baptism necessary to be saved???

[Florida College]

Malaka,

Aggie03 has clearly addressed the differences between the baptism of John and the baptism that puts one into Christ. Baptism into Christ is necessary for salvation. Mk. 16:16 should be easily understood: the sentence structure is not complicated nor the meaning hard to discern.

I would like to just briefly clarily a comment about Matt. 3:5-6. Your points were:

Matthew, chapter 3 tells us that John preached repentance and baptized "unto repentance" (v 11). But, verse 5 and 6, it states,

"Then Jerusalem, all Judea, and all the region around the Jordan went out to him and were baptized by him in the Jordan, confessing their sins"

That word "all" tells me that that "all" of the Jews in Jerusalem and Judean and the region around Jordan went to be baptized.

My comments: Does the word "all" really mean every single person? I don't think it applied to every single Jew that was in those areas. Carefully consider the Jews reaction in Luke 29-30 to Jesus' teaching in Capernaum. I offer this point only as a point to think about. I don't feel that I can say with certainty that the thief on the cross was baptized with the baptism of John - - that is, whether he was, or whether he wasn't. Since the baptism of John and the baptism of Christ are totally different actions, I choose to reason from the angle of when the Old Testament Law ended and the New Testament era started.

Ultimately, whatever one decides about the thief on the cross - - whether he as baptized or not - - must be harmonized with all other scriptures. That is what I am listening for - - I've yet to hear anyone harmonize salvation by "faith only" with Acts 2:38;22:16, or I Peter 3:20-21 (just to mention a few scriptures).

FC

 

[Galadriel]

About the theif on the cross, I notice that you try to make it Christ's death was the dividing line, so the theif on the cross doesn't count. But this is not true, the dividing line of OT and NT is with the coming of John the Baptist (Luke 16:16).

 

[Galadriel]

...so, the events of Jesus' life, and the theif on the cross, are ALL under the New Testament, not the Old, for it is NOT Christ's death that is the dividing line.

 

[A Brethren IN CHRIST]

Matt 20:16 So the last shall be first, and the first last: for many be called but few chosen

Matt 22:14 many are called, but few are chosen.

John 15:16 Ye have not chosen me, but I have chosen you, and ordained you, that ye should go and bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain: that whatsoever ye shall ask of the father in my name, he may give it you.

Romans 8:28 And we know that all things work together for good to them that love[agape] God, to them who are the called according to His purpose 29 For whom he did foreknow, he also did predestinate to be conformed to the image of His Son, that he might be the firstborn among many brethren.

Romans 11:2 God hath not cast away His people which He foreknew. Wot ye not what scripture saith of Isaiah? how he maketh intercession to God against Israel saying........

Romans 11:5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace. 6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

1cor 1:26-30

1 cor 9:22 To the weak became I as weak, that I might gain the weak, I am made all thing to all men, that I might by all means save some
determative will

Gal 1:6 I marel that ye are so soon removed from Him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:

Gal 1:15 But when it pleased God, who separted me from my mother's womb, and called me by His grace.

eph 1:4 According as He hath chosen us in Him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love.

where vs 3 ..heavenly places..aka postional truth




1 tim 2:4 Who will[desireous will] have all men to be saved, and to come unto the knowledge of the truth

Does this happen SORRY IT DOES NOT NOT HAPPEN

2tim 2:11 It is a faithful saying: For if we die with Him{and we did,Romans 6:8}, we shall also live with Him: 12 If we suffer {and we will, romans 5:3,12:12} we shall also reign with Him: if we deny Him {and we will, Peter} He also will deny us {rewards}: 13 If we beleive not, yet He abideth faithful: He cannot deny himself.

first class condition

titus 2:11 For the [saving] grace of God that bringeth salvation made available to all men[believers,chosen,elect]

1peter 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of the God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit unto obediebence and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you and peace, be multipled.

