Baptism, Is it required to go to heaven?

[Rhamiel]

Thanks??? now I know there are four more religions that needlessly baptize babies.

i was just pointing out that this is not a Protestant vs. Catholic thing, there are lots of Protestants who also baptise babies, i am not trying to derail the thread or anything, just pointing out that it is not a clear cut issue

 

[The Mighty Sword]

i was just pointing out that this is not a Protestant vs. Catholic thing, there are lots of Protestants who also baptise babies, i am not trying to derail the thread or anything, just pointing out that it is not a clear cut issue

ok,
Why would you bring that up??? I'm not Protestant either, as if it mattered, look who they birthed from, and thats all I need to know.

Why do you guys baptize babies anyway???

 

[Rhamiel]

ok,
Why would you bring that up??? I'm not Protestant either, as if it mattered, look who they birthed from, and thats all I need to know.

Why do you guys baptize babies anyway???

I ment no offinse, I am in the habit of refering to all Christians as Protestants who are not Catholic or Eastern Orthodox.
I am not sure if i can teach about the Catholic faith in this subforum, if you want i could make a thread in OBOB about why Catholics baptise babies? or you could make the thread if you wish

 

[believehim]

(1Co 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.

 

[The Mighty Sword]

(1Co 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.

As Christians we are aware of the Scriptures on baptism, what I'm asking for is where in scripture does it say to baptize babies and why would we need to??, and how can they repent??

 

[The Mighty Sword]

I ment no offinse, I am in the habit of refering to all Christians as Protestants who are not Catholic or Eastern Orthodox.
I am not sure if i can teach about the Catholic faith in this subforum, if you want i could make a thread in OBOB about why Catholics baptise babies? or you could make the thread if you wish

I shoulnd't have to go to OBOB to have a believer show me scripture concerning infant baptism should I??? There is no scripture, it is a man made concept like purgatory.

Rhamiel have a blessed day.

 

[BeagleMomSC]

I'm in the thinking that everytime we confess our sins to the Lord Christ and ask for forgiveness we are baptised, not all refresment is liquid.

that is exactly how I see it as well.. Baptism is a more formal commitment, but not necessary. Giving your life to Christ in your HEART is the more important part.

 

[Rhamiel]

I shoulnd't have to go to OBOB to have a believer show me scripture concerning infant baptism should I??? There is no scripture, it is a man made concept like purgatory.

Rhamiel have a blessed day.

in the Bible it talks about entire households being baptized, it would be silly to think that there were no children

 

[The Mighty Sword]

in the Bible it talks about entire households being baptized, it would be silly to think that there were no children

The bible says alot of things, With all due respects Rhamiel, scriptures please.

 

[Berean1]

Baptism in water for a believer. Notice that person is a...believer.
Not essential for salvation. A good act though. A testimony before believers, of where you stand. I have been baptized in water...it was a glorious occasion. Did it save me? No. I was saved before I even went into the tank. It is a baptism of repentance that shows your sincerity. The baptism... the more legalistic really need to pay attention to...is the baptism of the Spirit. There's no use going into the water, if the Spirit of Christ hasn't set up His Home in your temple. (the body).
Baptism in water is not something to have qualms about. Just do it as a testimony of sincere faith.

 

[The Mighty Sword]

Baptism in water for a believer. Notice that person is a...believer.
Not essential for salvation. A good act though. A testimony before believers, of where you stand. I have been baptized in water...it was a glorious occasion. Did it save me? No. I was saved before I even went into the tank. It is a baptism of repentance that shows your sincerity. The baptism... the more legalistic really need to pay attention to...is the baptism of the Spirit. There's no use going into the water, if the Spirit of Christ hasn't set up His Home in your temple. (the body).
Baptism in water is not something to have qualms about. Just do it as a testimony of sincere faith.

Spoken like true berean, thank you GOD bless, Amen and Amen.

 

[Svt4Him]

This is clearly on of the most debatable things in Christianity and unfortunately it could mean dire consequences to some. People often use the thief on the cross as an example however this man passed before Jesus died so it certainly could be said that up until Christ died that it was not a requirement for one to be baptized to get to Paradise. T

Did he die before Jesus, or did He die after Jesus become a curse, as anyone who hangs on a tree is cursed. Seems to me that the thief died and was saved not because of following the OT principle, but because of grace, through faith, in Jesus. For you to say he died before Jesus makes me wonder why his legs were broken.

