Are there really people who believe baptism with water is necessary for being born again?

[bling]

Bling, you obvious belong to one of the groups believing water baptism is needed in order to obtain God's mercy. The Bible does not say such a thing. We are probably not going to change each other's minds here.

Go in peace.

Go back to my earlier posts, I do not feel water does anything to save a person or enables God to do anything. God is extending "mercy" (Grace/Love/forgiveness/charity) to everyone, but people refuse this gift. It is one of the things God has given Christians to help them with their spiritual growth and I listed how it helps.
The question can be, since God has given us this help why are we refusing to accept it?

 

[JohannaSK]

I read an interesting article on the meaning of "water" in John 3:5:

D.A. Carson on the meaning of “born of water and of the Spirit”

I'm not familiar with the writer of that John 3:5 commentary (D. A. Carson), but I found many interesting points in it.

According to this commentary the meaning of "water" refers to spiritual renewal: the fulfilment of Old Testament promises anticipating the outpouring of the Spirit.

 

[Veritas238]

Are there any Bible verses that say one must be baptized in order to be born again from above, from the Spirit of God, and therefore saved?

It is very important that we not base our entire salvation off of one verse, or our belief system on one verse that says something specific. I can show you examples of people in the bible that had faith and were not saved, people who were baptized and were not saved until later. Salvation generally comes AFTER belief or after faith.

Other than John 3 which other people have pointed to, perhaps we should look at also at the following passages.

15 And He said to them, “Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. 16 He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned. Mark 16:15-16

The first sermon ever preached gave the response to essentially the question, "we believe the gospel, what must we do?" And Peters response was repent, be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sin, and then you will receive the Holy Ghost.

36“Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly that God has made this Jesus, whom you crucified, both Lord and Christ.”
37Now when they heard this, they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Men and brethren, what shall we do?”
38Then Peter said to them, “Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39For the promise is to you and to your children, and to all who are afar off, as many as the Lord our God will call.” Acts 2:36-38

What about the fact that there are many people (also have been in my family) who were water-baptized as a baby, but who lived through their lives into adulthood and died without ever declaring and professing that Jesus is their Lord (Romans 10: 9-10)? Are they all lying about never having been a Christian?

What about the man who repented while hanging on the cross alongside Jesus, and who died without being baptized with water, but to whom Jesus promised salvation in paradise?

What about people in general who have become a Christian, but because of their circumstances aren't able or allowed to be baptized – are they not considered born again?

Is there a theology that claims this? Really?

They were not living under the new covenant.

The Holy Ghost was not yet given at this point because Jesus was not yet glorified. John 7:39

The early church believed and taught that salvation was essential to salvation. This was also believed after the reformation, and Martin Luther also held such beliefs.

It is important to now form doctrine because of or based off of "what if" or hypothetical circumstances. We will one day be judged not because of those circumstances, but rather the word of God and our obedience to it.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

Veritas, did you leave out a word in your first sentence? Possibly a "not"?

It is very important that we base our entire salvation off of one verse, or our belief system on one verse that says something specific.

I believe basing any important facet of theology or doctrine from ONE VERSE, quite possible removed from context is a very poor way to go about the business. I think you agree with me on this.

 

[Veritas238]

Veritas, did you leave out a word in your first sentence? Possibly a "not"?


I believe basing any important facet of theology or doctrine from ONE VERSE, quite possible removed from context is a very poor way to go about the business. I think you agree with me on this.

Yes! Thanks for pointing that out.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

Yes! Thanks for pointing that out.

Oh! Good!

Keep up the good work.

 

[MWood]

There are many verses in just the Gospel of John that teach salvation unto eternal life. And non of them mention water baptism.

 

[prodromos]

There are many verses in just the Gospel of John that teach salvation unto eternal life. And non of them mention water baptism.

Yes, there are many aspect to our salvation. All of them are normative but God is able to work regardless of whether we are able to perform them or not. He has determined the means but He himself is not bound by them. However, it does not then follow that because one writer does not mention water baptism, that we can ignore it when another does.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

However, it does not then follow that because one writer does not mention water baptism, that we can ignore it when another does.

