The Baptism debate

[98cwitr]

What did Jesus do?
He was Baptised by Emerson then received the Holy Ghost.
if this has already been said then I did not read enough,but this is a simple truth.

quite true. Im not saying "dont get water baptized!", I find great value in it and say that if you can you should

 

[98cwitr]

No need to try again. I'm satisfied with God's word.

Why do you think Christ said "born of water" and not simply "baptized?"

OK, I looked carefully at verse 6. Is that supposed to convince me that Jesus is talking about two births in verse 5? I can assure you it does not.

"That which is born of flesh is flesh" refers to what Nicodemus said in verse 4. "That which is born of Spirit is spirit" refers to the birth Jesus mentions in verse 5.

You very well may be right, but what I want you to really see is that "spirit gives birth to spirit," He doesn't say "water gives birth to spirit."

 

[THIS]

True, but it does say they believed and were disciples, but didn't even know if there was a Holy Spirit. Which kind of puts the lie to the idea that the Holy Spirit is given at the moment of belief.

I never said the Holy Spirit was given as soon as someone believes.

Jesus gives the Holy Spirit to those he accepts, to those he chooses. Jesus tells us whom he accepts and chooses.

 

[greatdivide46]

Why do you think Christ said "born of water" and not simply "baptized?"

I have no idea. Why do you think he said "born of water" and not "born of the flesh"?

You very well may be right, but what I want you to really see is that "spirit gives birth to spirit," He doesn't say "water gives birth to spirit."

You are exactly right. Spirit gives birth to spirit. So when Jesus said "born of water and the Spirit" he was talking about a spiritual birth, not a birth of the flesh.

 

[greatdivide46]

I never said the Holy Spirit was given as soon as someone believes.

Jesus gives the Holy Spirit to those he accepts, to those he chooses. Jesus tells us whom he accepts and chooses.

So, since the disciples in Acts 19 didn't even know there was a Holy Spirit, and yet were still referred to by Luke as disciples, were they not accepted by Jesus until they were baptized?

 

[THIS]

So, since the disciples in Acts 19 didn't even know there was a Holy Spirit, and yet were still referred to by Luke as disciples, were they not accepted by Jesus until they were baptized?

We have to hear to believe. We have to believe to receive.

 

[greatdivide46]

We have to hear to believe. We have to believe to receive.

So were the disciples in Acts 19 accepted by Jesus even though they didn't even know there was a Holy Spirit?

If they were disciples, they must have been believers, and if they were believers they must have heard. Yet, they didn't even know there was a Holy Spirit.

 

[Bluelion]

Why do you think Christ said "born of water" and not simply "baptized?"



You very well may be right, but what I want you to really see is that "spirit gives birth to spirit," He doesn't say "water gives birth to spirit."

The born of water refers to the first birth from a woman as i have been taught. Her water breaks and the baby is born.

The rebirth is of spirit at being saved. The baptism is a sign of the New Covenant like circumcise was a sight of the old.

 

[greatdivide46]

The born of water refers to the first birth from a woman as i have been taught. Her water breaks and the baby is born.

OK, I'll ask you the same question. Why do you think Jesus said born of water instead of born of the flesh, in verse 5?

The rebirth is of spirit at being saved. The baptism is a sign of the New Covenant like circumcise was a sight of the old.

Yes, the rebirth is of Spirit upon being saved. And being saved occurs at our baptism. Not by our baptism or because of our baptism but merely at our baptism.

 

[THIS]

So were the disciples in Acts 19 accepted by Jesus even though they didn't even know there was a Holy Spirit?

If they were disciples, they must have been believers, and if they were believers they must have heard. Yet, they didn't even know there was a Holy Spirit.

They were John the baptizers disciples who did not know enough yet about Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

 

[now faith]

The born of water refers to the first birth from a woman as i have been taught. Her water breaks and the baby is born.

The rebirth is of spirit at being saved. The baptism is a sign of the New Covenant like circumcise was a sight of the old.

 

[now faith]

OK, I'll ask you the same question. Why do you think Jesus said born of water instead of born of the flesh, in verse 5?

