which is why catechumens get a full Orthodox funeral (whereas those who terminate their own lives without having a mental illness, which is an extreme minority but it does happen, would usually not, although perhaps an exception might be available in the case of captured pilots or intelligence officers who would face torture that could be a threat to national security, frankly I don’t know, but ordinarily if a sane person kills themselves that precludes a full funeral, although all deceased persons are entitled to an abbreviated service called “the Trisagion prayers” for the hymn.

Our faith is that Christ will save us, but like most Christians, we believe that Baptism and Holy Communion are the primary means of grace for the laity.

I strongly suggest that to understand the Orthodox theology of the mysteries of the Church, which is what we call the sacraments (which are usually counted as seven by the Eastern and Oriental Orthodox; the Assyrian Church of the East which is closely related to us also counts seven but their list differs from ours) but we also have other blessings which some count as well, essentially any kind of blessing such as the memorial service or the consecration of a church are all grouped together in a book called the Trebnik or Euchologion.

The focus of Orthodox theology is on Communion, not Baptism - we desire to be in communion with each other, with the Early Church, and with Christ our God, but Baptism is the ordinary means of the remission of sins and of the formal reception of the Holy Spirit (who has already acted to move one towards Baptism, but Baptism and Chrismation, the Seal of the Holy Spirit, ensure that one is Baptized in the Holy Spirit).

You are correct that ordinarily, this is the beginning of a lifelong process of reception of Grace through the sacred mysteries, but there are cases where people have been unable, for various reasons, to access the sacraments in ideal conditions and yet are still regarded as saved. For example, some of the great Hermits such as St. Anthony the Great or the Stylites (who literally lived atop pillars) would not have been in a position to receive the Eucharist in the ordinary way at an ordinary frequency due to the specific nature of their vocation, but were still very much a part of the communion of the church. Unlike in the Roman church, in the East it normally takes two or more to celebrate Communion, so its not possible for a legalistic regimen, which indeed even Rome acknowledged to some extent in special cases (such as the Missa Sicca or “dry mass” used by hermits). So the Roman church itself is much less legalistic than you argue, especially today.

The important thing to understand, where Luther’s arguments can be helpful, is the idea of Gottesdienst; as I said before - while we Orthodox do not deny that there is a sacrifice in the Eucharist of praise and of bread and wine, we are not re-sacrificing Christ but are participating in His sacrifice, that is to say, receiving something God did for us (this being a point of near-convergence between Lutheran and Orthodox perspectives; I don’t know if Lutherans would agree that the Liturgy is a “sacrifice of praise” or that the bread and wine are sacrificed, but my point is that the primary sacrifice that we are partaking of in anamnesis (the Greek word translated into early Modern English as “remembrance” but more correctly interpreted as something like “recapitulation” is the Sacrifice of Christ on the Cross, which He formalized by offering His Body and Blood to the Holy Apostles and commanded them to continue doing. Just as he commanded baptism.

Which is what this is really about - we are following the instructions of Christ, not legalistically, but spiritually, but retaining the elements of bread and wine, which become the Body and Blood, and the water which becomes the Water in the Jordan on which the Holy Spirit descends, as the New Testament clearly asserts.

And while there are a number of Orthodox specific nuances which you should comment on rather than dismissing me as “the Catholic” and falsely claiming I believe in Purgatory and other doctrines which Orthodox Christians absolutely reject and regard as extreme errors, on a par with the filioque, errors that preclude full communion with the Roman Catholic Church, the majority of historic Christian denominations including even Zwinglians, members of the Christian Church/Churches of Christ/Disciples of Christ and low church Anglicans regard baptism in water and the spirit, as a unified event, as an important and appropriate activity in the spiritual life of Christians.

The position you appear to be taking with regards to opposition to water baptism, assuming you are opposed to the idea of it, is an extremely fringe position; to my knowledge only Quakers, the Salvation Army and a few other denominations take such a view. If you could clarify your position that would be helpful.

Regarding the specifics of Eastern Orthodox theology, I recommend An Exact Exposition of the Orthodox Faith by St. John of Damascus, or more recently, The Orthodox Church and The Orthodox Ware by Metropolitan Kallistos Ware (which clarifies the distinctions between our theology and those of the Western church which did not exist at the time of St. John of Damascus, which predated the Scholastic trend in the Roman church).

Just assume that you already failed all this, and trust in Jesus.