Ignore water baptism, no. Declare it to be REQUIRED for salvation, also no.

Water baptism is indeed taught in the New Testament, but only after one has accepted the Salvation of by Grace of God through Jesus. Not prior, not instead of, and not as part of the process.

 

[stuart lawrence]

Besides John 3, you mean?

If they haven't been confirmed, I don't know if I'd go so far as to claim they're "lying" but as adults they need to confirm the promises made by their parents when they were infants.

I can't speak for anybody else but my Church teaches that water baptism is the ordinary means for salvation. From the Catechism...

There's more but that's a general idea of what the Catholic Church teaches regarding baptism.

As to the thief on the cross...

People in this situation (like the thief on the cross) are unable to be baptized. But if they would be baptized given the chance, my Church teaches they have the baptism of desire. The thief on the cross is believed to have received the baptism of desire. The exception being made in those cases doesn't mitigate the fact that baptism is the ordinary means for salvation.

The objection to baptism mystifies me, tbh. If you believe baptism to be optional, why not do it? Seems like the safer idea because if baptism turns out to be mandatory, you'll be okay. But if you knowingly rejected baptism even though it is required... oops! I mean, a typical reply to my point is "Well, I just don't believe that". Boy I sure hope you don't end up being proved wrong. That would really suck.

Yes.

Really really.

Water baptism is the ordinary means of salvation?
Your church teaches that?

I assume then your church also teaches the unsaved can receive the holy spirit as the disciples did at Pentecost and speak In tongues.

Cornelius and his household. Acts ch10

 

[thecolorsblend]

Water baptism is the ordinary means of salvation?
Your church teaches that?

I assume then your church also teaches the unsaved can receive the holy spirit as the disciples did at Pentecost and speak In tongues.

Cornelius and his household. Acts ch10

The Catholic Church doesn't encourage or discourage speaking in tongues. The informative passage which I keep seeing Catholic clergy refer to is 1 Corinthians 14.

 

[Archie the Preacher]

I assume then your church also teaches the unsaved can receive the holy spirit as the disciples did at Pentecost and speak In tongues.

Cornelius and his household. Acts ch10

I find this set of statements confusing.

I'm not sure if your statement (question) about the disciples at Pentecost were unsaved when they received the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues at Pentecost, or if 'the unsaved' can receive the holy spirit in the same fashion as the (already saved) disciples did at Pentecost.

Secondly, Cornelius, et al. Do you think at the point when Cornelius, et al received the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues they were NOT fully accepted by God, i.e., saved? Or are you citing that passage when that family group obviously received the Holy Spirit and 'spoke' prior to baptism demonstrates salvation occurs prior to water baptism?

 

[stuart lawrence]

I find this set of statements confusing.

I'm not sure if your statement (question) about the disciples at Pentecost were unsaved when they received the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues at Pentecost, or if 'the unsaved' can receive the holy spirit in the same fashion as the (already saved) disciples did at Pentecost.

Secondly, Cornelius, et al. Do you think at the point when Cornelius, et al received the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues they were NOT fully accepted by God, i.e., saved? Or are you citing that passage when that family group obviously received the Holy Spirit and 'spoke' prior to baptism demonstrates salvation occurs prior to water baptism?

If the unsaved cannot receive the holy spirit and speak in tongues, salvation must come before a person is baptised in water.
Cornelius and his household received the holy spirit as the disciples did at Pentecost and spoke in tongues prior to being baptised in water

 

[Archie the Preacher]

If the unsaved cannot receive the holy spirit and speak in tongues, salvation must come before a person is baptised in water

Thanks. I concur. More than that, I appreciate having a solid understanding of what you meant.

On a similar note, and not intending to divert the main thrust of this thread; I'm not sure 'we' can always be sure just exactly when salvation occurs. In my own case, I was not a Christian - saved - in any real sense when I was born. However, I grew up in a Christian home and I was baptized publicly at the age of nine years old.

I was baptized in the Southern Baptist denomination who hold baptism is for one who asks for baptism on the grounds one is already in a saving relationship with God the Father through Jesus Christ. Which I was, for the record.