Yes, the rebirth is of Spirit upon being saved. And being saved occurs at our baptism. Not by our baptism or because of our baptism but merely at our baptism.

Can you provide Bible verse that states Baptism is of its self the act of salvation.

Because if I'm understanding what your saying you are void of salvation until baptised.
This would appear to qualify salvation by a series of works.

So you could be Hell bound on the way to the river if you die before you get there?



Ephesians: 2. 4. But God, who is rich in mercy, for his great love wherewith he loved us, 5. Even when we were dead in sins, hath quickened us together with Christ, (by grace ye are saved 6. And hath raised us up together, and made us sit together in heavenly places in Christ Jesus: 7. That in the ages to come he might shew the exceeding riches of his grace in his kindness toward us through Christ Jesus. 8. For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God: 9. Not of works, lest any man should boast. 10. For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.

I would have to question the sinner dying of cancer,accepted Christ in his heart confessed with his mouth,then died the next day without baptism.
My answer would be verse 8.

 

[now faith]

They were John the baptizers disciples who did not know enough yet about Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

They knew and preached about Jesus.

Mark: 9. 38. And John answered him, saying, Master, we saw one casting out devils in thy name, and he followeth not us: and we forbad him, because he followeth not us. 39. But Jesus said, Forbid him not: for there is no man which shall do a miracle in my name, that can lightly speak evil of me. 40. For he that is not against us is on our part. 41. For whosoever shall give you a cup of water to drink in my name, because ye belong to Christ, verily I say unto you, he shall not lose his reward. 42. And whosoever shall offend one of these little ones that believe in me, it is better for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he were cast into the sea.

They knew enough to cast out devils in his name.

Some time they had believed in Christ,they just missed Pentecost and the Baptism of the Holy Ghost until Paul through the laying on of hands the received the Baptism of the Holy Ghost and spoke in tongues and received the gifts of the Spirit.

 

[greatdivide46]

They were John the baptizers disciples who did not know enough yet about Jesus and the Holy Spirit.

OK, that's possible I suppose.

 

[greatdivide46]

Can you provide Bible verse that states Baptism is of its self the act of salvation.

In Mark 16:16 Jesus puts baptism in the same relationship with salvation as belief.

Because if I'm understanding what your saying you are void of salvation until baptised.

You understand pretty well.

This would appear to qualify salvation by a series of works.

Why would you say that? Do you think baptism is a work of the law?

I would have to question the sinner dying of cancer,accepted Christ in his heart confessed with his mouth,then died the next day without baptism.

OK, what's the question? I'm not the one who said, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved." You'll have to question Him on that.

 

[ThisBrotherOfHis]

I'm not the one who said, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved." You'll have to question Him on that.

No one in the Bible said that. We are justified by faith ...

Romans 5, NASB
1 Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ,
2 through whom also we have obtained our introduction by faith into this grace in which we stand ; and we exult in hope of the glory of God.

Ephesians 2
8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;
9 not as a result of works, so that no one may boast.
​

... not by faith and a ceremony:

Romans 4
1 What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather according to the flesh, has found?
2 For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God.
3 For what does the Scripture say? "ABRAHAM BELIEVED GOD, AND IT WAS CREDITED TO HIM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 4 Now to the one who works, his wage is not credited as a favor, but as what is due.
5 But to the one who does not work, but believes in Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is credited as righteousness,
6 just as David also speaks of the blessing on the man to whom God credits righteousness apart from works:
7 "BLESSED ARE THOSE WHOSE LAWLESS DEEDS HAVE BEEN FORGIVEN, AND WHOSE SINS HAVE BEEN COVERED.
8 "BLESSED IS THE MAN WHOSE SIN THE LORD WILL NOT TAKE INTO ACCOUNT."
9 Is this blessing then on the circumcised, or on the uncircumcised also? For we say, "FAITH WAS CREDITED TO ABRAHAM AS RIGHTEOUSNESS." 10 How then was it credited? While he was circumcised, or uncircumcised ? Not while circumcised, but while uncircumcised;
11 and he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had while uncircumcised, so that he might be the father of all who believe without being circumcised, that righteousness might be credited to them,
12 and the father of circumcision to those who not only are of the circumcision, but who also follow in the steps of the faith of our father Abraham which he had while uncircumcised.
​

No more so than circumcision saved Abraham does baptism save us. The view is a deliberate distortion of God's word.

