• Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.

How can baptism be required for salvation?

ralliann

christian
Jun 27, 2007
8,210
2,590
✟265,654.00
Country
United States
Gender
Female
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Widowed
A living faith is required. Which faith under the law was to circumcise ones sons. Before birth neither good nor bad is done, as a choice between Esau and Jacob before they were born.
 
Upvote 0

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Site Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟431,808.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
How do you distinguish that baptism is mandatory to salvation?
Jesus taught ro enter the Kingdom of God one must be Baptized. And... You may not relate to this reason. I believe it is because I believe it always was. Development of doctrine requires that something always believed is still believed.

Those are not either or's to me #1 is covered by Baptism of desire. Which means God knows you would've but circumstances prevented Baptism. Peter spoke as if the only question was not whether it is necessary that's obvious, but whether or not it could be denied them.

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.
That's why I believe it's necessary.. I believe it's necessary for me. Since exceptions to God's commands are God's initiative not mine.

God Isn't bound to ritual or words those are for us The ritual and words make visible invisible realities. God responds to the ritual and words though. We know God has acted on our behalf when we are Baptized. God knows visible signs help us believe.

don't see any Churches these days baptizing people immediately after accepting Christ at all, which means they consider them saved already.
I don't believe we can say we are saved. Too many aren't that believe they are. Too many are but don't know they are. Makes it useless. And. Wasn't always believed and believing it requires that what was always believed cant be

Good advice. Yours in Christ.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
30,304
13,961
73
✟422,990.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Why was the faith of the parents enough to circumcise infants?

Simply because faith was never mentioned in conjunction with circumcision. Curiously, circumcision is not one of the Ten Commandments, nor any of the other commandments which God gave to Israel.

It takes virtually no faith to perform a medical procedure, especially one which is cosmetic, at best. Thus, today we see all manner of tattoos on people, the vast majority of which are hardly faith-based, but usually hold specific significance to the owner.

Circumcision (of males only) was the means of visible distinguishing them from the surrounding Gentiles. It also served as a helpful means of identification of Jewish men in 1930's and 1940's Germany.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
30,304
13,961
73
✟422,990.00
Faith
Non-Denom

The problem with this view is the concept that water can wash sin away. Even in the Old Testament water was quite insufficient to cover sin. The blood of lambs, sheep, and bulls was required. In the New Testament only the blood of the Perfect Lamb of God, Jesus Christ, is capable of cleansing the sinful soul. It is absurd to think that human effort is required by God when God has provided an infinite means for human forgiveness.

It reminds me of the (alleged) Treasury of the Merits of Jesus Christ and the Saints according to the Catholic Church. In theory they are infinite, as is the love of God in His provision of them. In practice, however, the Pope and His representatives are quite parsimonious in doling them out only to those whom they determine actually deserve them. Thus (in theory) there are untold millions of Catholics this moment suffering the pangs of Purgatory because The Treasury of Merits was forbidden to their use.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
30,304
13,961
73
✟422,990.00
Faith
Non-Denom

Wow! What a wonderfully circular argument. You believe this simply because you believe it. Most Catholics I know usually fall back on the argument that some Catholic doctrine is true because the Catholic Church teaches it.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
30,304
13,961
73
✟422,990.00
Faith
Non-Denom
A living faith is required. Which faith under the law was to circumcise ones sons. Before birth neither good nor bad is done, as a choice between Esau and Jacob before they were born.

Exactly. Apart from a living faith, any human effort is worse than worthless.
 
Upvote 0

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Site Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟431,808.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
The problem with this view is the concept that water can wash sin away.
For some reason I imagined Jesus using His spit to wash away blindness, remember that ? Did Jesus Baptize that man?
The premise here that water washes away sin isn't what is taught. The Holy Spirit does the supernatural stuff
 
Reactions: Tigger45
Upvote 0

Eloy Craft

Myth only points, Truth happened!
Site Supporter
Jan 9, 2018
3,132
871
Chandler
✟431,808.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Wow! What a wonderfully circular argument. You believe this simply because you believe it. Most Catholics I know usually fall back on the argument that some Catholic doctrine is true because the Catholic Church teaches it.
No. I didn't describe that well.
The Baptismal rite is Divine Tradition. The Holy Spirit started it with John. Jesus received John's Baptism and united water and fire in Himself and made them one Baptism.
I believe it because I believe it was believed since the beginning.
I can't put a Divine Tradition aside and put a human one before it.
 
