Is baptism necessary to be saved? (2)

[Evergreen48]

The only problem with the "covenant" thingy is that that indicates that God changed his mind about how to deal with us pesky human sinners. That is not very sound Theology.

Not when you consider that under the old covenant they ate and drank only those things which God told them were 'clean', and there were washings (baptisms) commanded for various and numerous occasions; there was a ritual connected to almost every thing that they did.

But these things were but shadows or dim pictures of Him, who in the fulness of times was to come, and God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made under the law, To redeem them that were under the law, that they might receive the adoption of sons.

And . . . .

"But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off (the Gentiles) are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;
And that he might reconcile both unto God in one body by the cross, having slain the enmity thereby: . . . . " (Ephesians 2:13-16)

And . . . .

Acts 2: 23. Him [Jesus], being delivered by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God, ye have taken, and by wicked hands have crucified and slain: -
Revelation 13: 8. "And all that dwell upon the earth shall worship him, whose names are not written in the book of life of the Lamb slain from the foundation of the world."


So, God's intentions toward, as you say, 'dealing with us pesky human sinners' have always been the same, and through Jesus Christ His intentions were brought to fulfillment. So, there is no further need to perform any of those ordinances (washings, abstaining from certain foods and drink, circumcision of the flesh, etc.), which were contained in the law.

 

[PattyOfurniture]

The only problem with the "covenant" thingy is that that indicates that God changed his mind about how to deal with us pesky human sinners. That is not very sound Theology.

who says He changed His mind?especially when you realize the entire old covenant is a shadow of Christ

 

[KCDAD]

[

AngelusSax;38936583]
We also know that this was pre-resurrection. We also know that Jesus says all who are baptized and believe will enter the kingdom of heaven. We also know Jesus commanded His disciples to go into all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

Also, when Jesus Himself was asking to be baptized, John questioned Him. Jesus' reply?

"Let it be so for now. For in this way we shall do all that God requires." So John agreed. (Matthew 3:15, GNB)

OUT OF CONTEXT ALERT!
Jesus was responding to John's "demand" that Jesus should be baptizing him not vice versa.

Baptism, it seems to me then, is more than just a ritual. It has efficacy. It isn't something we do to others apart from God. It's something we do to show what God has done. We baptize and are baptized by the Holy Spirit, and water is a sign.

Baptism is the Word working within the water, not just water alone. The preacher doesn't baptize. God does, using the preacher as an instrument in fulfilling the baptism.

Make up your mind, is it a something we do to show other people something or is it really a sacrament, that is God working through it?
Is it a sign or is it substance?
Like everything else about Jesus' words Jesus was not being totally literal when he said this: "go ye into all the nations baptizing them in the name of..."
Baptism is the rite of preparing one to enter in to the presence of God... Jesus is telling the disciples to prepare everyone to enter into God's presence.
He will baptize you with the holy spirit and fire... "real" fire? Ouch.

 

[KCDAD]

who says He changed His mind?especially when you realize the entire old covenant is a shadow of Christ

So not eating pork and not going out of the house during menstruation has something to do with the Beatitudes?

 

[Evergreen48]

So not eating pork and not going out of the house during menstruation has something to do with the Beatitudes?

No, those laws had to do with the literal health and sanitation of His people at that time, but pointed to the spiritual health and purity of His people in the here and now. -> -> -> "Know ye not that ye are the temple of God, and that the Spirit of God dwelleth in you?
If any man defile the temple of God, him shall God destroy; for the temple of God is holy, which temple ye are."

 

[BroGinder]

that just opened a killer big can o' worms bro,jee thanks Dude.....lol

I was having a kinda blah day, and read your comment and truly chuckled out loud. Thank you for the humour it is appreciated.

 

[PattyOfurniture]

I was having a kinda blah day, and read your comment and truly chuckled out loud. Thank you for the humour it is appreciated.

No prob,your welcome

yeah I enjoy a ton of stuff peeps type in here,some real characters...lol
GBU

 

[PattyOfurniture]

So not eating pork and not going out of the house during menstruation has something to do with the Beatitudes?

I said "Christ".....what i actually meant was
everything(in my opinion) was a type or shadow of the Fathers plan of salvation and who that was to involve(Christ)

 

[zspeedyrabit]

Mark 16:16

 

[PattyOfurniture]

Mark 16:16

[SIZE=-1]Mark 16:9-20 (New International Version) ... ((The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.))
I myself prefer to stick with textual proof that my lil peanut head can somewhat feel at ease with.
[/SIZE]

 

[YAQUBOS]

So you want the Biblical interpretation of baptism... How come it was invented in 30AD? This is about the same time hell seems to have been invented.... what do you think about that and your unchanging God?

The Old Testament was written before Christ, and it talks about hell and about images of baptism.

The New Testament was complete at the end of the first century. It talks about baptism and hell.

So I wonder what you mean when you talk about a changing god and about 30AD...

YAQUBOS†

 

[YAQUBOS]

Perhaps so, but the Old Testament thingy was nothing like the New Testament thingy.

Who told you this?

Do you first know what baptism is?

YAQUBOS†

 

[YAQUBOS]

I found this ,it may help....
http://www.haydid.org/ronimmer.htm

its fairly in depth concerning baptism for conversion into judaism

if this doesn't help,researching Talmud would be much better

The topic is about the question: Is Baptism necessary to be saved?

