How can baptism be required for salvation?

[Eloy Craft]

Infant baptism makes no sense to me.

That is because you don't understand Baptism.

Nor to me, either.

An unbiased reading with a mind open to the possibility that what was always believed about Baptism before what you believe now was true and still iS true.
Not all Churchmen before 1500 were depraved virtue signalers that built a church to be a tool for power and selfish gain.

consider it along the likes of virtue signaling and a way for the church doing it to be seen as doing something. I don't mind it at all though as the intent is good behind it as long as people realize that it does nothing to save the kids and sometimes they get confused by it thinking they don't need to accept Christ.

Well so much for your virtue signaling. Because we Baptize infants for their salvation. We accept the fact that the Gospel doesn't provide another means to remove the sin that makes all of us children of wrath who deserve hell.
The truth of our condition is lost to you having invented all sorts of beliefs about heaven that console the mind but are not beliefs that come from God.

 

[DerSchweik]

Well, forget for a moment the notion of salvation and take it out of the equation - Jesus DID command we be baptized (Mk 16:16, Mt 28:18-20). Are you suggesting God might command something of His people that are too difficult for them?

Wouldn't that contradict Jeremiah 32:17 “Behold, I am the Lord, the God of all flesh; is anything too difficult for Me?”

Although all of God's commands are possible, not all apply to all people. An obvious command is that of circumcision. It is impossible to circumcise a girl. Likewise, it is quite possible to circumcise Christian men, but the commandment regarding circumcision was set aside at the Jerusalem council in Acts 15, along with most of the dietary law for Gentiles.

Actually, I was responding to the objection [to Christian baptism] that Soph raised re it not being required for salvation - on the basis of his hypothetical that one might not be able to find water:

Can't find water - ergo, can't be baptized - ergo, baptism cannot be part of salvation.

I've heard this objection before and it simply doesn't hold water (no pun intended). It is in fact a rather obvious canard, or excuse not to believe in or obey the command. By way of example, the story of the Ethiopian eunuch takes place on a desert road (Acts 8:26).

God knows people's hearts, who will respond to the gospel message and who won't, and even when they will respond. Given nothing is too difficult for God (Jer 32:17), and given it's God who draws men to Him (Jn 6:44), it stands to reason He won't call someone [to baptism/salvation] and not provide water for them too.

"As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch said, “Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?”" (Acts 8:36)

 

[DerSchweik]

The Gospel of Grace was still not revealed, Peter was set up with this group of gentiles for a purpose and that was to help cement Paul as an apostle. If Peter had not had this happen to him Paul would have had an endless battle with Jews demanding gentiles be put under the Law.
Again Peter was not God chosen apostle to the Gentiles, his baptizing them means nothing for a precedent in that he didn't know any better it was habitual. Once you receive the Holy Spirit, what does baptism do? Can an unsaved person receive the Holy Spirit? After you receive the Holy Spirit if you don't get baptized does he leave you for good and you end up losing your salvation? It makes no logical sense other than a ceremonial inclusion into the group act. As baptism for Jesus was into the priesthood, I contend it is a worthy ceremony for us as being priests but logic would state if it were required for salvation people who have no access to water or die in a hospital bed after accepting Jesus would have wasted their time altogether.
Again... the Holy Spirit falling on them was the witness to this "granting" bit. Had not the Holy Spirit fallen on them what do you think Peter would have thought and said about them? Likely he would have not thought what he did and concluded nothing special about these people. Did the Holy Spirit wait till after baptism to fall on them? No as they were already saved prior to it.
As do most churches. Do they kick you out and reject you as a believer and not call you a Christian if you aren't baptised? No. Some churches require proof of baptism others don't
I don't see them claiming these people are unsaved. Why would you quarrel over a flock of unbelievers, no it was a sort of idea of legitimacy in that some of them thought they were better than others because of baptism which to me seems like baptism doesn't save you.

If baptism is essentially for salvation then I'm lost and shouldn't be speaking in tongues and my prayers for other should be of no effect.

No offense Soph, but very little of this makes any sense at all - it sounds like some very convoluted doctrine... none of which I've ever read in my bible.

Let me ask you this question - when do we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit?

Or more specifically, when does the BIBLE say we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit?