1peter 2:4 To whom coming, as unto a living stone, disallowed indeed of men, but chosen of God, and precious,

1peter 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation a royal priesthood, an holy nation[gentiles] a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of Him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light.

2 peter 3:9 The Lord is not slack concerning His promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to Us-ward {elect/chosen/believers}
not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance

John1:12 But as many recieved him, to them that He gave authority to become the children of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.


no response???

 

[aggie03]

...so, the events of Jesus' life, and the theif on the cross, are ALL under the New Testament, not the Old, for it is NOT Christ's death that is the dividing line.

I'm just going to copy and paste what I have already posted in the other forum regarding the OT comment you have made . It saves me a lot of typing that way.

This cannot be true - the theif on the cross was under the Old Covenant. Jesus Himself also said this:

Matthew 5:17-18 ASV

Think not that I came to destroy the law or the prophets: I came not to destroy, but to fulfil. (18) For verily I say unto you, Till heaven and earth pass away, one jot or one tittle shall in no wise pass away from the law, till all things be accomplished.

If what you have said is true, then this would mean that all things were accomplished and the Law and prophets were fulfilled BEFORE Christ was crucified. This simply is not the case.

Rather the verse that he has quoted is showing that until John came the Law and the prophets were the only guides that the people had. Now that John has come his message is bound upon the people because he was Elijah sent by sent God:

Matthew 17:10-13 ASV

And his disciples asked him, saying, Why then say the scribes that Elijah must first come? (11) And he answered and said, Elijah indeed cometh, and shall restore all things: (12) but I say into you, that Elijah is come already, and they knew him not, but did unto him whatsoever they would. Even so shall the Son of man also suffer of them. (13) Then understood the disciples that he spake unto them of John the Baptist.

John the Baptist was the last of the Old Testament prophets - his job was to make straight the way of the Lord, to lead the people away from the Laws of Moses and toward Christ and the New Covenant. John was an Old Covenant prophet who was preaching the leaving of the Law of Moses that would come in the future when all the things in the Law and the prophets had been fulfilled, specifically when the Christ was slain and ressurected in glory. If the New Covenant was already in effect before Jesus was crucified, then there would have been no need for Him to die.

 

[A Brethren IN CHRIST]

John1:12 But as many recieved him, to them that He gave authority to become the children of God, even to them that believe on his name: 13 Which were born, not of blood, nor of the will of the flesh, nor of the will of man, but of God.


no response???

 

[Florida College]

Galadriel,

I don't know if you have seen the previous discussions about the thief on the cross. I have used the following paragraph on at least two occasions to offer some insight about the circumstances of the thief's death:

Does the example of the thief on the cross negate the teachings on the necessity of baptism? You obviously think so. I don't. Consider how harmonizing the scriptures works in this case.
Beyond a shadow of a doubt, Jesus taught that baptism was necessary for salvation - Mk. 16:16.
When did Jesus' law go into effect? If you don't know the answer, read Hebrews 9: 15-17. According to this passage, Jesus' law (testament, or will) could not go into effect until after he died. Was Jesus dead at the time he granted parton to the thief on the cross? It doesn't appear that he was in Lk. 23:39-43. So the real questions are . . . what law was in effect when the thief was on the cross? . . . and was baptism into Christ required under that law in order to be saved? The only written law in effect at that time was the Law of Moses - - given exclusively to the Jews. Baptism into Christ was not required under the Old Testament. But what about after Jesus' death? What law went into effect then? According to the passage in Hebrews 9: 15-17, then Jesus' law could go into effect. In fact, if you consider that Jesus' testament or law is the same as a will that goes into effect when the one that made it dies, then you could think of Acts 2 as reading the will and stating the terms of the will. What did Peter tell those Jews that believed the sermon in Acts 2 and asked what they should do since they were guilty of putting to death the Christ? Did he tell them that as long as they had faith they would be saved from their sins? No, he told them to "repent and be baptized . . . for the remission of sins." In Acts 2 the message of salvation had been proclaimed, and the terms to the will stated. Now, can you find any examples of salvation without baptism after Jesus' testament went into effect?