Galatians 5:4 You have become estranged from Christ, you who attempt to be justified by law; you have fallen from grace.

The things that you're doing to obtain grace are actually keeping it from you. Do them as a thankful, already justified believer, trusting in what Jesus did by faith, and you have all of God's grace already. Do those things to try to earn what Jesus did, and you have no faith, no grace, only the Law and guilt, and death.

PloverWing · Friday at 5:01 PM

@Dave... : This has been a long thread, and I haven't totally understood the point you're trying to make. Are you arguing that water baptism is bad, or just that it isn't as important as one's internal spiritual state?

(I gather from your posts that you see water baptism as separate from one's spiritual state, that it's not sacramental in any way. Okay. But do you see water baptism as something acceptable for Christians to do, or something that Christians should avoid?)

Mark Quayle · Friday at 5:09 PM

MarkRohfrietsch said:
In Lutheranism, anyone may baptize in an emergency. Scripture tells us it is a means of grace, and to deny that is denying that God is so full of grace, and gives it so freely, why would we try to limit the generosity of our benevolent Lord and accept all that gifts that He offers to us?

As I posted above, baptism is about Christian unity, not about subjugation to the authority of one particular Church; rather, unity in Christ. and His Church.

From: GUIDELINES FOR CONGREGATIONAL AND PASTORAL PRACTICE LUTHERAN CHURCH—CANADA

View attachment 380079

I'm a little curious just what is meant by others as, "means of grace". Some say it is part and parcel WITH salvation. Others say it is CAUSAL OF salvation—at least in part. What does Lutheran doctrine say?

MarkRohfrietsch · Friday at 8:14 PM

Dave... said:
Jesus prayer for us all to be one was answered with the Baptism with the Holy Spirit. That places all true believers into One Body, Jesus, the One True Church, a spiritual Body, by faith, per 1 Corinthians 12:13. When we're 'placed into' Christ Jesus, we're 'immersed' spiritually with and into a spiritual union with Him, being One with Him, the Father and the Holy Spirit, and all true believers. This is what water baptism pictures as a public physical testimony of a spiritual reality that the public cannot see. It's a baptism by faith with the Holy Spirit that places us into Christ, not water. No magic water holds the iron, only genuine faith does. Believe and be saved, that's the Gospel.

Here's Jesus's prayer.

John 17:20-23 "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.

The cool thing is that God ultimately decides according to our faith where the unity ends.

Since you have no desire to understand, only to pontificate your own position from a soap-box, I am not sure why I am even bothering to answer, but Scripture is clear that Baptism saves; a washing of regeneration, and no the water is not magical, but the union of water and the Word are what conveys grace, forgives sin, and infuses with the Holy Spirit.

Dan Perez · Friday at 8:58 PM

MarkRohfrietsch said:
It is not about "Catholic" tyrany. If it were, they would not accept our Lutheran Baptism, Orthodox, Anglican, Presbyterian, etc., nor we theirs.

It is about Christian Unity. If your baptism was done properly, following the Trinitarian formula, guess what? You are a member of the "one holy catholic (small c) and Apostolic Church whether you like it or not.

And there are many. that ARE ACT 9. DISPENSATIONALIST. PRE - MIL and PRE-TRI. that disagree and Dave has a point

with the word PLACING. , like in. Rom 6:3 as BAPTIZED (. PLACED ). INTO Christ. Jesus were PLACED (. BAPTIZED )

INTO his death. !!

AND in Rom 6:4 Therefore we were buried TOGETHER. with Him through this BAPTISMA (. CHECK Greek text. on

BAPTISMA !!

And if you ALL; check the GREEK. TEXT. you will see BUT REALLY the Greek word is BAPTISMA from Matt 3:7

EPH 4:5. ONE BAPTISMA and end up in 1 PETER 3:31

And here is ONE in 1 COR 15:29 BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD !! Have anyone heard of RORBERT C BROCK and if you

find any used books of his , he wrote the Best TRANSLATIONS. I have ever seen. bar any other. !!

dan p

MarkRohfrietsch · Saturday at 6:56 AM

Dan Perez said:
And there are many. that ARE ACT 9. DISPENSATIONALIST. PRE - MIL and PRE-TRI. that disagree and Dave has a point

with the word PLACING. , like in. Rom 6:3 as BAPTIZED (. PLACED ). INTO Christ. Jesus were PLACED (. BAPTIZED )

INTO his death. !!

