Last one I promise about baptism

[ByTheSpirit]

This is the last independent thread I'll start on baptism I promise. Just wanted to get this out there for all to read and interact with who may not be following the other thread on the topic...

Question, I have observed several here state they believe baptism is not necessary for salvation but something that should be done at some point in time. That has been the general theme I've noticed, not quoting anyone in particular, so please don't feel as though I'm twisting individual words. I just made a blanket observation. That a good portion of the active forum here views baptism as not necessary for salvation but something that should be done at some point in time, eventually...

If that is the case, and you feel a person should eventually be baptized (for whatever reason) then why not just have the person do it immediately to avoid delay?

If we feel it is important enough that it should be done at some point why not just on the spot? Or as quickly as possible. Instead of, well it is important, but not necessary now, but if you don't get baptized eventually you may have consequences (whatever those are)

To me it seems you either believe it is necessary for the Christian or not necessary, for the "must be done eventually" frame of mind does make it necessary, otherwise it's a non-issue.

I hope I'm getting my wording across right. Either you believe it is necessary (not just important) or it's not. If it is, then why not baptize immediately.

 

[Andry]

When were the disciples baptized? For that matter, when were they "saved".

 

[Always in His Presence]

you keep writing the same thing over and over. You want to have someone baptized right away - go for it.

I received Christ as my Lord and Saviour in October of 1984, was Baptized in the Holy Spirit in January of 1985 and was water baptized in March of 1987.

I have friends who were saved and baptized the same day.

We both are living for Him, both saved, set free, delivered and walking in His Grace.

I think your tugging at knats

 

[ByTheSpirit]

I probably am "tugging at gnats" and admit I'm rehashing the same thing, which is why I promised this is the last thread from me on the topic, though I will continue to post in my teaching thread on it.

I was just willing to concede some on the topic for the sake of unity. If we view baptism as being necessary at some point in time, immediately or years later, why not just do it at the point of conversion? It's not that hard. Fill the baptismal before service, if someone decides to accept Jesus during service, they get baptized. Easy peasy. Truth is baptism has a greater significance than any of us, myself included, may understand.

 

[FoundInGrace]

The thief on the cross didn't get baptised yet was saved.
Personally for me having grown up in a believing family baptism was a special time of obedience and at the right timing between myself and the Lord. If I had gotten baptised when I was saved I would have been a child and not had that special time of reevaluating my life and walk with the Lord.
After being baptised, because it was a real declaration to those present and the spiritual realm of where I stood in wanting to follow the Lord, I did have a tough time and wilderness time I suppose you could call it.
For many people if they don't get baptised at the time of being saved then baptism can be a very moving and special time in their walk with God. I am not about to get in the way of what God may be doing in someone's life and take away that journey with Him where He may be calling them to that step of baptism Himself. I don't want to be the one saying you must be baptised, it should be their own walk with the Lord and Him asking them to do that in the timing that is right for them and their walk with Him.

In some ways if we insist on baptism of all converts right then and there we don't let them have their own calling from the Lord about it.

Baptism is not essential for salvation obviously, the thief on the cross was saved without it, so why not let people come it to for themselves and be all the more richer in their relationship with the Lord because they have come to that step of obedience for themselves. Let them have a real walk with the Lord instead of making baptism something they have to do straightaway. If they want to great but it shouldn't be something that is forced on people because in reality it is not an essential for salvation. If we force it, it becomes a work, if we rather let them grow in their relationship with the Lord themselves and as they read about it in the Bible and hear about it and feel led to do it by the Lord then it is real and special and a real blessing for everyone.

 

[chapmic]

When were the disciples baptized? For that matter, when were they "saved".

I believe they were baptized by John the Baptist. John was doing a baptism of repentance to show that you turn away from your old life and you are to live a life that is Holy. They were saved when they believed Jesus is the Son of God.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

The thief on the cross didn't get baptised yet was saved.
Personally for me having grown up in a believing family baptism was a special time of obedience and at the right timing between myself and the Lord. If I had gotten baptised when I was saved I would have been a child and not had that special time of reevaluating my life and walk with the Lord.
After being baptised, because it was a real declaration to those present and the spiritual realm of where I stood in wanting to follow the Lord, I did have a tough time and wilderness time I suppose you could call it.
For many people if they don't get baptised at the time of being saved then baptism can be a very moving and special time in their walk with God. I am not about to get in the way of what God may be doing in someone's life and take away that journey with Him where He may be calling them to that step of baptism Himself. I don't want to be the one saying you must be baptised, it should be their own walk with the Lord and Him asking them to do that in the timing that is right for them and their walk with Him.

In some ways if we insist on baptism of all converts right then and there we don't let them have their own calling from the Lord about it.