 

[Eloy Craft]

Once you receive the Holy Spirit, what does baptism do? Can an unsaved person receive the Holy Spirit? After you receive the Holy Spirit if you don't get baptized does he leave you for good and you end up losing your salvation? It

The Holy Spirit commanded John to Baptize with water. Its a Divine Tradition. If one has received the Holy Spirit one will desire Baptism by water knowing they have received a special grace that God requires.
If one teaches that a Sacrament the Spirit they themselves have received has given for our salvation is no longer necessary, no longer necessary by their own interpretation of what happened to them, as if the Holy Spirit is using them to correct the entire Church, means, there is an obstruction to the gifts God wants to give them or it isn't the action of the Holy Spirit they are experiencing.

 

[bbbbbbb]

False. Baptism replaced circumcision, as with circumcision the faith of the parents was enough. The Bible makes it clear that Jesus wanted the children to come to Him.

If baptism actually replaced circumcision why was it not at all discussed at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15? Circumcision was the primary topic of discussion and the conclusion was that Gentiles do not need to be circumcised, not that Gentile males need to be baptized instead of being circumcised. The fact is that circumcision was performed only on males and if baptism actually replaced circumcision then females would not be baptized.

The fact that Jesus wanted the children to come to him has nothing whatsoever to do with baptism. Did Jesus and/or His disciples baptize the children who came to Him? Not at all.

 

[bbbbbbb]

The Holy Spirit commanded John to Baptize with water. Its a Divine Tradition. If one has received the Holy Spirit one will desire Baptism by water knowing they have received a special grace that God requires.
If one teaches that a Sacrament the Spirit they themselves have received has given for our salvation is no longer necessary, no longer necessary by their own interpretation of what happened to them, as if the Holy Spirit is using them to correct the entire Church, means, there is an obstruction to the gifts God wants to give them or it isn't the action of the Holy Spirit they are experiencing.

Do you believe that John's baptism was identical to Christian baptism or to the various baptisms (mikveh) within Judaism, which are practiced to this day?

 

[Sophrosyne]

The Holy Spirit commanded John to Baptize with water. Its a Divine Tradition. If one has received the Holy Spirit one will desire Baptism by water knowing they have received a special grace that God requires.
If one teaches that a Sacrament the Spirit they themselves have received has given for our salvation is no longer necessary, no longer necessary by their own interpretation of what happened to them, as if the Holy Spirit is using them to correct the entire Church, means, there is an obstruction to the gifts God wants to give them or it isn't the action of the Holy Spirit they are experiencing.

I'm sorry but this makes no sense to me. Are you saying that I don't have the Holy Spirit since if I truly did I would have some sort of burning desire to be baptized?

 

[Sophrosyne]

No offense Soph, but very little of this makes any sense at all - it sounds like some very convoluted doctrine... none of which I've ever read in my bible.

Let me ask you this question - when do we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit?

Or more specifically, when does the BIBLE say we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit?

If it doesn't make sense then no sense in further discussion.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Do you believe that John's baptism was identical to Christian baptism or to the various baptisms (mikveh) within Judaism, which are practiced to this day?

Someone that gets what I'm saying. I contend that there are many water baptisms, and many Holy Spirit baptisms and they all have their reasons and outcomes and I don't see a firm standard that equates water baptism as a mechanism for salvation. I can relate to a baptism of the Holy Spirit as part of salvation as the Bible doesn't tell us water saves, it does say God saves though.

 

[bbbbbbb]

Someone that gets what I'm saying. I contend that there are many water baptisms, and many Holy Spirit baptisms and they all have their reasons and outcomes and I don't see a firm standard that equates water baptism as a mechanism for salvation. I can relate to a baptism of the Holy Spirit as part of salvation as the Bible doesn't tell us water saves, it does say God saves though.

Whew! I am glad that someone else here is on the same page. Thank you.

 

[Sophrosyne]

Whew! I am glad that someone else here is on the same page. Thank you.

I've had run ins with Baptists on this topic and have given it some thought but I'm nowhere near an apologist on the subject. I do take Paul to heart about being saved by Grace and a teacher I like to listen to says "faith + nothing". Adding anything to salvation other than a "yes" and change of heart, and that can include repenting makes your salvation dependent on that work, and our works aren't perfect but salvation is.

 

[Eloy Craft]

Do you believe that John's baptism was identical to Christian baptism or to the various baptisms (mikveh) within Judaism, which are practiced to this day?