Upvote 0

disciple Clint

Well-Known Member
Mar 26, 2018
15,259
5,997
Pacific Northwest
✟216,150.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
Are you suggesting Jesus' death (and subsequent burial and resurrection) are not relevant to, or necessary for our salvation?
I do not see anywhere that I said anything even close to that, is my post not clear?
 
Upvote 0

Valletta

Well-Known Member
Oct 10, 2020
12,320
5,863
Minnesota
✟329,198.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Catholic
Marital Status
Married
I was just reading a book by St. Augustine yesterday. St. Augustine put it this way:

"Had I been a Jew in the time of that ancient people, when there was nothing better that I could be, I would undoubtedly have received circumcision. That seal of the righteousness which is by faith was of so great importance in that dispensation before it was abrogated by the Lord's coming, that the angel would have strangled the infant-child of Moses, had not the child's mother, seizing a stone, circumcised the child, and by this sacrament averted impending death. This sacrament also arrested the waters of the Jordan, and made them flow back towards their source. This sacrament the Lord Himself received in infancy, although He abrogated it when He was crucified. For these signs of spiritual blessings were not condemned, but gave place to others which were more suitable to the later dispensation. For as circumcision was abolished by the first coming of the Lord, so baptism shall be abolished by His second coming. For as now, since the liberty of faith has come, and the yoke of bondage has been removed, no Christian receives circumcision in the flesh; so then, when the just are reigning with the Lord, and the wicked have been condemned, no one shall be baptized, but the reality which both ordinances prefigure — namely, circumcision of the heart and cleansing of the conscience— shall be eternally abiding."
CHURCH FATHERS: Letter 23 (St. Augustine)
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
30,304
13,961
73
✟422,990.00
Faith
Non-Denom

St. Augustine would have received circumcision, as a Jewish male. However, if he had been born female she certainly would not have been circumcised. If the analogy is carried through, then females should not be baptized.

I always find it curious the the writings of the ECFs are treated as mines from which to extract support for various doctrines while rejecting much of their other writings. The Catholic Church has firmly rejected Augustine's monergism, even though he wrote far, far more about it than this passage on circumcision.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
30,304
13,961
73
✟422,990.00
Faith
Non-Denom

You are partially correct. The Catholic baptismal rite is Catholic Tradition. The fact that the Catholic Church has also recognized virtually all other baptismal rites, including those of radical Protestantism, does not make them actually and truly identical with the Catholic baptismal rite.

You are still displaying a marvelously circular argument. You believe this because you believe this. You do not rely on objective facts for your belief, but believe it simply because you believe it.
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
30,304
13,961
73
✟422,990.00
Faith
Non-Denom
For some reason I imagined Jesus using His spit to wash away blindness, remember that ? Did Jesus Baptize that man?
The premise here that water washes away sin isn't what is taught. The Holy Spirit does the supernatural stuff

Jesus did not spit in the eyes of the blind man. He used dirt transformed into mud to apply a poultice to the man's eyes. He could have just as simply commanded the blindness to go away, as he did in other circumstances or He could have simply said, "Your sins are forgiven." as He did with the paralytic man who was lowered through the roof.

One takeaway from the examples of healing is that Jesus did not limit Himself to any particular mode. Thus, it is not a denial of godly faith to go to a doctor when one is sick and in need of healing. God can, and does, use medical science to heal people.

In the case of the forgiveness of sins, God is the One who forgives sin and the means is through the blood of Jesus Christ - not water, not a religious bureaucracy, not pilgrimages, and not saints.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,846
8,377
Dallas
✟1,087,745.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
At what point was the thief on the cross baptized? and yet Jesus saved him.

We don’t know that the thief wasn’t baptized either. I’m not saying baptism is required for salvation just pointing out that the thief on the cross isn’t evidence supporting either side of this debate.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,846
8,377
Dallas
✟1,087,745.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married

Actually if I’m not mistaken the Catholic Church only recognizes Trinitarian baptisms if it’s not a Trinitarian baptism they don’t consider it a valid baptism.
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,846
8,377
Dallas
✟1,087,745.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
It was fairly well universal until around 1500 or so. And no one ever argued over the meaning of anything in the bible.