AND in Rom 6:4 Therefore we were buried TOGETHER. with Him through this BAPTISMA (. CHECK Greek text. on

BAPTISMA !!

And if you ALL; check the GREEK. TEXT. you will see BUT REALLY the Greek word is BAPTISMA from Matt 3:7

EPH 4:5. ONE BAPTISMA and end up in 1 PETER 3:31

And here is ONE in 1 COR 15:29 BAPTISM FOR THE DEAD !! Have anyone heard of RORBERT C BROCK and if you

find any used books of his , he wrote the Best TRANSLATIONS. I have ever seen. bar any other. !!

dan p

Well, we hold this and the other sacraments, as core doctrine, therefore, the rejection of any of these means of grace, is a direct rejection of our Lord's generosity and mercy.

I believe that Pre trib and Pre mil theologies keep people Pre occupied worrying about what is God's affairs, and distracts them from being actively repentant; something that God actually requires of all believers.

ViaCrucis · Saturday at 10:57 AM

Mark Quayle said:
I'm a little curious just what is meant by others as, "means of grace". Some say it is part and parcel WITH salvation. Others say it is CAUSAL OF salvation—at least in part. What does Lutheran doctrine say?

When the Lord healed the blind man what was the means He used? The means of doing so was taking dirt and spit, mixing it together, and applying it to the man's eyes.

That's how the Lord healed the blind man, so the application of dirt and spit was Jesus' means of healing in this episode.

In a similar way "means of grace" is a way of saying "God uses these means to accomplish His grace". The cause of our salvation is grace, the cause of our salvation is Christ's life, death, and resurrection, the cause of our salvation is that God chose us in Christ, etc.

How do I, an alienated sinner and enemy of God by my own sin, receive what God gives? Well God does something--God does the work.

So when the Gospel is preached what happens? God actually, by the power of the Holy Spirit, takes the word of the Gospel in my hearing and places faith, creates faith, works faith, strengthens faith in me. Faith is not something I do, but which I receive as a pure gift. The preaching of the Gospel is, here, the means by which God does this.

That is what "means of Grace" means.

And the same is true of the Sacraments. Baptism is the means by which God comes down and works and creates faith in me, gives me the Holy Spirit, washes me clean of sin by uniting me to the life, death, and resurrection of His Son--so that I am clothed with Jesus Christ and His righteousness.

The Eucharist is the means by which God comes down and works, creates, and strengthens faith in me, feeding me the life-giving food of eternal life: the very body and blood of Jesus, by which I am a member of Christ's own precious Body--for I receive Him, His flesh that was pierced for my transgressions, His blood which was shed for my iniquity; by His stripes I am healed (as the Prophet Isaiah long ago proclaimed).

Word and Sacrament as the Means of Grace means that I am wholly dependent upon the good and gracious God who comes down to save me. When the word is preached, when I was baptized, when I receive the Lord's Supper, when I hear the words of Absolution--Here is God in His mercy declaring me righteous by the all-sufficient and perfect and accomplished work of His only-begotten and beloved Son in Whom he is well pleased. For Christ has made satisfaction on my behalf, and I am the benefactor according to the mercy of God. That I should be son and heir with Christ.

I don't have to guess if I belong to God. I have God Himself declaring that I belong to Him, because I am washed in the holy waters of Baptism wherein my sins are washed away and I am clothed with the Lord Jesus Christ, presented before the Father in Christ as blameless on Christ's account. Freely justified by His grace, through faith. So that God alone may receive all the glory, because of what Christ alone has done for me and for the whole world.

Dave... · Saturday at 1:17 PM

PloverWing said:
@Dave... : This has been a long thread, and I haven't totally understood the point you're trying to make. Are you arguing that water baptism is bad, or just that it isn't as important as one's internal spiritual state?

(I gather from your posts that you see water baptism as separate from one's spiritual state, that it's not sacramental in any way. Okay. But do you see water baptism as something acceptable for Christians to do, or something that Christians should avoid?)

Hey @PloverWing

I believe that after we come to faith, (which would result in Jesus placing the Holy Spirit into us, thus placing us into Him), that we should be water baptized as a public testimony. I believe that we should partake in communion, but only in remembrance of Him, and not to earn or maintain grace, which is an oxymoron of sorts. I believe that we should be obedient to God, but not to earn grace, but to evidence it.