If you think I am in error, please point out the scriptures that will help lead me in the right direction.

FC

 

[Florida College]

Chuck Slotter,

I did not try to ignore Acts 10:43. The passage plainly says "whoever believes in Him will receive remission of sins" (NKJV). What we disagree about is what it means to believe in the Lord. You would like for the passage to read BELIEVE ONLY, but it doesn't! If the word ONLY is implied in this verse, then the other N.T. scriptures will harmonize with that understanding. But they don't! Repentance is also commanded - Lk. 13:3,5; Acts 2:38 & 17:30. Confessing Jesus is also commanded - Matt.10:32-33; note Acts 8:37. And whether you like it or not, baptism is commanded - Acts 2:38, 10:48;& 22:16.
The doctrine of "faith only" focuses on only one requirement of salvation, while ignoring the other commands. Although I find plenty of scriptures that stress the necessity of faith for salvation, I can find none that say that salvation comes by faith ALONE or by faith ONLY. Perhaps, you would be kind enough to point out the passage??? Chuck, if you claim the remission of sins without obeying all the commands necessary for salvation, I strongly encourage you to consider 1 Cor.13:5.

Cornelius and his household did receive the Holy Spirit baptism before they were baptised into Christ.
To you that proves that they were already saved. The context shows that the Holy Spirit baptism was given to the Gentiles to show God's acceptance of them. If, and I say if, the scriptures here were teaching that faith only is required for salvation, then that doctrine would harmonize with scripture. It doesn't!

Now, to address your point about the Spirit of God not indwelling unsaved people. I agree. But where does Acts 10 say that the indwelling of the Spirit is what is under consideration? It doesn't. What it does say is that the Spirit came upon the Gentiles just as it did on the apostles in Acts 2 (Acts 10:47b). That is Holy Spirit baptism, not the indwelling of the spirit!

Let me say this plainly. Salvation is by grace. Salvation is also by faith. Salvation is also by obedience - Heb. 5:8-9.

You accuse me of twisting scripture, being irrational, and not willing to look at the facts. Here is one fact that I have not overlooked: "After being a Christian for 22 years or so, I've learned not to trust people. I want to take the Bible apart and do all of the math myself." Do you recognize this quote? It is yours - - from the Bible study on John @ the Christian Defense website. Did you really take the bible apart and do all the math when you studied the word "eis" in Acts 2:38? Remember . . . you know, when you said it means "because" in Matt. 12:41? As you were extracting "because" from Matt. 12:41 and trying to insert it into Acts 2:38, did the thought ever occur to you that you should make sure that you were using the same Greek word? You should have checked, but you didn't. Instead, you grabbed the Greek word "hoti", which is a totally different word - - with a different meaning!! Now, who's twisting scripture?

Make I make a suggestion? Probably not, but I will anyway. When you take the bible apart, make sure that you get all the right parts back in the right places.

Chuck,
If twisting scripture, being irrational, and not willing to look at the facts means that I have to ignore the context of scriptures, insert words that are not in the text, and transfer words from one text to another that have totally different meantings; then I can live (and die) with that.

FC

 

[Florida College]

A Brethren IN Christ,

Does Jn.1:12 mean that we must believe in the Lord?
Do we also need to repent? See Luke 13:3,5.
Do we also need to confess Jesus? See Matt. 10:32-33.
Do we also need to be baptized? See Mark 16:16.

FC

 

[Florida College]

Galadriel,

I'm sorry, I realize that I didn't fully understand the point you were making in your previous posting. I think you were referring to the end of the Old Testament with the book of Malachi, and the beginning of the New Testament with the book of Matthew. That is correct . . . at least that is the way the Testaments are arranged. The New Testament introduces us quickly to Jesus Christ - - the Messiah promised to descend from David . . . and the descendant from Abraham that would be a blessing to all nations.

Actually, to understand when the Law of Moses (law given to the Israelite nation during Old Testament times) ended, that is when passages like Hebrews 9:16-17 and Colossians 2:14 must be considered. I am not trying to ignore the thief on the cross, but both of these passages must be considered to understand when the Law of Moses ended and the Law of Christ began.

I hope this helps.

FC

 

[Florida College]

Chuck Slotter,

I need to clarify my thoughts on the last paragraph of the previous post.

It read:
If twisting scripture, being irrational, and not willing to look at the facts means that I have to ignore the context of scriptures, insert words that are not in the text, and transfer words from one text to another that have totally different meanings; then I can live (and die) with that.

A better wording would be:
You have charged me with twisting scripture, being irrational, and not willing to look at the facts. Do you prefer that I use your study methods:
* ignoring the context of scriptures,
* inserting words that are not in the text,
*and transferring words from one text to another that have totally different meanings? If so, we will never be in agreement . . . and if that is "your final answer," then I can live (and die) with that.

Galatians 4:16

FC

 

[Serapha]

About the theif on the cross, I notice that you try to make it Christ's death was the dividing line, so the theif on the cross doesn't count. But this is not true, the dividing line of OT and NT is with the coming of John the Baptist (Luke 16:16).

While John the Baptist might be written about in the New Testament Scriptures, he is an "Old Testament" prophet.

By that, I mean also, Old Testament prophets foretell, New Testament prophet forthtell.


~malaka~

 

[Serapha]

Malaka,



....


Ultimately, whatever one decides about the thief on the cross - - whether he as baptized or not - - must be harmonized with all other scriptures. That is what I am listening for - - I've yet to hear anyone harmonize salvation by "faith only" with Acts 2:38;22:16, or I Peter 3:20-21 (just to mention a few scriptures).

FC

Mercy, are you saying that baptismal regeneration is the only way??????


That doesn't align with biblical teachings.



Are you implying that if one is not baptized, then they don't enter heaven aka the presence of God?

There are a ton of people who are going to be in heaven (or who are already in the presence of God) that haven't been baptized (with water)....

~malaka~

 

[Serapha]

Beyond a shadow of a doubt, Jesus taught that baptism was necessary for salvation - Mk. 16:16.
If you think I am in error, please point out the scriptures that will help lead me in the right direction.

FC

The passage you cited doesn't say that those who are not baptized shall be ******, it says that tthose who do not believe will be ******.

And, let's get down to the brass tacks on the book of Mark. Since there are nine endings to the book of Mark and since the long version which you have drawn from was not written by Mark.... it would be better not to base one's salvation on those particular passages when not all of the information aligns with other teachings of the Bible. ...


I'm not handling snakes and drinking poison as a test of my faith... nor am I misinterpreting the passage of Mark 16:16. The words "not believe" are not attributable to Mark as the author; therefore, it is better not to use that passage as a measuring stick of salvation.



~malaka~

 

[Serapha]

I am sorry, on my previous posting... the 'puter edited the words from the passage out as profanity... The reference is to Mark 16:16 and you will have to read it for the meaning of my last posting...

~malaka~

 

[Serapha]

Howdy Malaka! Welcome to the thread ! You've made some interesting points about crucifixion, thank you for the time you spent on sharing that information with us.


....


A process is a series of actions, operations or a sequence of steps producing an end. If we were to take out one of the steps, actions or operations, then we no longer have that same series or sequence. In the same way, if we remove something from the process of salvation, we no longer have the same process that God has given us. So in your claim that baptism is part of the "salvation process" you have claimed that baptism is a necessary part of that process.

I pray that I have been of some help to you in your study of this topic thus far. I would ask that you please go through and read some of the scriptures regarding what we are talking about: Mark 16:16, Matthew 28:19, Acts 2:38, Acts 22:16, 1 Peter 3:21.