The baptism is one unto repentance. The message of the kingdom is repent and believe. Nothing more needs to be added.

 

[DerSchweik]

The baptism is one unto repentance. The message of the kingdom is repent and believe. Nothing more needs to be added.

Unsure who is "adding" what w/r to baptism. I have yet to hear a cogent explanation of why/how baptism is a work (and therefore to be ignored, delayed, or done at one's own leisure or not).

As to the message, well this is straight from the Lord's (Jesus') mouth:

"And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you." Mt 28:18ff

"16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." Mk 16:16

I don't know how anyone's theology can change or spin what Jesus said - but I know many that have.

But when you have the Christ, the Son of God proclaiming His absolute authority in heaven and on earth and then commanding and stating the necessity of baptism, one must wonder at a theology - any theology that diminishes its importance or ignores it altogether - let alone one that divorces it from the subject of salvation.

As to the message, this is what Peter said in his very first sermon:

Now when they heard this they were cut to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “Brothers, what shall we do?” And Peter said to them, “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. For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself.”And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, “Save yourselves from this crooked generation.” So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls." Acts 2

Again, theologies aside, it's hard to refute these very clear words - though I realize many still do

But ignore for a moment Jesus' commands and Peter's command and consider the theology of baptism as described by Paul:

"Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his." Romans 6:3ff

Paul clearly states the purpose of baptism being where we are identified with Christ's death, burial, and resurrection - where Christ died, so did we [in baptism]; where Christ was buried, so were we [in baptism]; and where Christ was resurrected from the dead, SO WERE WE [in baptism] - for the purpose of BEING UNITED WITH HIM.

Paul's appeal to our identity with one another and with His death, burial, and resurrection is exclusively on the basis of baptism - consider Galatians 2:20:

I have been crucified with Christ. It is no longer I who live, but Christ who lives in me. And the life I now live in the flesh I live by faith in the Son of God, who loved me and gave himself for me.

Many, including some who've commented here already, confuse the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" with the baptism Jesus, Paul, and Peter speak of - that occurred exactly TWICE in the bible - Acts 1 with Jews and Acts 10 with Gentiles and served an entirely different purpose than the baptism being discussed here.

Consider too that we have a number of solid scriptural examples of people becoming Christians via the salvation process which includes baptism (hear [the Word], believe/accept [the Word], confess, repent, and be baptized): the 3000 in Acts 2, the Ethiopian Eunuch in Acts 8, Saul (Paul) in Acts 9 (and repeated in Acts 22), Cornelius and his household in Acts 10 (despite other's interpretations of what happened there), Lydia in Acts 16, the Philippian jailer in Acts 16

And if you consider belief, confession, and repentence (in other words all three equaling "belief" or "faith") being the sole criteria for salvation - and thus appeal to the example of the thief on the cross as justification for ignoring baptism - consider again Paul's explanation of the purpose of baptism in Romans 6 - sharing in Christ's death, burial, and resurrection.

Was the thief saved? I believe he was - as does everyone else here. But how was/is the thief different from us? Very simple - he was ACTUALLY CRUCIFIED - physically crucified with Christ - not something we can do today - we can of course share in it by submitting to being baptized - which is why we do it and proclaim it.

This is a very serious topic because it addresses our IDENTITY in Christ and WITH Christ. We'd better get it right, right?

While it's not at ALL appropriate to judge another's salvation or relationship with Christ, it is entirely appropriate to call to question our beliefs in that regard, especially as it pertains to what the BIBLE ACTUALLY SAYS on the topic - versus how others might have interpreted it for us.

 

[stelow]

Trust in Jesus who God has sent forth to be the propitiation for our sins. Our salvation comes through His atoning sacrifice, the BLOOD of THE LAMB. Then every good and holy thing can follow but most importantly accept this salvation.

John 6:46-48
46 Not that anyone has seen the Father, except He who is from God; He has seen the Father. 47 Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life. 48 I am the bread of life.

Acts 4:10-12
10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole. 11 This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’ 12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”

Revelation 12:11"And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death."

 

[Svt4Him]

does it teach that baptism is required for salvation? The simple answer is: No, it does not. In fact, when one carefully examines this verse, it becomes clear that in order to make this it teach that baptism is required for salvation, one must go beyond what the verse actually says. What this verse does teach is that belief is necessary for salvation, which is consistent with all other verses in the Bible that deal with salvation, especially the countless verses where only belief or faith is mentioned (e.g. John 3:18; John 5:24; John 12:44; John 20:31; 1 John 5:13).

