Water Baptism - Is It Really Necessary?

[winsome]

i can see it from God to Jesus and to the 12 apostles, but SCRIPTURE from 12 apostles to whoever. NOPE the gifting is in us already the SPirit brings it out to be used for God. Jesus says all power is given to ME he does not say to me and i give it to you, though as i said they did have MORE then we do BUT it was for a reason. it was the beggining of the Church and people had to no that they were of GOD. but the Spirit WHICH is Christ who said he had all authority is in us now is it not. doesnt give us authority it is still the SPirit who is Christ with the authority. we just need to let him have it or use it. So even in your attempt to show authority passed down you could not give scripture to make the claim.

You see you are not even reading the scripture properly.Jesus does not say "all power is given to ME" he says all authority is given to me.

The Holy SPirit confers power - read my scripture quotes
Jesus gives authority - read my scripture quotes.

Don't confuse Jesus with the Spirit - they are different persons of the Trinity.

 

[winsome]

what does this have to do with the Church Universial. you are assuming it speaks of being over the Church Universial. it does not. unless you assume which i have shown you do well at.

It's an example of the passing on of authority.

However we are getting a bit sidetracked from baptism, although the question of authority is important. But there are plenty of threads on this already.

Can we get back to baptism and particularly the baptisms mentioned in John 3 & 4 (see earlier post) as I think they are important.

 

[Rich48]

Excellant points! As we both have pointed out, the command of Christ was to baptize--and that, as has been shown, did not mean to teach.

The point that has yet to be refuted is that the command is specific--baptize. How, other than in water, could this be done? Answer--no way!

Rich

 

[GenemZ]

Excellant points! As we both have pointed out, the command of Christ was to baptize--and that, as has been shown, did not mean to teach.

The point that has yet to be refuted is that the command is specific--baptize. How, other than in water, could this be done? Answer--no way!

Rich

After all this? You guys still do not know how the word baptism was used back then.

1 Corinthians 10:2 niv​

"They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea."​

I believe the Holy Spirit wanted that to appear in Scripture as to give those who he knew would think like you are now doing, something to chew on. Trouble is? You spit it out and make believe its been White Out- ed from the Word.

You have yet to grasp the true meaning of "baptize." As it was used back then!

Here's a hypothetical.....

If some Jews wandering in the wilderness had travelled into a near by town to buy some supplies. And when there, they started saying how they need to get the supplies quickly because Moses said they will be moving on in the morning. If the people of that town asked who is this Moses?

When they were told about WHO and WHAT Moses is?

They would be baptized into the name of Moses!

"Name" could mean "person" to people in those days!


That's why you guys fail to see. And, some of you will continue to fail to see.

"They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea."​

You really do not understand the meaning and the usage of the word "baptize" at the time Scripture was written. You are working with what has become a commonly held tradition of men. Its not what the Bible speaks of.

Mark 10:38 niv
"You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?"
​

Jesus had long received his water baptism before he spoke those words. Do you know what kind of baptism he was speaking of? Was he to be water baptized again?

Mark 10:38-39 niv
"You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?"
​

"We can," they answered. Jesus said to them, "You will drink the cup I drink and be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with."​

There is a lot more meaning to the word than your over simplified dogmatic application is indicating. These men had already been water baptized when Jesus spoke those words! Jesus was saying they were to receive a new baptism!

What about all those Jews who had been baptized by John? Were they to now be water baptized again when believing in Christ?

In Christ, GeneZ​

​

 

[Rich48]

I give up here. You continue to post the same scriptures time after time, and never address the facts that are presented to you. You cannot refute the scriptures that show that water baptism was used by the early church.

I leave the thread.

Rich

 

[GenemZ]

I give up here. You continue to post the same scriptures time after time, and never address the facts that are presented to you. You cannot refute the scriptures that show that water baptism was used by the early church.

I leave the thread.

Rich

I have LONG addressed what you claim I have not. Which only goes to prove you do not see what is written. I did not refute that water baptism was used in the early church. Because, it happened. I said WHY it was done. Again, you do not see what is written.....