Baptism is not essential for salvation obviously, the thief on the cross was saved without it, so why not let people come it to for themselves and be all the more richer in their relationship with the Lord because they have come to that step of obedience for themselves. Let them have a real walk with the Lord instead of making baptism something they have to do straightaway. If they want to great but it shouldn't be something that is forced on people because in reality it is not an essential for salvation. If we force it, it becomes a work, if we rather let them grow in their relationship with the Lord themselves and as they read about it in the Bible and hear about it and feel led to do it by the Lord then it is real and special and a real blessing for everyone.

The thing about the thief on the cross is he wasn't born again. You can't be born again without the Spirit and you only get the Spirit by responding to the gospel. The gospel being Jesus died, was buried, and rose again. Jesus had authority on earth to forgive, so him telling the thief on the cross what he did was just another way of him telling the thief, today you are going to die, and when you do you'll join others who by faith inherit the promise, such as David, Abraham, Moses, etc.

The thief couldn't be saved as we are, Jesus hadn't been buried or resurrected. The Spirit hadn't come. So I don't view that example as valid to this discussion.

 

[Andry]

I believe they were baptized by John the Baptist.

Scripture doesn't support that; this is pure supposition.

They were saved when they believed Jesus is the Son of God.

True but this is how everyone is "saved"; when did it happen for the disciples, as their actions before the resurrection didn't support their belief. None of them truly believed Jesus would rise again. Hadn't the foggiest clue. On the eve of the crucifixion Peter - the closest to the Christ, denied him not once, but three times. Judas betrayed the Christ. And after the crucifixion they went back to their old lives. The women brought annointing oils for burial to annoint a dead body and not a ressurected one.

Perhaps our current understanding of what/how/when one is saved need to be looked at.

 

[Always in His Presence]

I probably am "tugging at gnats" and admit I'm rehashing the same thing, which is why I promised this is the last thread from me on the topic, though I will continue to post in my teaching thread on it.

I was just willing to concede some on the topic for the sake of unity. If we view baptism as being necessary at some point in time, immediately or years later, why not just do it at the point of conversion? It's not that hard. Fill the baptismal before service, if someone decides to accept Jesus during service, they get baptized. Easy peasy. Truth is baptism has a greater significance than any of us, myself included, may understand.

You don't even go to church - why on earth is this an issue?

Do you have people converted at your home church? Do you baptize immediately?

Why or why not?

 

[Andry]

The thing about the thief on the cross is he wasn't born again. You can't be born again without the Spirit and you only get the Spirit by responding to the gospel. The gospel being Jesus died, was buried, and rose again. Jesus had authority on earth to forgive, so him telling the thief on the cross what he did was just another way of him telling the thief, today you are going to die, and when you do you'll join others who by faith inherit the promise, such as David, Abraham, Moses, etc.

The thief couldn't be saved as we are, Jesus hadn't been buried or resurrected. The Spirit hadn't come. So I don't view that example as valid to this discussion.

Respecting your statement, as bolded.

But couldn't agree with you. We are all saved the same way.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

You don't even go to church - why on earth is this an issue?

Do you have people converted at your home church? Do you baptize immediately?

Why or why not?

I do go to a fellowship, perhaps not "church" as you understand it, but that's irrelevent to this topic.

I don't think the fellowship I attend baptizes people at all, I'm not sure. I intend to find out tomorrow when I meet with the lead pastor.

I do baptize people immediately. I baptize them immediately because the Apostles did. Even if I don't fully understand the significance of it, something happens when a person is scripturally baptized. I'm not going to re-invent the wheel nor do I want to go along with those who do.

The Apostles baptized immediately, and the early church taught baptism as part of the gospel message so you know, that's good enough to me.

 

[FoundInGrace]

If what you say is true I was not saved for the 10 or so years I wasnt baptised even though I thought I was and lived as if I was ... wierd.
if I had died in that time I would have gone to be with my Savior though I have no doubts on that. I believed Jesus died on the Cross for my sins so I would have gone to be with the Lord.
I wonder about deathbed confessions too, sometimes they arent baptised - do they go to Heaven?
I believe they do.
When my cousin died unbeknown to me he had been going to church for a few months before, he hadnt gotten baptised as far as I knew but he had heard and responded to Jesus dying in his place for his sins because Jesus loved him so much. I believe he is in Heaven because he believed when he heard about Jesus. Baptism is not essential for salvation it is what a person does with Jesus that matters.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Look at the example of the Ethiopian eunuch and Phillip.

The eunuch is reading from Isaiah when suddenly Phillip arrives...

And the eunuch said to Philip, “About whom, I ask you, does the prophet say this, about himself or about someone else?” Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning with this Scripture he told him the good news about Jesus. And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, “See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?”