It's like anything, it's the motives that determine if it's legalism, not necessarily the act. What determines the motives? What makes legalism, legalism, and opposite of grace, even cancelling out grace?

Grace is based on divine accomplishment (what Christ did), it's a gift. Legalism is based on human achievement (what you must do). The new twist is combining the two. They would claim that it's grace, what Jesus did, but we must do things for it in the flesh, both to receive it (water baptism), and to maintain it, (through communion, etc..). Unmerited favor, grace, only needs faith, not physical acts to receive and maintain, otherwise it's merited favor. As Paul said, if it's of grace it is no longer of works, and if it's of works, it's not longer of grace. When one tries to combine the two, it becomes a works based salvation.

It's basically word games. Those who claim works as a evidence, like myself, believe that we already have everything from God that justifies us, being one with Jesus, we have the righteousness of God imputed to us, not in doses, but all of it (Romans 10:1-4) as a result of being "in Christ", the indwelling. And being in Christ we have the atonement, once for all, not earned in doses. In Hebrews 10:14, listen to what is being said, it's very revealing. The first part of that passage is about justification, "Perfected", (past tense), and the second part is about being practically sanctified (ongoing), becoming what God already reckons us to be legally in Christ, becoming Christlike. God separates the two, Catholicism says one must be initiated into that grace (justification), by water baptism, and then (justification) maintained with the ongoing. Evidence does not maintain, it only reveals. The past tense part of that passage is justification, positional sanctification, and is the result of faith and is not earned by anything done as a result of the practical sanctification, the ongoing. Nor is our justification "perfected" maintained by the ongoing. It's an evidence, not a merit. (1 John 2:19).

It's not wrong to be water baptized, but it is wrong to be water baptized with the motive that it's how one receives grace initially. Faith is how one receives grace, anything else is another Gospel. Obedience to God's commandments are not wrong, but obedience to God's commandments does not maintain grace, it evidences it. We are complete "in Christ" and lacking nothing (Collisions 2:9-14). If we have the Spirit of Christ in us, we belong to Him (Romans 8:9-11). We receive that Spirit by faith (Ephesians 1:13-14 **One cannot guarantee an inheritance unless the works are an evidence, not a merit.). That indwelling places us into Christ Jesus, the One True Church, a spiritual Body, making us complete in Him (1 Corinthians 12:13). When we trust completely in what Jesus did for us, and only what He did for us, His merit, His righteousness, His atonement, His death and resurrection, then we only need to be "in Him" to receive it all. There is no doses to be earned, if you are saved, in Christ, you have everything already.

Hope that helps clear things up.

Dave

Dave... · Saturday at 2:20 PM

MarkRohfrietsch said:
Since you have no desire to understand, only to pontificate your own position from a soap-box, I am not sure why I am even bothering to answer, but Scripture is clear that Baptism saves; a washing of regeneration, and no the water is not magical, but the union of water and the Word are what conveys grace, forgives sin, and infuses with the Holy Spirit.

Hi Mark

I agree that a 'placing into' saves. But there is more than one 'immersion' in Scripture (Matthew 3:11). The position of many in this thread conveniently ignores that fact when they interpret Scripture, specifically the word 'baptism'. Can you define the word baptism and show me water in that definition? The indwelling of the Holy Spirit is what places us into Christ Jesus (Romans 8:9-11). It's the result of faith. It's called the 'placing into/immersion' with/by the Holy Spirit. Remember, John 3:6? "That which is born of the flesh is flesh, and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit".

What I need is for those who disagree with me to start to acknowledge the Scripture and questions that I'm posting. Until people start answering my questions and Scripture, honestly, I must continue to ask. Believe me, I don't like to chase people who are metaphorically running away holding their hands over their ears yelling 'I can't hear you, I can't hear you LaLaLaLaLa'. That's what those who suppress the truth do. That's idolatry.

I'll even accept a collective answer from all of you. I'll give you my answers. These question are obvious given your replies so far.
Are these unfair questions? Are they devious, misleading, or otherwise an attempt to misdirect?

When does the [spiritual] life start? My answer: When we are indwelt with the Holy Spirit and are "in Christ". (Romans 8:9-11)

When are we indwelt with the Holy Spirit? For us today, after the transition from the OT to the NT as recorded in Acts, we are indwelt when we have a genuine faith in Jesus Christ. (Ephesians 1:13-14.)