Well that’s not exactly accurate. You had Pelagianism, Nestrianism, Doecitism, and the biggest of all Arianism which were all disputes over the meaning of scripture. All of these took place within the first 3 centuries of the church.

Edit: Sorry Pelagianism was 4th-5th century.
 
Upvote 0

disciple Clint

Well-Known Member
Mar 26, 2018
15,259
5,997
Pacific Northwest
✟216,150.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Private
We don’t know that the thief wasn’t baptized either. I’m not saying baptism is required for salvation just pointing out that the thief on the cross isn’t evidence supporting either side of this debate.
So is it going to be your assertion that all of the people that Jesus gave absolution to were baptized at some unknown and unverifiable time prior to that? I do not know of anything that would support that view, do you?
 
Upvote 0

bbbbbbb

Well-Known Member
Jun 9, 2015
30,304
13,961
73
✟422,990.00
Faith
Non-Denom
Actually if I’m not mistaken the Catholic Church only recognizes Trinitarian baptisms if it’s not a Trinitarian baptism they don’t consider it a valid baptism.

You are correct. This is somewhat perplexing to myself in light of the fact that many trinitarian baptisms are expressly believed to be non-sacramental and non-salvific. This flies fully in the face of Catholic doctrine. However, even the Orthodox baptismal rite is radically different from Catholic beliefs in that the Orthodox fully reject the concept of inherited sin from Adam.
 
Upvote 0

DerSchweik

Spend time in His Word - every day
Aug 31, 2007
70,186
161,375
Right of center
✟1,886,814.00
Country
United States
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
I do not see anywhere that I said anything even close to that, is my post not clear?
Please forgive me if I misunderstood.

@HTacianas made what I believe were several respectable points:
Christianity has taught from the beginning that baptism is necessary. The quotes you provided are synecdoches. The writers need not repeat every word of the gospel in every single line.
He then asked this question which I thought too was very good:
But perhaps a better question would be "why are you discouraging people from being baptized"? You have truncated the Great Commission.
To which you responded:
At what point was the thief on the cross baptized? and yet Jesus saved him.
Do you see why I asked what I did? He (correctly, I believe) pointed out how Christianity has taught from the beginning the necessity of baptism; and asked why you were discouraging people from being baptized.

You responded with the thief on the cross.

Invariably, it seems, whenever the topic of baptism comes up, someone raises the example of the thief on the cross, always noting "the thief was saved, but he wasn't baptized..." as if to say his example is somehow an example for us today why baptism isn't necessary. It has always stymied me why people bring him up to make this particular point.

No, you did not say that Jesus' death (and subsequent burial and resurrection) are unnecessary to salvation.

And understand, I do believe the thief was saved. However, raising his example, as many seem so keen to, raises several other key points:
  • Jesus' command that we be baptized (c.f. Mk 16:16, Mt 28:18-20) was given AFTER His death, AFTER His burial, and AFTER His resurrection.
  • Christian baptism is explicitly linked to Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection as the point at which we die, are buried, and subsequently "raised" with Him (c.f. Rom 6:1ff), and clothe ourselves with Him (Gal 3:27), etc. That said,
  • At the time of His interaction with the thief, Jesus was still alive.
I mean, is it not logical to conclude that if thief is an example to us today of how to be saved, then Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection - and Christian baptism - are truly unnecessary? Do you see my point, and why I asked what I did?
 
Upvote 0

BNR32FAN

He’s a Way of life
Site Supporter
Aug 11, 2017
25,846
8,377
Dallas
✟1,087,745.00
Country
United States
Gender
Male
Faith
Non-Denom
Marital Status
Married
So is it going to be your assertion that all of the people that Jesus gave absolution to were baptized at some unknown and unverifiable time prior to that? I do not know of anything that would support that view, do you?

No, hence my statements “baptism is not required for salvation” and “the thief on the cross does not give any evidence supporting either side of the debate”. We can’t say for certain that the thief was baptized nor can we say that he wasn’t so it can’t be used as evidence to support the necessity of baptism nor can it be used as evidence against the necessity of baptism.
 
Upvote 0