But I cannot put an exact time date on the actual moment of salvation. I know it was between birth and Easter Sunday of 1959. Probably after the age of four or possibly five. I always said grace over meals and prayed before bed. I was always in church at the appropriate times. I always (in my memory) accepted the Lord as a real being, although 'somewhere else'.

I've met other people who know EXACTLY when they 'got saved'. Or as in older times, 'got religion'. They have the similarity of all being older when such happened (and I'm not doubting the authenticity).

However, I have heard good Christian men, including preachers, who say things along the line of people '... have to know the exact time of their conversion...' and I think that is a bit of an overstatement.

 

[stuart lawrence]

Thanks. I concur. More than that, I appreciate having a solid understanding of what you meant.

On a similar note, and not intending to divert the main thrust of this thread; I'm not sure 'we' can always be sure just exactly when salvation occurs. In my own case, I was not a Christian - saved - in any real sense when I was born. However, I grew up in a Christian home and I was baptized publicly at the age of nine years old.

I was baptized in the Southern Baptist denomination who hold baptism is for one who asks for baptism on the grounds one is already in a saving relationship with God the Father through Jesus Christ. Which I was, for the record.

But I cannot put an exact time date on the actual moment of salvation. I know it was between birth and Easter Sunday of 1959. Probably after the age of four or possibly five. I always said grace over meals and prayed before bed. I was always in church at the appropriate times. I always (in my memory) accepted the Lord as a real being, although 'somewhere else'.

I've met other people who know EXACTLY when they 'got saved'. Or as in older times, 'got religion'. They have the similarity of all being older when such happened (and I'm not doubting the authenticity).

However, I have heard good Christian men, including preachers, who say things along the line of people '... have to know the exact time of their conversion...' and I think that is a bit of an overstatement.

Thank you for the post.
I knew when I was saved. My life changed dramatically. At the age of ten my family moved church. Four weeks later I responded to an altar call. I remember vividly what happened next. Even at that age I became aware of my sin.
Under the new covenant, the law God desires you to keep is written on your mind and placed on your heart.
And through the law we become conscious of sin( rom3:20)
For sin is transgression of the law(1john3:4)

I was forever changed, and for many years deeply unhappy, for in truth, I only had half a covenant.
I didn't realise my sins and lawless deeds would be remembered no more

 

[Archie the Preacher]

I was forever changed, and for many years deeply unhappy, for in truth, I only had half a covenant. I didn't realise my sins and lawless deeds would be remembered no more

I'll go along with that. I think 'growing' in Christ takes on many aspects. One is the idea He loves us and puts up with us much more than we ever realize. That 'remembered no more' thing is really hard for human to grasp. I grasp it more than I used to, but I'm sure there's more to 'get'.

 

[DingDing]

You asked,
Are there really people who believe baptism with water is necessary for being born again?

Yes.

 

[stuart lawrence]

I'll go along with that. I think 'growing' in Christ takes on many aspects. One is the idea He loves us and puts up with us much more than we ever realize. That 'remembered no more' thing is really hard for human to grasp. I grasp it more than I used to, but I'm sure there's more to 'get'.

I was nineteen when I first read Paul's epistles. I had given up with God for a few years, believing I could not be good enough for God.
Reading pauls letters showed me Christ was my right standing before the father, not my personal goodness. I suddenly realised I could be a christian after all.
As long as I thought I had to be good enough for God, sin increased in my life.
When I knew Christ was my right standingt before God, sin lessened its grip on my life

That is Paul's core message. An incredible message I believe, but I admit to being biased!

 

[SkyWriting]

Are there any Bible verses that say one must be baptized in order to be born again from above, from the Spirit of God, and therefore saved?

Absolutely. But it refers to spiritual baptism.

 

[SkyWriting]

In John 3: 5 Jesus says:
“Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit."

I heard a preacher man say that by "water" Jesus refers to the water that comes from the womb when baby is born. What do you guys think about this interpretation?

Yes. Born of water refers to the birthing process.
After a spiritual rebirth it is a good idea to back that
up with a physical baptism with water. It helps to
cement the experience.