What places us in Christ? A baptism/placing into/immersion-- by/with one Spirit (capitol "S"), the Holy Spirit, into one Body. That's the one true Church, Jesus. (1 Corinthians 12:13)

What is your answer to Paul in Galatians 3:2? "This only I want to learn from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?"

What do you believe the placing into/immersion with/by the Holy Spirit places us/immerses us into, if not Jesus, the One True Church?

And for the few passages in Acts (a historical book more than anything) that appear to put water baptism as a cause along with faith, I can provide just as many that show water baptism absent, or after they received the Holy Spirit, and many more that back me up through out the Epistles (which were meant to teach), like above. The way that some here are trying to reconcile these differences is basically to ignore the rest of the Bible, even the simple Gospel message of believe and be saved, and proceed to teach another Gospel. It's clear that the goal was for the believer (already spiritually baptized because they believe), to then be immediately water baptized. It makes sense, the outward testimony, physically. But it's not Biblical to claim water baptism for salvation. It just doesn't hold up when we compare the many to the few, which is what sound hermeneutics must do.

Dave

PloverWing · Saturday at 3:29 PM

Dave... said:
Hey @PloverWing

I believe that after we come to faith, (which would result in Jesus placing the Holy Spirit into us, thus placing us into Him), that we should be water baptized as a public testimony. I believe that we should partake in communion, but only in remembrance of Him, and not to earn or maintain grace, which is an oxymoron of sorts. I believe that we should be obedient to God, but not to earn grace, but to evidence it.

Thanks, that does help clarify your thoughts for me.

This sounds similar to the views held by the Baptist church I grew up in. In that view, baptism was seen as something we do to show that we have made a commitment to Jesus, and communion was seen as something we do to help us remember Jesus. Both ordinances were seen as entirely human actions. And, as with any human action, it is important to remember that we don't earn God's grace, as you correctly point out.

A significant difference between this viewpoint and the viewpoint commonly held in the liturgical churches is that the liturgical churches see God as actively doing something in (for example) communion. The liturgical churches see communion as more than humans remembering Jesus. Rather, they see communion as something God does, something God gives us.

One analogy might be if my spouse cooks me a wonderful, nutritious dinner and then calls me to join him at the table and eat. When I sit down at the table, is that action primarily a remembrance of my spouse's wonderfulness, or is it primarily a way of earning my spouse's favor (the "remembrance" vs "works" dichotomy)? I'd say it's neither; it's primarily eating the dinner that my spouse provided for me and enjoying my spouse's company. Sure, I should also remember how wonderful my spouse is and be thankful, but primarily I'm receiving the food that he's giving me. Liturgical Christians see communion as something like that, only the food is spiritual instead of peas and carrots.

Dave... said:
It's like anything, it's the motives that determine if it's legalism, not necessarily the act.

This I can agree with. Whatever action you're doing, if it's not to help someone (loving your neighbor) and it's not an offering to God (loving God), if you're only doing it to follow some rule that's meaningless to you, then you should reexamine your motives and possibly choose a different action.

Dan Perez · Saturday at 7:55 PM

Dave... said:
Jesus prayer for us all to be one was answered with the Baptism with the Holy Spirit. That places all true believers into One Body, Jesus, the One True Church, a spiritual Body, by faith, per 1 Corinthians 12:13. When we're 'placed into' Christ Jesus, we're 'immersed' spiritually with and into a spiritual union with Him, being One with Him, the Father and the Holy Spirit, and all true believers. This is what water baptism pictures as a public physical testimony of a spiritual reality that the public cannot see. It's a baptism by faith with the Holy Spirit that places us into Christ, not water. No magic water holds the iron, only genuine faith does. Believe and be saved, that's the Gospel.

Here's Jesus's prayer.

John 17:20-23 "I do not pray for these alone, but also for those who will believe in Me through their word; that they all may be one, as You, Father, are in Me, and I in You; that they also may be one in Us, that the world may believe that You sent Me. And the glory which You gave Me I have given them, that they may be one just as We are one: I in them, and You in Me; that they may be made perfect in one, and that the world may know that You have sent Me, and have loved them as You have loved Me.

The cool thing is that God ultimately decides according to our faith where the unity ends.

DAVE and just asking you about Mark 16:16 ??