“He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16:16). If we look at this verse closely, we see that it is composed of two basic statements. 1—He who believes and is baptized will be saved. 2—He who does not believe will be condemned.

Clearly, the determining factor regarding whether one is saved or condemned is whether or not he believes. In interpreting this passage correctly, it is important to realize that while it tells us something about believers who have been baptized (they are saved), it does not say anything about believers who have not been baptized. In order for this verse to teach that baptism is necessary for salvation, a third statement would have had to be included, that statement being: “He who believes and is not baptized will be condemned” or “He who is not baptized will be condemned.” But, of course, neither of these statements is found in the verse.

Quoted in part from : Does Mark 16:16 teach that baptism is necessary for salvation?

Was the thief saved? I believe he was - as does everyone else here. But how was/is the thief different from us? Very simple - he was ACTUALLY CRUCIFIED - physically crucified with Christ - not something we can do today - we can of course share in it by submitting to being baptized - which is why we do it and proclaim it.

So we can be saved through faith by grace, or we can be saved by being literally crucified with Christ. But that would mean that both of the thieves would have been saved. Oh, but the verse should say if you believe and are baptized and/or are crucified with Christ, you will be saved. That is in fact adding something to the Bible that is in fact not there, nor is it ever implied.

For me, my identity in Christ and 'with' Christ is actually only about Christ. I'll preach the cross, if someone thinks Paul missed it by not preaching the cross and baptism, that's ok with me I don't think anyone will lose their salvation over it.

especially as it pertains to what the BIBLE ACTUALLY SAYS on the topic - versus how others might have interpreted it for us.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XkZZRkC5LR8

 

[RefrusRevlis]

Originally Posted by Svt4Him

Nope, it's not. Just ask the thief who died next to Jesus.
​

How refreshing it is to hear truth spoken with such simplicity...

The Thief on the cross is not an argument for baptism being non-essential. Jesus personally forgave the man. He did this before the new covenant came into effect (ie before Jesus' death).

“He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16:16). If we look at this verse closely, we see that it is composed of two basic statements. 1—He who believes and is baptized will be saved. 2—He who does not believe will be condemned.

Clearly, the determining factor regarding whether one is saved or condemned is whether or not he believes. In interpreting this passage correctly, it is important to realize that while it tells us something about believers who have been baptized (they are saved), it does not say anything about believers who have not been baptized. In order for this verse to teach that baptism is necessary for salvation, a third statement would have had to be included, that statement being: “He who believes and is not baptized will be condemned” or “He who is not baptized will be condemned.” But, of course, neither of these statements is found in the verse.

Your reasoning is totally wrong. In order to be baptised one must first believe. Belief precedes Baptism. If a person has not believed it is not possible for them to be baptised. The third statement is not required. Baptism is the answer of a good conscience (1 Peter 3:21), not the removal of filth from the flesh (ie not a bath or Jewish washing). Baptism is therefore defined as something which requires a right mind/heart (conscience) before God. One cannot have this without faith. Therefore it is impossible to be baptised, as the Bible defines baptism, without faith preceding it. It is therefore unnecessary to add “He who believes and is not baptized will be condemned” since if this person has no faith he or she is condemned already.

The idea that Baptism is just a symbol or sign of an inward truth can be traced back to the Reformer Zwingli in the 1520's. It is a man-made doctrine absent from the Bible and as such void of any worth.

 

[Svt4Him]

The Thief on the cross is not an argument for baptism being non-essential. Jesus personally forgave the man. He did this before the new covenant came into effect (ie before Jesus' death).

Oh, so now there's a new condition. We can believe (and I personally believe Jesus still personally forgives us) and be saved if we're baptized unless Jesus personally forgives us.

This is taking a verse and making it fit a doctrine. There is no additional condition to Mark. But let me say I agree with this. If Jesus personally forgives you, then you don't need to be baptized. Again, thank God that Jesus does personally forgive each and every person who repents and believes. That is the message of the kingdom, that is the message Jesus preached, and that is the only one that makes it so you don't have to do exegesis gymnastics to prove a simple Biblical story. There is no indication that Jesus' personal forgiveness on earth is better than His personal forgiveness in heaven, that to be punished next to Christ is the same as being crucified with Christ, but things like this have to be added to fit a doctrine. Salvation has always been by faith, through grace, and God's way has never changed on this.