 

[Bluelion]

In Mark 16:16 Jesus puts baptism in the same relationship with salvation as belief.

You understand pretty well.

Why would you say that? Do you think baptism is a work of the law?

OK, what's the question? I'm not the one who said, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved." You'll have to question Him on that.

That is just not Biblical. Abraham was counted righteous because of his faith with all the other prophets. Jesus saved a man on the cross with out baptism. What Jesus said is you must be reborn that happens when a person repents and turns to God. We are commanded to be baptized, we are not saved by it, no more than circumcise could save a person in the old covenant.

 

[greatdivide46]

No one in the Bible said that.

This is a direct quote from Jesus, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved" (Mark 16:16). Now, tell me again how no one in the Bible said that.

 

[ThisBrotherOfHis]

This is a direct quote from Jesus, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved" (Mark 16:16). Now, tell me again how no one in the Bible said that.

I will, because you don't understand what you've read.

The word there is baptizo, not to be confused with bapto, which is the word referring to water baptism. The latter is a temporary change, later coming to mean a public testimony of the permanent change brought about by the former, which is not dipping in water, but receiving the Holy Spirit. That happens when one believes the gospel -- though I'm sure in your stubbornness you will not accept that, and continue to insist errantly that water baptism is necessary for salvation. It most assuredly is not.

The clearest example that shows the meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physician Nicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making pickles and is helpful because it uses both words. Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be "dipped" (bapto) into boiling water and then "baptized" (baptizo) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change. When used in the New Testament, this word more often refers to our union and identification with Christ through the indwelling Holy Spirit, rather than to our water baptism.

In your citing of Mark 16:16, you are missing the point that Christ says nothing about getting wet having anything to do with. Instead, He affirms that mere intellectual assent, even followed by public testimony, is not enough for salvation. There must be a union with Him, a real change, like the vegetable to the pickle.

So, I've placed that before you. Feel free to accept it, or carry on in your erroneous belief. I fear you will choose the latter.

 

[greatdivide46]

I will, because you don't understand what you've read.

You may be right.

The word there is baptizo, not to be confused with bapto, which is the word referring to water baptism. The latter is a temporary change, later coming to mean a public testimony of the permanent change brought about by the former, which is not dipping in water, but receiving the Holy Spirit. That happens when one believes the gospel -- though I'm sure in your stubbornness you will not accept that, and continue to insist errantly that water baptism is necessary for salvation. It most assuredly is not.

The definition of baptizo in the lexicon that I own is to immerse or submerge in water. Therefore, to say that baptizo is always indicative of a dry baptism is most assuredly not true.

The clearest example that shows the meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physician Nicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making pickles and is helpful because it uses both words. Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be "dipped" (bapto) into boiling water and then "baptized" (baptizo) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change. When used in the New Testament, this word more often refers to our union and identification with Christ through the indwelling Holy Spirit, rather than to our water baptism.

Oh, here we go with the pickling recipe. Unfortunately were not talking about making pickles here, we're talking about people becoming members of the body of Christ and followers of His. What that has to do with a pickle recipe, I've never been able to understand.

In your citing of Mark 16:16, you are missing the point that Christ says nothing about getting wet having anything to do with. Instead, He affirms that mere intellectual assent, even followed by public testimony, is not enough for salvation. There must be a union with Him, a real change, like the vegetable to the pickle.

Baptism means getting wet just like taking a bath means getting wet. It means in water unless context shows otherwise.

So, I've placed that before you. Feel free to accept it, or carry on in your erroneous belief. I fear you will choose the latter.

I think I'll carry on with my biblical belief and leave the interpretational gymnastics, pickle recipes, and erroneous beliefs to those who find it difficult to accept the words of the bible for what they actually say.