In Christ, GeneZ
​

 

[sawdust]

Excellant points! As we both have pointed out, the command of Christ was to baptize--and that, as has been shown, did not mean to teach.

The point that has yet to be refuted is that the command is specific--baptize. How, other than in water, could this be done? Answer--no way!

Rich

You ask "how can one be baptised into the name apart from water?" This is how:

On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus. Acts 19:5

Do you see that? "Hearing". No water at all here just hearing.

Also note this.

24Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures. 25He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John. 26He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately. Acts 18:24-26

John's baptism was adequate for the time of Israel because it was a baptism signifying repentance and resulting in forgiveness of sin. But it is not adequate for the time of the Church because between the two times stands the Cross. This is the one place where all sin was dealt with, once and for all. Prior to the Cross, water counted as a "credit on the books" but after the Cross?.... no more need for "credits". Now is the time for "cash in hand".

peace

 

[heymikey80]

Hey winsome, we're spinning a little too far from the subject, but I don't agree that the Great Commission was limited to the eleven there, for ... clear reasons (starting with Paul, but also stretching to Lk 9:49-50 and the Greek of the binding and loosing passages showing a derived authority in some cases, and permitting that interpretation in the remainder).

So for me the issue is what Jesus Christ said, not what authority the Church proposes to exercise. The authority Christ gave is the basis of the authority of the Church. It's not an authority over what Christ said -- so it's not over God's word.

 

[winsome]

Hey winsome, we're spinning a little too far from the subject, but I don't agree that the Great Commission was limited to the eleven there, for ... clear reasons (starting with Paul, but also stretching to Lk 9:49-50 and the Greek of the binding and loosing passages showing a derived authority in some cases, and permitting that interpretation in the remainder).

So for me the issue is what Jesus Christ said, not what authority the Church proposes to exercise. The authority Christ gave is the basis of the authority of the Church. It's not an authority over what Christ said -- so it's not over God's word.

We are off topic and there are threads on this already so I won't take this any further here.

I'm just waiting to see if Schroeder will agree that in fact Jesus was baptising in the Jordan, and his disciples were also baptising in the Jordan as repoirted in John chapters 3 & 4. Otherwise I'm not going to spend any more time in this thread.

Mind you, with one last push we could get it to the 1,000 mark.

 

[Schroeder]

You mean Jesus said you must be born again with Spirit and the Spirit. Doesn’t make sense. But I’ll leave that one for now or we’ll get sidetracked too much.

did you read the part i said some see it saying water EVEN the spirit. and as i said he speaks in a SINGULAR way in speaking of BORN FROM ABOVE. It is GOd giving the SPirit FROM ABOVE. NOT through water baptism. FACT is no scripture makes it this way unblkess you make it all contradict itself. which i showed you and or gave examples of which you ignored.

You say it does not record it very precisely

After this Jesus and his disciples went into the Judean countryside, and he spent some time there with them and baptized. (Jn 3:23)
How imprecise is that?
You want facts? FACT – Jesus is baptising (in water). Scripture says so.

Another unclear picture you say? What is unclear?
Jesus and his disciples went into the Judean countryside, and he spent some time there with them and baptized.
What is unclear about that?

They came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, the one who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you testified, here he is baptizing, and all are going to him.” (Jn 3:26)
How imprecise is that?
You want facts? FACT – Jesus is baptising (in water). Scripture says so.

Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard, “Jesus is making and baptising more disciples than John” —although it was not Jesus himself but his disciples who baptised (Jn 4:1-2)
How imprecise is that?
You want facts? FACT – Jesus’ disciples were baptising (in water). Scripture says so.

The trouble is you don’t like the facts that are presented to you because they don’t fit in with your theology.

i read the facts. i said EVEN if he did what was his point in doing it. seeing HOW he was to baptize with the SPirit. there is NO point in him doing it UNLESS the point is different from what you make it out to be. i NEVER said they did not water baptize. the POINT is WHAT it was done for.

 

[Schroeder]

You see you are not even reading the scripture properly.Jesus does not say "all power is given to ME" he says all authority is given to me.

The Holy SPirit confers power - read my scripture quotes
Jesus gives authority - read my scripture quotes.