# 1. HE THAT //. HO is a is. a DEFINIOYTE ARTICLE is a NOMINATIVE CASE in. the SINGULAR

#2 BELIEVETH. //. PICTEUO. in. the APORIST TENSE in. the ACTIVE VOICE. is a NOMINATIVE CASE in. the SINGULAR

# 3 AND // KAI is a CONJUNCTION

# 4 IS BAPTIZED. // BAPTIZO. in. the AORIST TENSE is a PARTICPLE MOOD is a NOMINATIVE CASE IS A SINGULAR

# 5 SHALL BE SAVED // SOZO. in. the FUTURE TENSE. in the PASSIVE VOICE in. the INDICATIVE MOOD. in the SINGULAR

# 6 BUT. //. DE. is a CONJUNCION

# 7. HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT. // APPSTEO. in. the AORIST TENSE in. the ACTIVE VOICE. in the NOMNATIVE CASE. in.

the SINGULAR

# 8 SHALL BE DAMNED // KATAKRINO. in. the FUTURE TENSE in. the SINGULAR

dan p

MarkRohfrietsch · 2026-06-07T06:25:51-0500

Dave... said:
Hey @PloverWing

I believe that after we come to faith, (which would result in Jesus placing the Holy Spirit into us, thus placing us into Him), that we should be water baptized as a public testimony. I believe that we should partake in communion, but only in remembrance of Him, and not to earn or maintain grace, which is an oxymoron of sorts. I believe that we should be obedient to God, but not to earn grace, but to evidence it.

It's like anything, it's the motives that determine if it's legalism, not necessarily the act. What determines the motives? What makes legalism, legalism, and opposite of grace, even cancelling out grace?

Grace is based on divine accomplishment (what Christ did), it's a gift. Legalism is based on human achievement (what you must do). The new twist is combining the two. They would claim that it's grace, what Jesus did, but we must do things for it in the flesh, both to receive it (water baptism), and to maintain it, (through communion, etc..). Unmerited favor, grace, only needs faith, not physical acts to receive and maintain, otherwise it's merited favor. As Paul said, if it's of grace it is no longer of works, and if it's of works, it's not longer of grace. When one tries to combine the two, it becomes a works based salvation.

It's basically word games. Those who claim works as a evidence, like myself, believe that we already have everything from God that justifies us, being one with Jesus, we have the righteousness of God imputed to us, not in doses, but all of it (Romans 10:1-4) as a result of being "in Christ", the indwelling. And being in Christ we have the atonement, once for all, not earned in doses. In Hebrews 10:14, listen to what is being said, it's very revealing. The first part of that passage is about justification, "Perfected", (past tense), and the second part is about being practically sanctified (ongoing), becoming what God already reckons us to be legally in Christ, becoming Christlike. God separates the two, Catholicism says one must be initiated into that grace (justification), by water baptism, and then (justification) maintained with the ongoing. Evidence does not maintain, it only reveals. The past tense part of that passage is justification, positional sanctification, and is the result of faith and is not earned by anything done as a result of the practical sanctification, the ongoing. Nor is our justification "perfected" maintained by the ongoing. It's an evidence, not a merit. (1 John 2:19).

It's not wrong to be water baptized, but it is wrong to be water baptized with the motive that it's how one receives grace initially. Faith is how one receives grace, anything else is another Gospel. Obedience to God's commandments are not wrong, but obedience to God's commandments does not maintain grace, it evidences it. We are complete "in Christ" and lacking nothing (Collisions 2:9-14). If we have the Spirit of Christ in us, we belong to Him (Romans 8:9-11). We receive that Spirit by faith (Ephesians 1:13-14 **One cannot guarantee an inheritance unless the works are an evidence, not a merit.). That indwelling places us into Christ Jesus, the One True Church, a spiritual Body, making us complete in Him (1 Corinthians 12:13). When we trust completely in what Jesus did for us, and only what He did for us, His merit, His righteousness, His atonement, His death and resurrection, then we only need to be "in Him" to receive it all. There is no doses to be earned, if you are saved, in Christ, you have everything already.

Hope that helps clear things up.

Dave

This is backwards; we can only become faithful with the intervention of the Holy Spirit and the word; there is no merit or worthieness in any of us. "by grace are you saved through faith... it is a gift of God, not of works..."

Dan Perez · 2026-06-07T20:30:52-0500

concretecamper said:
Maybe your interpretation of Scripture contradicts the true teaching of His Church. According to the close to 2,000 years of Church teaching and according to it's interpretation of Scripture, the grace of Baptism is required for salvation. Of course people can pretend to be smarter than everyone else and reject this consistent teaching.