No. John's Baptism is united to Christian Baptism. It does for us today what it did for John's diciples in his day. It provides righteousness to resist the temptations that Jesus didn't suffer. Jesus wasn't burdened by a body that inherited death. Flesh thar serves a law that is unnatural to human life. John was conceived in sin like us all but was cleansed in the womb. He preserved His innocence by living a life in the desert resisting temptation through fasting and prayer. That is the righteousness Jesus didn't experience Himself. Until He received John's Baptism. The Holy Spirit drove Jesus into the desert to fast pray and be tempted by Satan. Jesus entered into John's righteous life of victory resisting temptation to sin and the rebellion of the flesh. Jesus was Baptized by John to include righteousness only a life of a sinner who never sinned after his baptism in the womb could offer. A righteousness we need to make a straight way to the Lord. To prepare our soul to receive the Holy Spirit.

 

[bbbbbbb]

No. John's Baptism is united to Christian Baptism. It does for us today what it did for John's diciples in his day. It provides righteousness to resist the temptations that Jesus didn't suffer. Jesus wasn't burdened by a body that inherited death. Flesh thar serves a law that is unnatural to human life. John was conceived in sin like us all but was cleansed in the womb. He preserved His innocence by living a life in the desert resisting temptation through fasting and prayer. That is the righteousness Jesus didn't experience Himself. Until He received John's Baptism. The Holy Spirit drove Jesus into the desert to fast pray and be tempted by Satan. Jesus entered into John's righteous life of victory resisting temptation to sin and the rebellion of the flesh. Jesus was Baptized by John to include righteousness only a life of a sinner who never sinned after his baptism in the womb could offer. A righteousness we need to make a straight way to the Lord. To prepare our soul to receive the Holy Spirit.

Do you believe it is possible to receive the Holy Spirit without being baptized?

 

[Eloy Craft]

Do you believe it is possible to receive the Holy Spirit without being baptized?

Yes and no. Baptism is a means of cleansing sin and experience freedom from the shame and guilt that obstructs Grace. The Holy Spirit is able to act on souls prepared by other means. Roman centurions seemed to live a rule of life that diciplined them in a way that enabled them to co-operate with Grace in a special way. There are a few centurions in the Gospels who demonstrated faith that impressed Jesus. I need to ask. Was Cornelius a Centurion? The Samaritan's experienced cleansing of sin by Jesus' Words. They didn't seem to have the expectations of worldly status that blinded the Jews. The Holy Spirit did something special with them ? The prerequisite condition is the removal of sin that isolates us from all including ourselves and compels us to hide from God and prefer the dark. The sin unto death obstructs the Spirit but sin that doesn't cause death isn't good but doesn't do what Adam's sin did. Its sin that is not the manner of Adam's sin. Paul taught about it.

Baptism is how life that exists at a higher level reaches down and lifts us up. But it is always entering a death. Jesus Was Baptized into His Divine life by dying to His perfect life on earth. He didn't need to die as we do. But even perfect life experiences suffering in preparation for a higher perfection God wants for us.
Recall when God said about Adam's life in Paradise. " It's not good that the man is alone. The absence of good is the definition of evil. Evil in Paradise.

Anyway, Baptism is the means God provides for us to remove sin and it's the way we need so we know with certainty that God has done what the rite signifies
If we received Him some other way we need a sign to be certain that it was Him that we experienced.

 

[Valletta]

If baptism actually replaced circumcision why was it not at all discussed at the Jerusalem Council in Acts 15? Circumcision was the primary topic of discussion and the conclusion was that Gentiles do not need to be circumcised, not that Gentile males need to be baptized instead of being circumcised. The fact is that circumcision was performed only on males and if baptism actually replaced circumcision then females would not be baptized.

The fact that Jesus wanted the children to come to him has nothing whatsoever to do with baptism. Did Jesus and/or His disciples baptize the children who came to Him? Not at all.

Why was the faith of the parents enough to circumcise infants?

 

[DerSchweik]

Someone that gets what I'm saying. I contend that there are many water baptisms, and many Holy Spirit baptisms and they all have their reasons and outcomes and I don't see a firm standard that equates water baptism as a mechanism for salvation. I can relate to a baptism of the Holy Spirit as part of salvation as the Bible doesn't tell us water saves, it does say God saves though.

From Psalm 119:160 we understand:
The sum of Your word is truth, And every one of Your righteous ordinances is everlasting.