Don't confuse Jesus with the Spirit - they are different persons of the Trinity.

NO they are not different person they are ONE and the same person in three forms. JESUS is the SPirit GOd is SPirit scripture says so. jn. 4:24, 2 cor 3:17-18. and jesus said he was I AM. your scripture qoutes do not say that the holy spirit confers power as you seem to see it. and no scripturte said Jesus gave His athority over to the apostles TO then be passed on to whoever after that. there is NO succession of Athority you keep speaking of.

 

[Schroeder]

We are off topic and there are threads on this already so I won't take this any further here.

I'm just waiting to see if Schroeder will agree that in fact Jesus was baptising in the Jordan, and his disciples were also baptising in the Jordan as repoirted in John chapters 3 & 4. Otherwise I'm not going to spend any more time in this thread.

Mind you, with one last push we could get it to the 1,000 mark.

i did and would you tell me his point in water baptizing. they were not in the CHurch age yet seeing how he had not yet been glorified or shed his blood. once he sheds his blood the NEW order goes into effect. At which HIS baptism of the SPirit would begin. 7:38-39. he in john 3 states we are to be BORN FROM ABOVE. in verse 8 he says so it is with everyone BORN OF THE SPIRIT. if he is speaking of water and spirit in verse 5 WHY WHY WHY does he only speak of the SPirit in verse 8. and THEN WHY WHY does he ONLY speak of BELIEF and eternal life in verse 16, 36 and why does eph 1:13-14 speak of belief then receiving the SPirit which show our QUARANTEE OF ETERNAL LIFE. put it ALL together and what you and others speak of that water baptism is essential for eternal life is FLAT WRONG AND A LIE. you do not say in one instance that eternal life is through water (baptism) and the SPirit then in the next moment say that it is belief in Me for eternal life. IF you would JUST examine ALL of scripture it would become clear. instead you cherry pick it apart and create a useless theology of works for salvation. FACT is we can do no works for God UNTILL the SPirit is in us and that is given by belief as CLEARLY stated in eph 1:13-14. SO the issue IS NOT whether he or his disciples DID water baptize but why they did it and what it was done for. WHICH IS WHAT YOU GOT ALL WRONG.

 

[winsome]

i read the facts. i said EVEN if he did what was his point in doing it. seeing HOW he was to baptize with the SPirit. there is NO point in him doing it UNLESS the point is different from what you make it out to be. i NEVER said they did not water baptize. the POINT is WHAT it was done for.

You see no point because you are fixated of "Spirit Baptism".

Now follow this logic.

Two key texts is the discussion about baptism with water are Jesus words to the apostles just before his ascension.

Mark records
Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation. The one who believes and is baptised will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned. (Mk 16:15-16)

Matthew records.
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age. (Mt 28:19-20)

These would appear to be two separate occasions as in one they at table and in the other they are on a high mountain.

When someone goes away and leaves someone else in charge they give them many instruction about what they are to do. What do they say in their final instructions just before they go? I would say they highlight the most important to make sure they stick in their minds. The four things that Jesus highlights are:

Proclaim the god news
Make disciples
Baptise
Teach

But two questions we must answer are:
1. What did Jesus mean by baptise?
2. What did the apostles understand by baptise?

This was an important moment. Jesus was giving his last instructions and commissioning them to carry on his mission. It seems to me it was vital that they understood him. Why would he mislead them?

So it seems to me that the two should be the same, and we can understand what Jesus meant by what the apostles understood.

So what did the apostles understand by baptism. We can discover this by looking at their experience and their practice.

What was the apostles experience of baptism?

John tells us:
After this Jesus and his disciples went into the Judean countryside, and he spent some time there with them and baptised. (Jn 3:23)

They came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, the one who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you testified, here he is baptising, and all are going to him.”
They saw Jesus baptising – in water

Then they themselves baptised with water
Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard, “Jesus is making and baptising more disciples than John” —although it was not Jesus himself but his disciples who baptised— (Jn 4:1-2)

Now what was their practice of baptism
We have seen (above) that they baptised with water at the start of Jesus’ ministry.
We also know that they baptised with water after Pentecost – I don’t think there is any dispute about this so I won’t give the scriptures.