And when anyone reads Acts 9:16. and 17 Paul. was NEVER with WATER //. HYDOR and everyone misses. verse

17 where it says Ananias is sent so that you might. recover. sight and be full of HOLY SPIRIT. <. PERIOD. !!

dan p

Lukaris · 2026-06-07T21:02:02-0500

Baptism was not Paul’s ministry but he performed it when necessary, Circumcision was far less part of Paul’s ministry but he performed it when necessary ( Acts 16:1-5). It is irresponsible to speculate a change of practice when none is indicated.

Paul evangelized Lydia ( & her household) who were near a riverside and baptized ( Acts 16:11-15).

Late Messianic Jewish believer, David Stern, translated Acts 16:15 account of baptism practice as immersion.

15. After she and the members of her household had been immersed, she gave us this invitation: “If you consider me to be faithful to the Lord, come and stay in my house.” And she insisted till we went.

Acts 16 chapter Jewish New Testament and comments of David H. Stern

kifakz.github.io

David Stern also translated the account of the Philippian jailer & his family ( Acts 16:25-34) as an immersion ( within my previous link).

Info on the late David Stern;

David H. Stern - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

Dave... · 2026-06-08T13:01:23-0500

PloverWing said:
A significant difference between this viewpoint and the viewpoint commonly held in the liturgical churches is that the liturgical churches see God as actively doing something in (for example) communion. The liturgical churches see communion as more than humans remembering Jesus. Rather, they see communion as something God does, something God gives us.

Hey P

What is it that they see God giving them in this communion that we don't already have from being placed into Christ, the spiritual Body? What does this "grace" represent. Can a man be justified without it?

And a question for you. What must a man do to be saved?

PloverWing said:
One analogy might be if my spouse cooks me a wonderful, nutritious dinner and then calls me to join him at the table and eat. When I sit down at the table, is that action primarily a remembrance of my spouse's wonderfulness, or is it primarily a way of earning my spouse's favor (the "remembrance" vs "works" dichotomy)? I'd say it's neither; it's primarily eating the dinner that my spouse provided for me and enjoying my spouse's company. Sure, I should also remember how wonderful my spouse is and be thankful, but primarily I'm receiving the food that he's giving me. Liturgical Christians see communion as something like that, only the food is spiritual instead of peas and carrots.

Communion cannot give us more of what we already have, as we are complete in Him and lacking nothing (Colossians 2:9-14). We receive all of God's grace from a spiritual union with Jesus, when we are placed into Him with the indwelling of the Holy spirit, called the baptism with the Holy spirit. That's the result of our first coming to faith. Even the filling is not receiving more of the Holy Spirit, rather, it's our being more under His control. This is the means God has designed for our practical sanctification, but not positional sanctification. Positional sanctification is justification, and is satisfied by Jesus, and given to us as a gift when we are placed into Christ Jesus by our initial faith. This practical sanctification is also called being conformed to Christlikeness. It's not communion that allows this practical sanctification, it's...I'll quote MacArthur to save time.

"...While there is no command in scripture to be baptized with the Spirit, believers are commanded to be filled with the Spirit (Eph. 5:18 ). The grammatical construction of that passage indicates believers are to be continuously being filled with the Spirit. Those who would be filled with the Spirit must first empty themselves. That involves confession of sin and dying to selfishness and self will. To be filled with the Holy Spirit is to consciously practice the presence of the Lord Jesus Christ and to have a mind saturated with the Word of God. Colossians 3:16-25 delineates the results of "letting the word of Christ richly dwell" in us. They are the same ones that result from the filling of the Spirit (Eph. 5:19-33). As believers yield the moment by moment decisions of life to His control, they "walk by the Spirit" (Gal. 5:16). The baptism of the Spirit grants the power that the filling with the Spirit unleashes." (Macarthur)

Positional sanctification is a one time act, and is the result of that baptism with the Holy Spirit which spiritually baptizes us into Christ Jesus. This happens one time when we first come to faith.

I'm afraid that your dinner analogy doesn't capture the true nature of this. It's a mixture of practical sanctification with implied positional maintenance. In Christ, justified. Not in Christ, not Justified. Here's communion...