So doesn't the stance you're sharing ignore some very obvious verses to the contrary? For instance:

But when the kindness of God our Savior and His love for mankind appeared, He saved us, not on the basis of deeds which we have done in righteousness, but according to His mercy, by the washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, whom He poured out upon us richly through Jesus Christ our Savior, so that being justified by His grace we would be made heirs according to the hope of eternal life. (Titus 3:5ff). Or:

“Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (Jn 3:5)

Or of the examples we've been given of people actually being converted in the New Testament:

Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning from this Scripture he preached Jesus to him. As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch said, “Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?” (Acts 8:35f) What did Philip preach to the eunuch regarding Jesus if not the inclusion of water baptism?

A woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple fabrics, a worshiper of God, was listening; and the Lord opened her heart to respond to the things spoken by Paul. And when she and her household had been baptized, she urged us, saying, “If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into my house and stay.” (Acts 16:14f) What "things" did Paul share with Lydia and her household if not the inclusion of water baptism? And after being baptized, why would she respond with "if you have judged me faithful..."?

Or the Philippian jailer at the end of Acts 16:
“Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.” And they spoke the word of the Lord to him together with all who were in his house. And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household. And he brought them into his house and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, having believed in God with his whole household. (Acts 16:30ff) Isn't it possible for baptism to be an act of faith, an act of obedience to His word, and therefore part of the salvation message?

There are more examples, some that mention baptism and some that don't. Good students of the bible recognize the importance of looking at all verses on a subject, not just picking out or focusing on a few. Moreover, good students realize baptism in and of itself is not salvific (as you said, it's God who saves); but God did command it too so isn't it possible that part of His saving us involves that which He's commanded of us? And what is faith, if not obedience to Him? Demons believed in Jesus and knew exactly who He was from the outset. What makes the belief of those who believed above different from the demons' belief, if not obedience?

 

[Eloy Craft]

I'm sorry but this makes no sense to me. Are you saying that I don't have the Holy Spirit since if I truly did I would have some sort of burning desire to be baptized?

How do you distinguish the Holy Spirit from your own or an evil spirit?
To teach that Baptism is unnecessary isn't something that the Person who gave it and who is united to us by it would inspired.

 

[Sophrosyne]

How do you distinguish the Holy Spirit from your own or an evil spirit?
To teach that Baptism is unnecessary isn't something that the Person who gave it and who is united to us by it would inspired.

How do you distinguish that baptism is mandatory to salvation?
we have two scenarios here:
1)Those who are NOT baptized (water) cannot be saved... regardless of confession of faith in God/Jesus and agreement with Paul's Gospel of Grace
2)People can be saved without ever being baptised.
with an alternative option
3)People are in limbo of their salvation after confession/acceptance until they are wetted down. If someone accept Christ in a battle and a bullet hits them killing them instantly it voids their faith in God entirely.

Now I believe that God can make exceptions to the rule but we cannot and should not teach/preach or consider that he will do such to give someone an option to reject the Gospel itself.

All the desires to have baptism mandatory flies in the face of logic of those saved without it and those saved and THEN baptized afterwards it. Most folks I have seen are baptized weeks even months after accepting Jesus, would you have those people NOT considered Christian until they take their watery dip using all the right words during it?
I don't see any Churches these days baptizing people immediately after accepting Christ at all, which means they consider them saved already.

No scriptural argument can void these logical assertions in my mind. Now I do not say don't get baptized, that it is not a good thing to do, I just say tying the ritual to ones salvation isn't in the Bible. I would lean towards thinking that baptism is into the "priesthood" just like in the case of Jesus. I believe it is ceremonial in nature and not salvic. Just like we are born through water, baptism signifies us being born again.
Relying on a physical ceremony for salvation is not logical because it requires exceptions to be made for those who cannot participate in it.

I allow God to make exceptions not listed in scripture, but I don't teach that he automatically makes these exceptions for everyone or even anyone at all it is up to him with his omniscience to decide that. If God can judge people based upon the universe itself testifying of him and reject them never hearing the gospel as saved or not then he can likewise judge people who are baptized or not.

I personally believe that people who never have essentially said the phrases of accepting Jesus as savior because they never heard the Gospel God can know if they did hear it if they would accept him or not just as those who died prior to Jesus incarnation on earth were saved. Abraham and Noah and all the OT saints died without being baptized as we know it but it was said that Abraham heard enough to equate it to hearing the Gospel and was accounted to him righteousness. If OT saints are saved through faith and not baptized then either God made an exception for them or, it wasn't required and it was added as a salvic condition in the NT.