So their experience and practice of baptism was baptism with water. This is what they understood by baptism

When Jesus was speaking to them just before his ascension, what was the experience of the apostles of Baptism with the Holy Spirit. NONE, absolutely none.

Jesus knew this. He knew they understood baptism as baptism with water. So if when he told them to baptise he actually meant Baptism with the Holy Spirit why did not say that and why he leave them with this massive misunderstanding?

In reality he didn’t because he meant baptise with water.

What other possibilities are there?

Did Jesus mean water baptism but “got it wrong”? Hardly.

Did Jesus mean Spirit baptism but deliberately left the disciples in error. That’s tantamount to saying he deceived them.

No, when he said baptise he meant baptise with water.

 

[Schroeder]

Excellant points! As we both have pointed out, the command of Christ was to baptize--and that, as has been shown, did not mean to teach.

The point that has yet to be refuted is that the command is specific--baptize. How, other than in water, could this be done? Answer--no way!

Rich

talk about having blinders on. my goodness. it has been shown to you way to many times that the word does not merely mean water baptism. and that matt. 28 is not telling them to water baptize but to go and share the gospel WHICH would JOIN them or IMMERSE them into the trinity or body or Church how ever you wish to state it. THEN they could teach them His commands. read rom8:5-10 for once. you can DO NOTHING for God including something to gain what you need to do it in the first place UNTILL you have the SPirit in you ALREADY. you say acts 2:38 says water baptism then receive the SPirit because you obeyed a command of Christ to be water baptized to be saved and forgiven sin. YET YET YET YET YET scripture says we cant do His will UNLTILL AFTER we have the SPirit. and God says our work is to BELIEVE eph 1 :13-14 says we RECIEVE the SPirit when we BELIEVE JESUS said if we BELIEVE in Him we have eternal life.

 

[Schroeder]

You see no point because you are fixated of "Spirit Baptism".

Now follow this logic.

Two key texts is the discussion about baptism with water are Jesus words to the apostles just before his ascension.

Mark records
Go into all the world and proclaim the good news to the whole creation. The one who believes and is baptised will be saved; but the one who does not believe will be condemned. (Mk 16:15-16)

Matthew records.
Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptising them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything that I have commanded you. And remember, I am with you always, to the end of the age. (Mt 28:19-20)

These would appear to be two separate occasions as in one they at table and in the other they are on a high mountain.

When someone goes away and leaves someone else in charge they give them many instruction about what they are to do. What do they say in their final instructions just before they go? I would say they highlight the most important to make sure they stick in their minds. The four things that Jesus highlights are:

Proclaim the god news
Make disciples
Baptise
Teach

But two questions we must answer are:
1. What did Jesus mean by baptise?
2. What did the apostles understand by baptise?

This was an important moment. Jesus was giving his last instructions and commissioning them to carry on his mission. It seems to me it was vital that they understood him. Why would he mislead them?

So it seems to me that the two should be the same, and we can understand what Jesus meant by what the apostles understood.

So what did the apostles understand by baptism. We can discover this by looking at their experience and their practice.

What was the apostles experience of baptism?

John tells us:
After this Jesus and his disciples went into the Judean countryside, and he spent some time there with them and baptised. (Jn 3:23)

They came to John and said to him, “Rabbi, the one who was with you across the Jordan, to whom you testified, here he is baptising, and all are going to him.”
They saw Jesus baptising – in water

Then they themselves baptised with water
Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard, “Jesus is making and baptising more disciples than John” —although it was not Jesus himself but his disciples who baptised— (Jn 4:1-2)

Now what was their practice of baptism
We have seen (above) that they baptised with water at the start of Jesus’ ministry.
We also know that they baptised with water after Pentecost – I don’t think there is any dispute about this so I won’t give the scriptures.

So their experience and practice of baptism was baptism with water. This is what they understood by baptism

When Jesus was speaking to them just before his ascension, what was the experience of the apostles of Baptism with the Holy Spirit. NONE, absolutely none.

Jesus knew this. He knew they understood baptism as baptism with water. So if when he told them to baptise he actually meant Baptism with the Holy Spirit why did not say that and why he leave them with this massive misunderstanding?