So it's not essential to know whether it was practised in the Old Testament or not. The essential is to see if its MEANING was there in the Old Testament. The fact is that it was there in the Old Testament, and it wasn't necessary FOR Salvation.

N.B.: In the Old Testament there was not a CHRISTIAN baptism.

YAQUBOS†

 

[YAQUBOS]

The age of accountability is one of those grey areas. I believe once you become aware of what baptism is and why its done, you become accountable, no matter the age.

However baptism is required for salvation. the Water has long been a seperation going all the way back to Moses as he led Isreal across the Red Sea. The Water Washed away their past leaving no remnant of it. So long as they did not go back to Egypt, it was gone.

Can you please give us any reference from the Bible saying that baptism is necessary for Salvation?

Do you think that unbaptized babies go to hell?

Do you think that all those Jews who lived in Egypt before the Exodus went to hell?

Please, explain.

Remission of sin is the same, we need it. Repentance only forgives, the Baptism is to remit.

I didn't get it. How does repentance forgive anything? And how is baptism the remission of sins?

It is designed also as an identification with Christ. We Die out to sin. Identifying with Jesus dieing on the cross we cruxify the flesh and turn 180 degrees to go a new way(Repent) Then we are buried in a watery grave indentifying with Christ as he was placed in the tomb. We bury the old man arising a new creature with a new name. it is in the Baptism that we take on the name of Christ. (Baptism) Then we shall recieve the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Resurection) Acts 2:28 they asked what must we do to be saved. the answer was Repent, be baptised in the name of Jesus Chrsit for the remission of sin, and ye shall recieve the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Simple thoughts from a simple man. God Bless

Yes, baptism tells us about our death with Christ, and then our spiritual resurrection to walk in newness of life. But how does this mean that baptism is NECESSARY FOR Salvation?

YAQUBOS†

 

[YAQUBOS]

Would you say that Peter missed it? After three years with Jesus teaching him one on one?

No, Peter didn't miss it. He never said that baptism is necessary FOR Salvation.

Would you say when Jesus interacted with Nicodemus he was off when he said be born of water and the Spirit?

Where did He talk about the necessity of baptism? Please, show me.

YAQUBOS†

 

[YAQUBOS]

We don't technically know that. The Bible doesn't say that that thief wasn't someone who had been baptized and then, like many of us, erred afterward (though his was a more criminal erring than most of ours typically is, hence his crucifixion).

We also don't know that he was.

If you don't know it, then this means that it was not mentioned in the Bible. So I don't see any proof from the Bible in your reply.

We also know that this was pre-resurrection. We also know that Jesus says all who are baptized and believe will enter the kingdom of heaven.

Nope. Jesus NEVER said such a thing. Please, be sure to quote the exact words.

We also know Jesus commanded His disciples to go into all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.

But where did He say that this is necessary FOR Salvation?

Also, when Jesus Himself was asking to be baptized, John questioned Him. Jesus' reply?

"Let it be so for now. For in this way we shall do all that God requires." So John agreed. (Matthew 3:15, GNB)

Jesus was not a sinner. So His case has nothing to do with our topic.

Secondly, John's baptism is not what we are talking about here. We are talking about the CHRISTIAN baptism.

Other translations say "Let it be done so now, for it is proper to do in order to fulfill all righteousness".

Baptism, it seems to me then, is more than just a ritual. It has efficacy. It isn't something we do to others apart from God. It's something we do to show what God has done. We baptize and are baptized by the Holy Spirit, and water is a sign.

First, let me remind you again that we are not talking about John's baptism.

Second, as you said, water is a SIGN...

Baptism is the Word working within the water, not just water alone. The preacher doesn't baptize. God does, using the preacher as an instrument in fulfilling the baptism.

But how does this mean that baptism is necessary FOR Salvation? Do you mean that if the preacher didn't baptize a person, then this person could never be saved? What do you think about Cornelius and those of his household who were born again BEFORE they were baptized?

YAQUBOS†

 

[YAQUBOS]

Jesus had not died yet, and the OLD LAW was still in effect then.

And who said that the "old" Law could save anyone before or after Jesus died and was risen?

YAQUBOS†

 

[YAQUBOS]

I Hope your right but I am living like your wrong. The Bible says that God is not respector of person. I am sure there is not a circumstancial portion to salvation.

I am sure Gods plan is in that book and we ARE held accountable for it.

God Bless

And so, as God is not respector of persons, then you mean baptism is not necessary for Salvation? Or maybe He is respector of persons, according to you?

†

 

[YAQUBOS]

Mark 16:16

This says that baptism is necessary IN Salvation. But it doesn't say that it is necessary FOR Salvation, because it says that those who do not believe will be condemned. It doesn't say that those who are not baptized will be condemned.

YAQUBOS†

 

[YAQUBOS]

[SIZE=-1]Mark 16:9-20 (New International Version) ... ((The most reliable early manuscripts and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20.))[/SIZE]
[SIZE=-1]I myself prefer to stick with textual proof that my lil peanut head can somewhat feel at ease with.[/SIZE]

Mark 16:16 is part of the Scripture. We can't discuss that here. It's another topic.

The only thing needed is to understand it in the right manner, by letting Scripture explain Scripture. You can't deny the Word of God just because you can't understand how it is the Word of God.

YAQUBOS†