1 Corinthians 11:24-26 and when He had given thanks, He broke it and said, "Take, eat; this is My body which is broken for you; do this in remembrance of Me." In the same manner He also took the cup after supper, saying, "This cup is the new covenant in My blood. This do, as often as you drink it, in remembrance of Me." For as often as you eat this bread and drink this cup, you proclaim the Lord's death till He comes.

Dave

Dave... · 2026-06-08T13:04:59-0500

Dan Perez said:
DAVE and just asking you about Mark 16:16 ??

# 1. HE THAT //. HO is a is. a DEFINIOYTE ARTICLE is a NOMINATIVE CASE in. the SINGULAR

#2 BELIEVETH. //. PICTEUO. in. the APORIST TENSE in. the ACTIVE VOICE. is a NOMINATIVE CASE in. the SINGULAR

# 3 AND // KAI is a CONJUNCTION

# 4 IS BAPTIZED. // BAPTIZO. in. the AORIST TENSE is a PARTICPLE MOOD is a NOMINATIVE CASE IS A SINGULAR

# 5 SHALL BE SAVED // SOZO. in. the FUTURE TENSE. in the PASSIVE VOICE in. the INDICATIVE MOOD. in the SINGULAR

# 6 BUT. //. DE. is a CONJUNCION

# 7. HE THAT BELIEVETH NOT. // APPSTEO. in. the AORIST TENSE in. the ACTIVE VOICE. in the NOMNATIVE CASE. in.

the SINGULAR

# 8 SHALL BE DAMNED // KATAKRINO. in. the FUTURE TENSE in. the SINGULAR

dan p

post # 65 I'll quote it.

Dave... said:
Hi Jan

That passage in Mark 16:15-16 says that those who don't believe are not saved, even giving more support to fact that it is the faith that saves. The original Greek allows for two interpretations of that passage in Mark. Both are equally, linguistically valid translations. One is in line with the context of the rest of the Bible, the other is in direct confrontation to the rest of the Bible. Jan, yours is the wrong one in light of the rest of Scripture, which states very clearly, believe and be saved.

The same great commission in John, and Jesus said this.

John 20:21, 29-31 So Jesus said to them again, "Peace to you! As the Father has sent Me, I also send you.".....Jesus said to him, "Thomas, because you have seen Me, you have believed. Blessed are those who have not seen and yet have believed." And truly Jesus did many other signs in the presence of His disciples, which are not written in this book; but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name.

Here is the same thing being said in John 3, minus the water baptism.

John 3:16-18 For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Just in case you missed it, I'll show you even more directly.

Mark 16:16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

John 3:18 He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Dave... · 2026-06-08T13:24:03-0500

MarkRohfrietsch said:
This is backwards; we can only become faithful with the intervention of the Holy Spirit and the word; there is no merit or worthieness in any of us. "by grace are you saved through faith... it is a gift of God, not of works..."

Hey Mark

I do not believe that our initial faith needs to pass righteous standards to be genuine. The faithfulness that you speak of is the result of that life and the fruit of the Spirit. That's someone who is indwelt and already in Christ.

It's not backwards with the correct context. The life is a gift from God. And it is only in that life that we can be righteous by God's standards, thus good and "faithful". In the OT before anyone had the indwelling Holy Spirit, the life, there we're "none good, and none righteous, no not one". We have that life with the NT indwelling which places us into Christ Jesus. That life is what Jesus is the Author and Finisher of. The work that He begins and promises to finish, is that life. That indwelling is that life (Romans 8:9-11), and is always the result of our initial faith (Galatians 3:2-3, Ephesians 1:13-14), which only needs to be a desire to do what is good (Romans 7:18-19). And we do have the presence of God, and His Word before that indwelling. In the Temple, in the Tabernacle. In the NT, His presence is with every believer when we evangelize. And as you said, His Word.

Anyway, in the OT, they believed, but were not yet indwelt, and did not yet have the life in them. but they had had the Holy Spirit in other ways. The Temple, Jesus Himself, etc.

John 7:38-39 He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water." But this He spoke concerning the Spirit, whom those believing in Him would receive; for the Holy Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified.

Dave

Paul's argument against the idea that water baptism saves. (Implied)

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Episcopalian

Monergist; and by reputation, Reformed Calvinist

Unapologetic Apologist

Well-Known Member

Unapologetic Apologist

Confessional Lutheran

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Episcopalian

Well-Known Member

Unapologetic Apologist

Well-Known Member

Orthodox Christian

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Similar threads