In reality he didn’t because he meant baptise with water.

What other possibilities are there?

Did Jesus mean water baptism but “got it wrong”? Hardly.

Did Jesus mean Spirit baptism but deliberately left the disciples in error. That’s tantamount to saying he deceived them.

No, when he said baptise he meant baptise with water.

know that is wrong he used the word baptism in Luke to refer to immersion. HGe was speakin gof his sacrifice, the FACT is they did understand the use of it other then just meaning water batism. for the meaning of it is to dip or to IMMERSE. NOT water dip or water immersion. in Matt. 28. he does not give the command to water baptize. he uses it has the use of IMMERSION or joined into. the FACT is that is ACTUALY what they did they went and made the Church the Church is joined into or with GOd, Christ and the SPirit. GOd draws us Christ did the work needed and the SPirit joins us to His work. they NEVER said the words baptize yo in the name of.... when they water baptized. scripture NEVER says it was to join us into the Church or into Christ. Mark 16:16 does not mean water baptism either. as i keep saying He does not say we are saved by belief then say belief PLUS water baptism. read john 7:38-39 it explains why he says it the way he does in mark 16. then read john 3:18 it is the same words except for the word baptize. YOU KNOW WHY. john 7:39 shows why. in john 3:18 he was not yet glorified His baptism was not in effect yet. in mark 16 HIS baptism was because he had been glorified. the apostles did not work the miricles mentioned in verse 17 untill AFTER they were baptized in the SPirit. and they were not water baptized to receive the holy SPirit. scripture shows it was NOT a misunderstanding for them. you show it is for YOU quite clearly. scripture says that the consular would REMIND them of whast he taught them. that it would help them UNDERSTAND what he was saying. and scripture shows that is what happened. once they received the SPirit they became clearer in what was taught them. 1 cor 1 shows water baptism was for ASSOCIATION and that is it. it had no value in salvation or forgiveness of sins.

 

[winsome]

know that is wrong he used the word baptism in Luke to refer to immersion. HGe was speakin gof his sacrifice, the FACT is they did understand the use of it other then just meaning water batism. for the meaning of it is to dip or to IMMERSE. NOT water dip or water immersion. in Matt. 28. he does not give the command to water baptize. he uses it has the use of IMMERSION or joined into. the FACT is that is ACTUALY what they did they went and made the Church the Church is joined into or with GOd, Christ and the SPirit. GOd draws us Christ did the work needed and the SPirit joins us to His work. they NEVER said the words baptize yo in the name of.... when they water baptized. scripture NEVER says it was to join us into the Church or into Christ. Mark 16:16 does not mean water baptism either. as i keep saying He does not say we are saved by belief then say belief PLUS water baptism. read john 7:38-39 it explains why he says it the way he does in mark 16. then read john 3:18 it is the same words except for the word baptize. YOU KNOW WHY. john 7:39 shows why. in john 3:18 he was not yet glorified His baptism was not in effect yet. in mark 16 HIS baptism was because he had been glorified. the apostles did not work the miricles mentioned in verse 17 untill AFTER they were baptized in the SPirit. and they were not water baptized to receive the holy SPirit. scripture shows it was NOT a misunderstanding for them. you show it is for YOU quite clearly. scripture says that the consular would REMIND them of whast he taught them. that it would help them UNDERSTAND what he was saying. and scripture shows that is what happened. once they received the SPirit they became clearer in what was taught them. 1 cor 1 shows water baptism was for ASSOCIATION and that is it. it had no value in salvation or forgiveness of sins.

You haven't even attempted to answer my argument. It's no good just saying that Jesus didn't mean water baptism in Mt. 16:16.

It's just logic, and I've presented it simply and logically.You show me where the above argument fails.

 

[GenemZ]

did you read the part i said some see it saying water EVEN the spirit. and as i said he speaks in a SINGULAR way in speaking of BORN FROM ABOVE. It is GOd giving the SPirit FROM ABOVE. NOT through water baptism. FACT is no scripture makes it this way unblkess you make it all contradict itself. which i showed you and or gave examples of which you ignored.