And he commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him. ([bless and do not curse]Acts‬ [bless and do not curse]8‬:[bless and do not curse]34-36, 38‬ ESV)

So, the eunuch asks who is being spoken of. Philip spoke the gospel to the eunuch, then suddenly the eunuch asks an odd question... What prevents me from being baptized? HUH? Where did baptism come into play? Phillip obviously mentioned baptism to the man while speaking about Jesus. This eunuch would not have known otherwise what baptism was. So Phillip preached baptism while preaching the gospel.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

If what you say is true I was not saved for the 10 or so years I wasnt baptised even though I thought I was and lived as if I was ... wierd.
if I had died in that time I would have gone to be with my Savior though I have no doubts on that. I believed Jesus died on the Cross for my sins so I would have gone to be with the Lord.
I wonder about deathbed confessions too, sometimes they arent baptised - do they go to Heaven?
I believe they do.
When my cousin died unbeknown to me he had been going to church for a few months before, he hadnt gotten baptised as far as I knew but he had heard and responded to Jesus dying in his place for his sins because Jesus loved him so much. I believe he is in Heaven because he believed when he heard about Jesus. Baptism is not essential for salvation it is what a person does with Jesus that matters.

Derek Prince said this on the subject:

Jesus in Mark 16:16 said two things are needed for salvation, belief and baptism. You can try to enter heaven with just belief, that is between you and the Lord. But the Lord said believe and be baptized to be saved. Actually Jesus mentions baptism more than once in conjunction with being born again.

I agree with that sentiment. I look at baptism like this:

You hear the message and instead of an "altar call" you invite people who want to enter the New Covenant to come forward and be baptized. I'll go over all this in my teaching thread on it.

 

[FoundInGrace]

I'm glad God isnt as picky about things as we are.
He looks at our hearts condition with regard to how we respond to Jesus.
If God held up a great big list..
1. Have you been fully immersed in baptism? not sprinkled of course..
2. Have you been baptised in the Holy Spirit?
3. Have you spoken in tongues?
4. Have you been circumcised?
etc etc
For some reason we try to make salvation about following a formula but its about relationship and forgiveness of sins and being able to know the love of our Father.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Sure, salvation is about the heart. But no where, I mean NO WHERE in scripture is saving faith not evidenced by works. I have mentioned this many times and still no one has shown me a single instance where someone was saved or entered God's covenant without displaying their faith. So it's more than just a condition of the heart, that implies passivity towards the action faith demands.

If a person has true saving faith, they will show it with their actions. Modern church (for the most part) calls it an altar call, which I find unscriptural, the Apostolic Church of Acts used baptism...

 

[FoundInGrace]

There are other places where Jesus Himself said if you will believe and confess you will be saved, there was no mention Iin those places about needing to be baptised as well.

 

[FoundInGrace]

Faith in action that follows after salvation can be things other than baptism.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Don't misunderstand my words, I'm really exploring what baptism is. I find a lot of holes in what most churches teach on the subject.

Some in this very forum have said it's not needed ever. That is directly against scripture. To believe a person can be openly disobedient to Jesus is wrong.

Then the alternative is, well it's important but just not needed, although if a person never is saved I'd question their salvation. This is a paradox in itself. This position says baptism isn't necessary while dictating it is. For either a person doesn't ever need baptism, or they do. We certainly would say that about faith. Or repentance. Why baptism? If a person or church preaches baptism is important/needed eventually, why not just baptize converts immediately?

If it is because we feel the need to teach them about baptism, well what's the point in that? Just baptize them then teach them. We certainly don't expect people to understand the fullness of the gospel when they are saved, but to grow in that knowledge.

There is a disconnect, a great disconnect from the church of Acts and the church today. If baptism isn't important, the Apostles wouldn't have done it immediately. They didn't wait, they baptized immediately and made it a point to do so.

Jesus had them baptize while he walked the planet. Surely if Jesus knew baptism wasn't going to be that big a deal he would have just glanced over the practice and taught more on another. But not only did he teach them baptism and that they should baptize, he himself was baptized. In fact, there is not even a handful of events in all scripture where the entire God-head actively participates in manifested form. Baptism is one of them. Jesus' baptism showed that. He approved of John's baptism by having John baptize him, the Spirit came when Jesus was baptized, the Father voiced his approval of Jesus at his baptism.

That in itself should convince us baptism is more important than what is being led on.

 

[FoundInGrace]

I like baptism, there were six people got baptised at church on Sunday night. Was quite neat all ages and all had different journeys with the Lord. It was nice too because they were able to invite friends and family along so it was sort of a witnessing and testimony time to them.
Its great when people get baptised at the time but its also great if its a bit later on in the journey.