Anyway I've argued enough about this I likely won't defend my thoughts because we have already seen two camps here, those who explore the idea based upon logic allowing scripture itself to testify of problems related to salvic baptism and those who by their thinking consider those not baptized either half saved or not at all till they are dunked or showered or whatever or they make hop on both sides of a fence not wanting to deal with essentially separate "acts" of faith in order to be saved and considering all water baptisms are the same.

I suggest those people who are on the side that thinks we must be baptized as part of salvation get baptized soon if not already as regardless of my thinking it is not needed getting it done will remove a stumbling block in your faith in being saved or not.

 

[Sophrosyne]

How do you distinguish the Holy Spirit from your own or an evil spirit?
To teach that Baptism is unnecessary isn't something that the Person who gave it and who is united to us by it would inspired.

You basically have 2 choices then, to agree I'm saved or agree that I'm not because I have not been water baptized. I have nothing else to say on this topic in this thread.

 

[DerSchweik]

It is not our purview to judge who is and who isn't saved.

Our purview is to share the gospel, His word. We can do no more; indeed, we are permitted to do no more - and I trust no one here is judging anyone else here as saved or not. If so, such [unrighteous] judgment must stop.

We share based on our study and understanding of it. If we are wrong, it is incumbent on those who disagree to do their best, in a Godly, Christian manner, to attempt to persuade otherwise; and if we are wrong, we are to repent and do as persuaded by His word. If not wrong however, the incumbency falls on us and we are all to behave as Christ did, in utmost grace and patience and prayer.

Saul was anything if not sincere and pious in his zeal for God. “I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this city, educated under Gamaliel, strictly according to the law of our fathers, being zealous for God just as you all are today.” (Acts 22:3). In Galatians 1:14 he writes – “…I was advancing in Judaism beyond many of my contemporaries among my countrymen, being more extremely zealous for my ancestral traditions.” In Philippians 3:6 – “…as to zeal, a persecutor of the church, as to the righteousness which is in the Law, found blameless.…” And of the Jews Paul wrote in Romans 10:2 – “For I testify about them that they have a zeal for God, but not in accordance with knowledge.” We see here how sincerity and zeal (piety), even for God is no guarantee of Godly faith; nor does it negate the truth of Scripture.

This is in fact one of the key struggles I had to deal with when I became a Christian - on many levels: personal, family, friends, relatives, respected teachers / leaders, etc. Raised in a Christian household, "confirmed" in the Methodist church as a teen, always searching spiritually... I even had a bible! though I never read it. As a young sailor still in school, I was invited to a large Southern Baptist church nearby. Large congregation, very emotional sermon and two equally emotional testimonies: one of a giant of a man, 7+ feet tall, and the other a young woman just 18" tall. There was a call to baptism at the end of the sermon, and responding emotionally, I answered the call. Exiting the baptistry however and descending the stairs, I was spiritually repelled and vividly remember saying to myself - "Get-me-out-of-here!" I never returned, utterly repelled. In the years that followed, I'd make occasional visits to various churches, never really devoted to any though. Indeed, my life was spiraling into deeper and deeper sin. Drugs, sex, alcohol... I was further and further out of control. In college, a long-haired, sloppily dressed degenerate, I was invited to a campus bible study; and ironically, I eagerly went. We got to some studies on how to respond to the gospel and I hit a huge wall - thinking I was already a Christian (though my life was demonstrably precisely the opposite). Like Paul, to accept what I was reading meant I'd have to renounce "my faith" (such as "my faith" was) and accept as true what was convicting me so thoroughly.

To make matters worse, "my faith" was also similar to my family's, my relative's, my friend's...

Trust me when I say, Jesus' words never rang so true as at this time with me: “Do not think that I came to bring peace on the earth; I did not come to bring peace, but a sword. For I came to set a man against his father, and a daughter against her mother, and a daughter-in-law against her mother-in-law; and a man’s enemies will be the members of his household." (Mt 10:34ff)

I don't know about anyone here who may be reading these words, their background, their situation, their heart... Heck, I don't even know your real names, nor you mine. It is not my purpose in sharing this to judge anyone here - please believe that. I am simply sharing what I believe is God's word on this subject. Nothing more. It is my prayer it be received in similar manner, if received at all. And if not, that it not drive a wedge between us, but that we remain able to fellowship together, regardless.

In Him,