I realize I need to repeat this again.

When Jesus told Nicodemus to be born again? Water baptism was at that time an active part of the steps to professing faith! Many were being baptized in the Jordan!

John the baptist was baptizing believers when Jesus told Nicodemus to be born again! Just like Jesus told the healed men to present themselves to the priests as commanded by Moses? They were still all under the regulations of the Jewish age! Of course, Jesus would tell Nicodemus to believe and be water baptized! For that was the baptism for that time. Holy Spirit baptism was not yet to be given!

Are we straight on this? Remember this! When Jesus told Nicodemus to be born again, water baptism was actively a part of professing faith. It does not apply to today.

Today, it is simply...

Acts 16:31a niv
They replied, "Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved."
​

If they believe? They will be baptized!

Mark 16:16 niv
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned."

​

Notice? Jesus did not say,

"...does not believe and is not baptized will be condemned."

​

Nor! ..... Even more importantly! He did not say....

"Whoever believes and is not baptized will be condemned."
​

Because when we believe, we are automatically baptized into the body of Christ! Believe and am baptized!

When we do not believe? We are not baptized!

That is why Jesus did not even bother to mention baptism in conjunction with not believing! It just will not happen! But! Believers can believe and not be water baptized... They will not be condemned! (that is, if you want to see baptism as referring to water in this passage).

Grace and peace, GeneZ
​

​

 

[sawdust]

So their experience and practice of baptism was baptism with water. This is what they understood by baptism.

True. It was their experience and practice but their understanding of baptism was not limited to water.

"You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?" Mk.10:38

It's obvious Jesus isn't referring to water baptism here, so the disciples understood baptism in ways beyond water.

When Jesus was speaking to them just before his ascension, what was the experience of the apostles of Baptism with the Holy Spirit. NONE, absolutely none.

Correct.

Jesus knew this.

Correct again.

He knew they understood baptism as baptism with water.

Predominately, but like I said, not limited to.

So if when he told them to baptise he actually meant Baptism with the Holy Spirit why did not say that and why he leave them with this massive misunderstanding?

He did say that. He told them exactly what baptism was required!

On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: "Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. 5For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit." Acts 1:4&5

This is the very thing Peter forgot. (temporarily)

"As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. 16Then I remembered what the Lord had said: 'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' Acts 11:15&16

In reality he didn’t because he meant baptise with water.

If He meant water He would not have said what He said regarding the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

What other possibilities are there?

The one we have been trying to explain all through his thread. BUT, it keeps getting tossed out.

We are to baptise in the name of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This is the equivalent of "Introduction to God 101". Now, if (maybe they will, maybe they won't) they beleive in what they hear? They will be baptised in the Spirit (by God). Now and only now, can they be taught of God. That is, enter into true discipleship. Baptising in the name makes disciples by effectively opening the door to the knowledge of God. Until then, we all are ignorant of who God is and what He has done (and is doing).

Now, I want you to note something. (if you dare)

What was John's baptism?

Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus." Acts 19:4

What did the Jews say to Peter regarding the baptism of the Spirit that Cornelius and his household received?

When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, "So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life." Acts 11:18

The Jews made the connection between the baptism of the Spirit and repentance. John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. Two baptisms, both given for the same reason.

Yet we have....

one Lord, one faith, one baptism; Eph.4:5

If you have been baptised in the Spirit, you have repented. You do not need to undergo another baptism to prove your repentance because your salvation is no-one else's business but is something between you and God alone. The moment you make someone else's salvation your business? You have declared yourself to be their judge, for judgement must proceed salvation.

But there is a greater, far more important lesson to be learned in all this. And that is .... learning to take one at their word alone. If you cannot believe my word, which has no value in and of itself and you treat it as something to be discounted? If that is your attitude to a person's word? Then what guarantee is there you will not hold the same attitude to God's word? If the Church needs and indeed mandates "outward shows" of reality? Then it has missed the very first step on the road of spiritual living. For we walk by faith, not by sight.

God did not create the Church so that we might believe. HE GAVE US HIS WORD! It is written.