 

[RefrusRevlis]

Oh, so now there's a new condition. We can believe (and I personally believe Jesus still personally forgives us) and be saved if we're baptized unless Jesus personally forgives us.

Okay. Let me rephrase my statement, so there are no misunderstandings. Jesus was physically present with the person whom he forgave and this was under the old covenant. Jesus had not died and therefore the new covenant was not in effect. Jesus was perfectly within his rights to forgive the thief. However, the New Covenant is now in effect. Jesus has delivered to us through the apostles and prophets the terms of entry into his forgiveness. The thief on the cross could not have been baptised even if he had been plucked off the cross, since the new covenant was not in effect and thus he could not have entered into it.

This is taking a verse and making it fit a doctrine.

Not at all, it is reasoning from the scriptures.

There is no additional condition to Mark. But let me say I agree with this. If Jesus personally forgives you, then you don't need to be baptized.

Jesus does forgive us individually, but this is in accordance with the revealed will of God. Many verses show us that it is at the point of baptism that we enter into Christ:

Galatians 3:27
For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Acts 2:38
Then 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.

Acts 22:16
And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.’

1 Corinthians 12:13
For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body— whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.
To have one's sins forgiven occurs at the same time as entry into the body of Christ.

Again, thank God that Jesus does personally forgive each and every person who repents and believes. That is the message of the kingdom, that is the message Jesus preached, and that is the only one that makes it so you don't have to do exegesis gymnastics to prove a simple Biblical story.

No gymnastics are required to demostrate that baptism saves. However a lot of contortion is is required to attempt to show baptism is not essential for salvation.

There is no indication that Jesus' personal forgiveness on earth is better than His personal forgiveness in heaven, that to be punished next to Christ is the same as being crucified with Christ, but things like this have to be added to fit a doctrine.

I don't really know what you are talking about. The thief on the cross was not forgiven because he was punished alongside Christ. Christ's forgiveness on Earth before he died was not better than the forgiveness available now that he is in heaven. Both result in eternal life. However the means (instrument) by which this salvation occurs is different. We must have faith as the thief did and this faith is based on the word of God which includes obedience.

Salvation has always been by faith, through grace, and God's way has never changed on this.

Baptism does not negate God's grace. It is at Baptism that one is able to enter Christ. It was Zwingli who popularised the ploy (strawman) that Baptism negates grace because it is a work. Faith itself is a work (John 6:28-29)

__________________

 

[DerSchweik]

does it teach that baptism is required for salvation? The simple answer is: No, it does not. In fact, when one carefully examines this verse, it becomes clear that in order to make this it teach that baptism is required for salvation, one must go beyond what the verse actually says. What this verse does teach is that belief is necessary for salvation, which is consistent with all other verses in the Bible that deal with salvation, especially the countless verses where only belief or faith is mentioned (e.g. John 3:18; John 5:24; John 12:44; John 20:31; 1 John 5:13).

I'm missing the logic here - what the verse *says* - is "he who believes and who is baptized will be saved." That is what the verse *says*. Is belief required? ABSOLUTELY! That's what the verse says. Is baptism required? APPARENTLY NOT because that "goes beyond what the verse says".

You are right however that there are more instances of the word "belief" (and it's variants) w/r to salvation than baptism. No argument there. I actually did my own study of the New Testament on the topic of "Salvation Verses" and came up with the following (words or similar variants):


BELIEVE 70
BAPTISM 34
GOD'S GRACE 32
IN / OF CHRIST 26
HEAR (GOSPEL)25
GIFT OF HOLY S. 14
OBEY 10
REPENT 7
SEE 7
FOLLOW / COME TO 6
RECEIVE 6
CONFESS 5
REBORN 5
ENDURE 5
DENY SELF 4
ABIDE IN JESUS 4
LIKE CHILDREN 3
TAKE UP CROSS 2
BE HUMBLE 2
CONVERT 1
BE TAUGHT 1
NO FEAR 1
LOVE (GOD) 1
CALL ON LORD 1

In all, I found some 152 verses, some capturing several of the topics, that were related to this topic [salvation]. It's certainly not definitive, but it was a valuable series of quiet times for me and quite helpful. What I did find was a "pattern" in these verses that summarizes thus:

Condensed Pattern Summary:
Someone PREACHES THE WORD [JOHN, JESUS, CHRISTIANS]
The listener RECEIVES THE WORD (i.e. does not shut it out, LISTENS, ACCEPTS, WELCOMES)
The listener BELIEVES THE WORD
The listener OBEYS THE WORD (Repentence, etc. – FAITH?)
Hearts cleansed by faith
The listener IS BAPTIZED, Crucified with Christ
Judged faithful, justified after being baptized
The listener RECEIVES THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT
The indwelling Spirit gives life
The listener ‘IS ADDED’ [to the congregation of believers], by God
God’s grace, or ‘through God’s grace,’ permits the whole process
Once saved, we persevere until the day
We ABIDE in the Word
God CALLS us through the gospel, so as to be saved by it, if we believe (and obey) it



What I have always found intriguing about these discussions is the acceptance and promotion of everything BUT baptism w/r to salvation. We are indeed "saved by grace" (Eph 2:8f, Acts 15:11, etc.) - in fact, I see grace everywhere in fact in this topic [of salvation].

We are also saved by (things by which we are EXPLICITLY saved):
Faith - Jn 3:16, Gal 3:26, Lk 7:50 etc. etc. etc.)
Calling on the Lord's Name - Acts 2:21 (Joel 2, Romans 10)
Jesus' Life - Rom 5:10
Perseverance - Lk 21:19
Endurance - Mt 24:13, Mt 10:22
Confession - Rom 10:9f (Mt 10:32)
Gospel - 1 Cor 15:1f
Baptism - I Pet 3:21, Acts 2:38ff, etc.
Lose Life - Lk 9:24, Mk 8:35ff
God's Mercy, Regenerative washing, renewal of the H. S. - Tit 3:5
Being 'In Christ' - Acts 4:12, Jn 3:17
Words - Acts 11:14 (the gospel)
Love of truth - 2 Thess 2:10
God's Patience - 2 Pet 3:5

“He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16:16). If we look at this verse closely, we see that it is composed of two basic statements. 1—He who believes and is baptized will be saved. 2—He who does not believe will be condemned.

OMITTED here is that portion of the verse that does not suit the argument because is is part of the first part of Jesus' statement. The "SUM of Thy word that is truth" (Psalms 119:160), not that portion only that suits our argument/belief.

Clearly, the determining factor regarding whether one is saved or condemned is whether or not he believes. In interpreting this passage correctly, it is important to realize that while it tells us something about believers who have been baptized (they are saved), it does not say anything about believers who have not been baptized. In order for this verse to teach that baptism is necessary for salvation, a third statement would have had to be included, that statement being: “He who believes and is not baptized will be condemned” or “He who is not baptized will be condemned.” But, of course, neither of these statements is found in the verse.

Neither of those statements are found in the verse for the simple reason that the Lord didn't say them - they are part of the contrived argument against baptism. The appeal to the [false] argument that someone who reads "He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned" needs to ADD to the verse the necessity for baptism is the unfortunate teaching here and entirely without warrant, logically or scripturally - particularly when the teaching SUBTRACTS from the verse the very statement those teachers claim is being added. If arguments FOR baptism frustrate, certainly these against it frustrate as well.

So we can be saved through faith by grace, or we can be saved by being literally crucified with Christ. But that would mean that both of the thieves would have been saved. Oh, but the verse should say if you believe and are baptized and/or are crucified with Christ, you will be saved. That is in fact adding something to the Bible that is in fact not there, nor is it ever implied.

Svt, That was not my point and I think you know it.

For me, my identity in Christ and 'with' Christ is actually only about Christ. I'll preach the cross, if someone thinks Paul missed it by not preaching the cross and baptism, that's ok with me I don't think anyone will lose their salvation over it.

I appreciate that and I understand - and for what it's worth, I also agree that it's not up to either of us to judge another's salvation based on their understanding of God's Word - however they got to it. Many have walked with the Lord without a perfect understanding of either what He said or what He meant by what He said - including myself (which I'm sure I still do and until heaven always will). Amen to His grace, His mercy, His patience, and His kindness.

brothers regardless?

God bless...

 

[stelow]

To me it would be an insult to God to claim that anything else but His Son's shed Blood was needed for our salvation.

1 Corinthians 12:13"For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit."