Baptism

[Melethiel]

doesn't your church consider a fetus alive? i thought they did.

Even more a reason to reject the "waters of birth" argument - are you going to claim that unborn children aren't saved?

 

[Meshavrischika]

See, there is nothing here that says "water is blood". What I said is that water baptism is where the blood of Christ washes away sin.

then you equate the water to the blood, which it's not. it's very simple

 

[jmacvols]

Water Baptism is for the remission of sins. Holy Spirit baptism is where we get our cirucmcised heart. This is why John said I baptize with water but there is one that comes after me whos sandals I am not worhthy of that will baptized you in the Holy Spirit and fire. So if you do not have the Holy Spirits baptism then you have not the Spirit of Christ in you.. If one does not have the Holy Spirit baptism then no amount of water baptism will save you.

You say water baptism is for the remission of sins, remission of sins is equal to being saved, therefore water baptism saves, and Peter said as much, 1 Pet 3:21. Above you mention water baptism and Holy Spirit baptism. By the time Paul wrote the Ephesian epistle there was just one baptism, Eph 4:5, that one baptism being in effect today is water baptism in the name of the Lord for remission of sins. Baptism with the Holy Spirit is an obsolete baptism.

 

[Meshavrischika]

Right...and do you still refuse to understand the historic position? We hold that it is GOD doing the baptizing. He works through the water and the hand of the pastor, but the ultimate act is God's. If you read through Scripture in it's entirety, God has always worked through material means - he commanded Namaan to wash in the river, he put mud on the blind man's eyes, etc. I see no indication in the Scripture that God suddenly changed his modus operandi and started working in a vague emotional manner. To say otherwise is Gnosticism.

so are you Gnostic to say he suddenly made up baptism and it was not from mikvah which had been ordered by him in the past in YOUR bible? huh.

 

[jmacvols]

then you equate the water to the blood, which it's not. it's very simple

No I did not, you need to read what I said again.

 

[Meshavrischika]

Even more a reason to reject the "waters of birth" argument - are you going to claim that unborn children aren't saved?

no, I'm just saying your water saves argumet is silly and misguided. water was used from the beginning of time for ritual impurity while sacrifice and prayer offered for sin... now all of a sudden he changes his mind and because you believe it, makes water for sin and sacrifice for sin which is somewhat redundant. it's just skewed IMO.

 

[Melethiel]

so are you Gnostic to say he suddenly made up baptism and it was not from mikvah which had been ordered by him in the past in YOUR bible? huh.

1) Where did I say he "suddenly made up baptism"? You may think I'm a clueless, tradition-blinded teenager, but I'm quite aware of the Jewish rites, thank you. Answer me this: if children were included in the Old Covenant, why are they, according to you, suddenly excluded from the New?
2) Look up Gnosticism...if you had any clue what it was, you would understand why this post makes absolutely no sense.

 

[jmacvols]

Mat 3:11 "As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

John was simply announcing these baptisms, he did not promise them to anyone in his audience.

 

[Meshavrischika]

You say water baptism is for the remission of sins, remission of sins is equal to being saved, therefore water baptism saves, and Peter said as much, 1 Pet 3:21. Above you mention water baptism and Holy Spirit baptism. By the time Paul wrote the Ephesian epistle there was just one baptism, Eph 4:5, that one baptism being in effect today is water baptism in the name of the Lord for remission of sins. Baptism with the Holy Spirit is an obsolete baptism.[/quote]
you're kidding right

 

[Melethiel]

no, I'm just saying your water saves argumet is silly and misguided. water was used from the beginning of time for ritual impurity while sacrifice and prayer offered for sin... now all of a sudden he changes his mind and because you believe it, makes water for sin and sacrifice for sin which is somewhat redundant. it's just skewed IMO.

I'm just following Scripture, not man's logic.
"Repent and be baptized."
"Baptism now saves you."
"One Lord, one faith, one baptism."
"born of water and the Spirit."

 

[MamaZ]

You say water baptism is for the remission of sins, remission of sins is equal to being saved, therefore water baptism saves, and Peter said as much, 1 Pet 3:21. Above you mention water baptism and Holy Spirit baptism. By the time Paul wrote the Ephesian epistle there was just one baptism, Eph 4:5, that one baptism being in effect today is water baptism in the name of the Lord for remission of sins. Baptism with the Holy Spirit is an obsolete baptism.

If you do not believe in Christ you are condemned.. Water baptism is a declaration of Yes I believe in Christ.. Water baptism is not the saving power. Christ is. The Baptism of the Holy Spirit is not oboslete for this is where we are Joined with Christ in the Spirit.

 

[Meshavrischika]

1) Where did I say he "suddenly made up baptism"? You may think I'm a clueless, tradition-blinded teenager, but I'm quite aware of the Jewish rites, thank you. Answer me this: if children were included in the Old Covenant, why are they, according to you, suddenly excluded from the New?
2) Look up Gnosticism...if you had any clue what it was, you would understand why this post makes absolutely no sense.

1. they weren't included in the old covenant and didn't HAVE to keep mitzvot (the law)
2. if we are gnostic for what we said, you are equally gnostic (and I know that gnostic is)

baptism the way you practice it is not biblical. this was NEVER for the removal of sin. that is NOT what mikvah is about and never has been about. therefore, either you made it up (baptism) or are misrepresenting what God previously commanded. pick.

 

[MamaZ]

John was simply announcing these baptisms, he did not promise them to anyone in his audience.

Oh brother.. Well If ye have not the Spirit of Christ in you then ye are none of His..

 

[Melethiel]

no, I'm just saying your water saves argumet is silly and misguided. water was used from the beginning of time for ritual impurity while sacrifice and prayer offered for sin... now all of a sudden he changes his mind and because you believe it, makes water for sin and sacrifice for sin which is somewhat redundant. it's just skewed IMO.

Yet more strawmen of the historic doctrine...would you bother even researching before condemning? There is not "water for sin and sacrifice for sin...somewhat redundant." The water is where the sacrifice is applied. Here, maybe this can explain better:

[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]3] In the first place, we must above all things know well the words upon which Baptism is founded, and to which everything refers that is to be said on the subject, namely, where the Lord Christ speaks in Matthew 28, 19: [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]4] Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]Likewise in St. Mark 16, 16: 5] He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]6] In these words you must note, in the first place, that here stand God's commandment and institution, lest we doubt that Baptism is divine, not devised nor invented by men. For as truly as I can say, No man has spun the Ten Commandments, the Creed, and the Lord's Prayer out of his head, but they are revealed and given by God Himself, so also I can boast that Baptism is no human trifle, but instituted by God Himself, moreover, that it is most solemnly and strictly commanded that we must be baptized or we cannot be saved, lest any one regard it as a trifling matter, like putting on a new red coat. 7] For it is of the greatest importance that we esteem Baptism 8] excellent, glorious, and exalted, for which we contend and fight chiefly, because the world is now so full of sects clamoring that Baptism is an external thing, and that external things are of no benefit. But let it be ever so much an external thing, here stand God's Word and command which institute, establish, and confirm Baptism. But what God institutes and commands cannot be a vain, but must be a most precious thing, though in appearance it were of less value than a straw. 9] If hitherto people could consider it a great thing when the Pope with his letters and bulls dispensed indulgences and confirmed altars and churches, solely because of the letters and seals, we ought to esteem Baptism much more highly and more precious, because God has commanded it, and, besides, it is performed in His name. For these are the words, Go ye, baptize; however, not in your name, but in the name of God. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]10] For to be baptized in the name of God is to be baptized not by men, but by God Himself. Therefore, although it is performed by human hands, it is nevertheless truly God's own work. From this fact every one may himself readily infer that it is a far higher work than any work performed by a man or a saint. For what work greater than the work of God can we do?
[/FONT]


[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]14] From this now learn a proper understanding of the subject, and how to answer the question what Baptism is, namely thus, that it is not mere ordinary water, but water comprehended in God's Word and command, and sanctified thereby, so that it is nothing else than a divine water; not that the water in itself is nobler than other water, but that God's Word and command are added. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]15] Therefore it is pure wickedness and blasphemy of the devil that now our new spirits, to mock at Baptism, omit from it God's Word and institution, and look upon it in no other way than as water which is taken from the well, and then blather and say: How is a handful of water to help the soul? 16] Aye, my friend, who does not know that water is water if tearing things asunder is what we are after? But how dare you thus interfere with God's order, and tear away the most precious treasure with which God has connected and enclosed it, and which He will not have separated? For the kernel in the water is God's Word or command and the name of God, which is a treasure greater and nobler than heaven and earth. [/FONT]
[FONT=Arial, Helvetica, sans-serif]17] Comprehend the difference, then, that Baptism is quite another thing than all other water; not on account of the natural quality but because something more noble is here added; for God Himself stakes His honor, His power and might on it. Therefore it is not only natural water, but a divine, heavenly, holy, and blessed water, and in whatever other terms we can praise it,—all on account of the Word, which is a heavenly, holy Word, that no one can sufficiently extol, for it has, and is able to do, all that God is and can do [since it has all the virtue and power of God comprised in it]. 18] Hence also it derives its essence as a Sacrament, as St. Augustine also taught: Accedat verbum ad elementum et fit sacramentum. That is, when the Word is joined to the element or natural substance, it becomes a Sacrament, that is, a holy and divine matter and sign.

[/FONT]


Read the rest here: http://www.bookofconcord.com/largecatechism/6_baptism.html

 

[jmacvols]

The baptism of water does not save. It is having complete faith in Christ and What he has accomplished on the cross that saves. When one believes solely on Christ for salvation a beautiful new birth happens inside the believer. Christ comes to reside in this persons heart. This is the saving power of Jesus. The water baptism is from the OT also. It was a cleansing ritual. So when John was baptizing it was not uncommon. What was uncommon was that He was telling Jewish people they needed to repent and be baptized.

Here you say "The baptism of water does not save" yet back in post #143 you said "water baptism is for the remisson of sins" and remission of sins is equal to being saved, so you're saying in #143 water baptism does save.

 

[Thekla]

1. they weren't included in the old covenant and didn't HAVE to keep mitzvot (the law)
2. if we are gnostic for what we said, you are equally gnostic (and I know that gnostic is)

baptism the way you practice it is not biblical. this was NEVER for the removal of sin. that is NOT what mikvah is about and never has been about. therefore, either you made it up (baptism) or are misrepresenting what God previously commanded. pick.

Acts 19:1-7:

"While Apollos was in Corinth, Paul passed through the interior of the country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples to whom he put the question: 'Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you became believers?' They answered, 'We have not so much as heard that there is a Holy Spirit.' 'Well, how were you baptized?' he persisted. They replied, 'With the baptism of John.' Paul then explained, 'John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He used to tell the people about the one who would come after him in whom they were to believe--that is, Jesus.' When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. As Paul laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came down on them and they began to speak in tongues and to utter prophecies. There were in the company about twelve men in all."​

 

[Meshavrischika]

I'm just following Scripture, not man's logic.
"Repent and be baptized."
"Baptism now saves you."
"One Lord, one faith, one baptism."
"born of water and the Spirit."

Immersion as part of the installation/consecration ceremony of the Kohanim/priests was to attain a higher degree of holiness ... in essence to show a change of status.
(we are priests - all of us)
born of WATER (not baptism) and of Spirit. Again, funny he doesn't say mikvah or baptizmo. Also the term "born again" implies a first birth, not a concurrent birth... thus "water" not being "baptism"
one baptism = by the HOLY SPIRIT
baptism saves = HOLY SPIRIT

 

[Meshavrischika]

As Paul laid his hands on them, the Holy Spirit came down on them and they began to speak in tongues and to utter prophecies.

implies water baptism and Spirit baptism DO NOT HAPPEN CONCURRANTLY.

 

[MamaZ]

Here you say "The baptism of water does not save" yet back in post #143 you said "water baptism is for the remisson of sins" and remission of sins is equal to being saved, so you're saying in #143 water baptism does save.

Water will not wash your sin away... The blood of Jesus washes your sin away. For the remission of sin is as it states. We repent..We turn and believe in Christ.. Then we are baptized.. Water is not the saving power.. Christ and His Shed blood is the saving power..
Many of man have thought they have repented and been baptized. But if one has not fully believed in Christ no matter how many times a person gets baptized will not save them. It will only get them wet.

 

[Thekla]

Immersion as part of the installation/consecration ceremony of the Kohanim/priests was to attain a higher degree of holiness ... in essence to show a change of status.
(we are priests - all of us)
born of WATER (not baptism) and of Spirit. Again, funny he doesn't say mikvah or baptizmo. Also the term "born again" implies a first birth, not a concurrent birth... thus "water" not being "baptism"
one baptism = by the HOLY SPIRIT
baptism saves = HOLY SPIRIT

the verse doesn't say "born again", it says "born from above"