But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. Jn.20:31 (please note, no water)

peace

 

[winsome]

True. It was their experience and practice but their understanding of baptism was not limited to water.

"You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?" Mk.10:38

It's obvious Jesus isn't referring to water baptism here, so the disciples understood baptism in ways beyond water.

This just demonstrates my point.
The only baptism that the disciples were familiar with, that they had experienced and practiced, was baptism with water. They were throuoghly familiar with this. So when Jesus wanted to tell them about something outside their experience he used something inside their experience to relate it to – a metaphor.
Jesus was here talking about his passion and death. They did not understand yet that he had to go through this and Jesus is teaching them about it. This comparison of baptism and death ties in with Paul’s teaching about baptism being taking part in the death of Christ.
This telling of something new in terms of what they understand is the same as when he tells them they will be baptised with the Holy Spirit.

He did say that. He told them exactly what baptism was required!

On one occasion, while he was eating with them, he gave them this command: "Do not leave Jerusalem, but wait for the gift my Father promised, which you have heard me speak about. 5For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit." Acts 1:4&5

This is the very thing Peter forgot. (temporarily)

"As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. 16Then I remembered what the Lord had said: 'John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.' Acts 11:15&16



If He meant water He would not have said what He said regarding the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

No he was using baptism as a metaphor to relate something they had not yet experienced to something they had experienced. That didn’t change the nature of the baptism he commanded them to carry out. You just don’t seem to grasp that.

The one we have been trying to explain all through his thread. BUT, it keeps getting tossed out.

We are to baptise in the name of God the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. This is the equivalent of "Introduction to God 101". Now, if (maybe they will, maybe they won't) they beleive in what they hear? They will be baptised in the Spirit (by God). Now and only now, can they be taught of God. That is, enter into true discipleship. Baptising in the name makes disciples by effectively opening the door to the knowledge of God. Until then, we all are ignorant of who God is and what He has done (and is doing).

Now, I want you to note something. (if you dare)

What was John's baptism?

Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus." Acts 19:4

What did the Jews say to Peter regarding the baptism of the Spirit that Cornelius and his household received?

When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, "So then, God has granted even the Gentiles repentance unto life." Acts 11:18

The Jews made the connection between the baptism of the Spirit and repentance. John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. Two baptisms, both given for the same reason.

No they received the Holy Spirit and were then baptised with water. They could only have either because they had repented.

Yet we have....

one Lord, one faith, one baptism; Eph.4:5

If you have been baptised in the Spirit, you have repented. You do not need to undergo another baptism to prove your repentance because your salvation is no-one else's business but is something between you and God alone. The moment you make someone else's salvation your business? You have declared yourself to be their judge, for judgement must proceed salvation.

Baptism with water does many things.
It frees us from original sin.
It forgives any actual sin.
It transfers us from the kingdom of darkness to the kingdom of light
It makes us a new creature, a child of God, a member of the Body of Christ.
It gives us sanctifying grace and the grace of justification.

That is why it is so important.

But there is a greater, far more important lesson to be learned in all this. And that is .... learning to take one at their word alone. If you cannot believe my word, which has no value in and of itself and you treat it as something to be discounted? If that is your attitude to a person's word? Then what guarantee is there you will not hold the same attitude to God's word? If the Church needs and indeed mandates "outward shows" of reality? Then it has missed the very first step on the road of spiritual living. For we walk by faith, not by sight.

God did not create the Church so that we might believe. HE GAVE US HIS WORD! It is written.

But these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that by believing you may have life in his name. Jn.20:31 (please note, no water)

peace

God gave us his Church to teach and sanctify. It is through the ministration of the Church that he pours out his grace in the sacraments that he gave us. He can, and does act outside of these sacraments, but to reject them is unwise, presumptuous and ungrateful.

 

[winsome]

True. It was their experience and practice but their understanding of baptism was not limited to water.

"You don't know what you are asking," Jesus said. "Can you drink the cup I drink or be baptized with the baptism I am baptized with?" Mk.10:38

I would also point out that according to your theory of taking every mention of baptism literally and not metaphorically, we now have three baptisms - with water, with the Holy Spirit, and with blood/suffering/death depending on what you take the above quote to refer to.