I look forward to hearing back from you .

Thank you, aggie03, for putting words in my mouth, but these words would not pass over my lips (or keyboard)...


"So in your claim that baptism is part of the "salvation process" you have claimed that baptism is a necessary part of that process."


wrong. I didn't say that and the scriptures don't say that. If baptism were a requirement, then every aborted baby would be in hell. I don't believe that for one minute. Nor do I believe that young children or mental incapacitated adults that die without a profession of faith are in hell.


Baptistism is a ritual sign for man... an outward symbol of an inward faith.


Then you say.... (not I)....

"A process is a series of actions, operations or a sequence of steps producing an end. If we were to take out one of the steps, actions or operations, then we no longer have that same series or sequence. In the same way, if we remove something from the process of salvation, we no longer have the same process that God has given us."


I would reply:

God didn't give us the exact sequence, did He? Some people receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit before the baptism of water. And exactly what is the sequence of steps???? where does the profession of faith come in? If someone is "mute" and can't make a public profession of faith, are the forever condemned?



By your definition... yes... they would never be able to be redeemed.


God skips baptism for those who are redeemed by the invisible qualities of God in Romans Chapter 1 and 2. Explain that one to me.


~malaka~

 

[aggie03]

Mercy, are you saying that baptismal regeneration is the only way??????

No, the only way, the only truth, and the only life if through Christ. Christ has also th way: hear, believe, repent, confess and be baptized for the remission of sins - this is way, not baptism alone.

That doesn't align with biblical teachings.

You say this, but you provide no support for it. There are passages in the Bible that clearly indicate baptism is to be for the remission of sins and that it is part of and necessary for our salvation (Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16, Acts 22:16, 1 Peter 3:21, Colossians 2:12, just to name a few)

Are you implying that if one is not baptized, then they don't enter heaven aka the presence of God?

The Scriptures have laid out the conditions by which we might receive our salvation. Baptism is one of those conditions. The sum of God's word teaches that baptism is necessary for our salvation. This is all that I can tell you. To try and tell you whether a particular person will go to heaven or not is not my place, that is reserved for God and God alone. I can show you what God has said is necessary for your salvation though...

There are a ton of people who are going to be in heaven (or who are already in the presence of God) that haven't been baptized (with water)....

~malaka~

How can you possibly know this? You are not God and I am not God - and to say that a particular person is going to be in heaven is not our place. You are passing judgment where the right to judge is reserved for God and God alone.

 

[Serapha]

How can you possibly know this? You are not God and I am not God - and to say that a particular person is going to be in heaven is not our place. You are passing judgment where the right to judge is reserved for God and God alone.

Answer this question according to the Scriptures.


What happens to babies when they die?


and "I don't know" won't work for someone who is posting that baptism is a requirement to make heaven.

~malaka~

 

[CrossMovement]

Answer this question according to the Scriptures.


What happens to babies when they die?


and "I don't know" won't work for someone who is posting that baptism is a requirement to make heaven.

~malaka~

Only God know , not the man remember that (No man shall change something because THEY think it should be better) , We must trust him. He is good and Loving so ... Make your own conclusion , I don't want to go to far with this because i'm not God but God is Good so why would he not let baby to go to heaven if they don't have the age of reasoning. (Only god know but , like I say he is good and loving)

In the time of Jesus , did Jesus was baptize when he was baby because people were scared of wheter he could die as a Baby ??

Trust him.

 

[Serapha]

Only God know , not the man remember that (No man shall change something because THEY think it should be better) , We must trust him. He is good and Loving so ... Make your own conclusion , I don't want to go to far with this because i'm not God but God is Good so why would he not let baby to go to heaven if they don't have the age of reasoning. (Only god know but , like I say he is good and loving)

In the time of Jesus , did Jesus was baptize when he was baby because people were scared of wheter he could die as a Baby ??

Trust him.

Do you know that you are saved? If so, how do you know?


~malaka~