Water baptism

[Frogster]

At the end of Acts 1, the apostles chose a replacement.

Acts 1:21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us (the 11 disciples) the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”

23 So they (the 11) nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.

Now into Acts chapter 2.

Acts 2:1 When the day of Pentecost came, they (referring to the group most recently mentioned in ch1 - the apostles) were all together in one place.

2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they (the 12) were sitting. 3 They (the 12) saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them (as Jesus said would happen to the them) 4 All of them (the 12) were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues[a] as the Spirit enabled them.

It is never mentioned that the apostles were baptised with water. Their conversion story again differs from the norm. NOTE: The church had not begun yet.

To find the truth about salvation today, we need to look at the way people were saved when the church started in Acts 2.


Ok, I've read Hebrews.

(Hebrews 9:14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death,[c] so that we may serve the living God!)

Hebrews 9:14 says that Jesus blood "cleanse(s) our consciences".
So before our consciences have been cleansed, we are in sin, and are not saved. Do you agree with this statement?

bob please..enough...they were filled first, and that is that.

the blood does it always, and after conversion, and forever, it is eternal. Hebrews says so.Chapter 10 cover that. That book was written to saved people..

Gosh, why doesn't hebrews go into baptism?

Now what about mr Miami!


by the way, you sort of overpost, you did not need the first part, about choosing an apostle, it was not needed.

 

[Frogster]

By the way, where is Edial?

 

[Frogster]

At the end of Acts 1, the apostles chose a replacement.

Acts 1:21 Therefore it is necessary to choose one of the men who have been with us (the 11 disciples) the whole time the Lord Jesus was living among us, 22 beginning from John’s baptism to the time when Jesus was taken up from us. For one of these must become a witness with us of his resurrection.”

23 So they (the 11) nominated two men: Joseph called Barsabbas (also known as Justus) and Matthias. 24 Then they prayed, “Lord, you know everyone’s heart. Show us which of these two you have chosen 25 to take over this apostolic ministry, which Judas left to go where he belongs.” 26 Then they cast lots, and the lot fell to Matthias; so he was added to the eleven apostles.

Now into Acts chapter 2.

Acts 2:1 When the day of Pentecost came, they (referring to the group most recently mentioned in ch1 - the apostles) were all together in one place.

2 Suddenly a sound like the blowing of a violent wind came from heaven and filled the whole house where they (the 12) were sitting. 3 They (the 12) saw what seemed to be tongues of fire that separated and came to rest on each of them (as Jesus said would happen to the them) 4 All of them (the 12) were filled with the Holy Spirit and began to speak in other tongues[a] as the Spirit enabled them.

It is never mentioned that the apostles were baptised with water. Their conversion story again differs from the norm. NOTE: The church had not begun yet.

To find the truth about salvation today, we need to look at the way people were saved when the church started in Acts 2.


Ok, I've read Hebrews.

(Hebrews 9:14 How much more, then, will the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself unblemished to God, cleanse our consciences from acts that lead to death,[c] so that we may serve the living God!)

Hebrews 9:14 says that Jesus blood "cleanse(s) our consciences".
So before our consciences have been cleansed, we are in sin, and are not saved. Do you agree with this statement?

This verse means all the time, according to Charles Stanley, and he is right.

Bro, keep a proper perspective on the blood, don't overdo baptism to elevate it to the blood.


7 But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus his Son cleanses us from all sin.

 

[bob96]

the blood does it always, and after conversion, and forever, it is eternal. Hebrews says so.Chapter 10 cover that. That book was written to saved people..

So you believe that Jesus' blood cleanses us of our sins AFTER conversion? His blood washes away our sins AFTER we are saved? Sorry to point this out, but that doesn't actually make sense. If we are saved without Jesus' blood, then He died for nothing.

Yours is a very strange doctrine indeed. I don't know anyone else that interprets the bible that way.

Biblically, our conscience is unclean before our sins are forgiven.
After our sins are forgiven (through Jesus' blood), only then is our conscience clear.

 

[Frogster]

what about our friend from miami?

 

[bob96]

lol...you prove my point, the blood cleanses upon conversion...
gee, interesting, why doesn't hebrews go on and on about baptism?

The reason the writer of Hebrews 6 does not go on and on about baptism is because it was a basic teaching - a subject that did not require deep theological debate. It's purpose was simple and clear.

Hebrews 6:1 (KJ21)
1 Therefore, leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God,
2 of the doctrine of baptisms and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead and of eternal judgment.

NIV
1 let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ.

On the other hand, topics such as faith and belief were much more complicated. Faith could waver. Belief could faulter.

So your argument that the claims of baptism are symbolic, and therefore not literal or easily understood must be wrong.

Acts 2:38 "be baptised for the forgiveness of sins."
Acts 22:16 "be baptized, and wash away thy sins"
Rom 6:4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism, ...(that) we too might walk in newness of life.
Gal 3:27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Eph 5:26 ...having cleansed her (the church) by the washing of water with the word
Titus 3:5 he saved us, ...by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit
1 Peter 3:21 "it (baptism) saves you".

NOTE:If a person has not "put on Christ" in baptism (Gal 3:27), then you are not "heirs according to the promise" (Gal 3:29). God will not have anything to do with you.

The writer of Hebrews, and I, implore you to accept the simple truth, and move on to more pressing subjects.

If you cannot accept these verses on face value, and accept the literal translation, then there is something seriously wrong with the "faith only" doctrine you have inherited from Luther.

Luther wanted to tear the book of James from his Bible because he thought the emphasis on works was unbiblical. I suggest you tear out the references to the above verses from your Bible IF you cannot accept them as the words of God.

 

[bob96]

Bob, if as guy on a jet tonight, flying over miami, hears the gospel, believes, repents, and by faith asks Jesus into his heart, and he has now converted, is he saved, where there is no water baptismal on the Jet?

No. He should pray that the jet doesn't crash and kill him before he gets a chance to be baptised. The sad truth is, some people wait too late to be saved. They put it off, they make excuses.

As stated previously, the bible doesn't specify whether baptism should be performed publicly or privately, as this is not the issue. The real issue is urgency, as it is a metter of life and death!

The Ethiopian - “See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?” (Acts 8:36)
Jailer and family - "immediately he and all his household were baptized." (Acts 16:33)
The believers discover their sin - "Brothers! What shall we do!?" ... "be baptized" Acts 2
Gentiles saved - "Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water." (Acts 10:47)
Acts 22:16 "And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name."

Your doctrine of "faith only" says "Stop! Wait! No need to rush! There's a big baptism service in 6 months time. You can get baptised then."

 

[Alithis]

Originally Posted by michaelmynameIs View Post
are you saying water baptism is mandatory to salvation OR water baptism is mandatory to obedience because having been saved we are now to obey ?

the former will get some here all hot under the collar

Your quote of me doesn't mention water or baptism.

Have you read the previous 27 pages?

no but i did not wish to quote a specific quote .simply get your attention

are you saying water baptism is mandatory to salvation OR are you saying water baptism is mandatory to obedience ie-because having been saved we are now to obey ?

 

[High Fidelity]

MOD HAT ON

Please remember the Statement of Purpose for this forum;

Spirit-Filled / Charismatic Community Statement of Purpose
No Promotion of works, observances or water baptism as a means to gain salvation or righteousness, or any other merit, or as mandatory to Christian living. Baptism however may be discussed as a sign of obedience to Christ.

MOD HAT OFF
​

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Thanks for the reminder JTK

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Okay, so within the confines of this particular forum's rules what is the significance of water baptism?

As I stated to start the post, there is still significant evidence within the text of the New Testament to support the need for converts to be baptized IMMEDIATELY upon conversion even without treading the "salvation" topic.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

First of these topics is baptism is necessary... IS NECESSARY if a person wants to become a disciple of Jesus.

Matthew 28:18-20 ESV

18 And Jesus came and said to them, All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.

In this passage, the "Great Commission" of Christ, we see ONE, and only ONE, command given.

MAKE DISCIPLES

Go, is not a command here. The Greek of the text actually would be better translated, "As you are going..." Baptism and teaching are sub-commands of the singular command of "Make disciples".

It's sort of like when you went to the grocery store as a kid. Mommy said, "Go to the grocery store and buy food." BUY FOOD is the command there, GO to the grocery store is the place this is to be done. The grocery list that came with your command is what is expected of you to make the command, BUY FOOD, fulfilled. You know you can't come home until you have completed that list of you may well have failed in your task.

Jesus said:
GO [into all the world; Mark 16:15] (Mode/where)
MAKE DISCIPLES (Command)

Now the sub-commands to make disciples are baptize and teach. Baptism FIRST and Teach SECOND. You shouldn't teach people the deeper commands of Christ without them being baptized first. This is the biblical standard. This is why the Apostles baptized people first before committing them to fellowship (Acts 2:38-42).

So Matthew 28:19-20 is easier read as:

As you are going [by the Spirit (Romans 8:14)] you need to make disciples by baptizing people in the name of Jesus (Colossians 1:15, 19, 2:9; Hebrews 1:3) then teaching them all of the Lord's commands (John 14:15-17).

 

[ByTheSpirit]

Another aspect of water baptism that can be discussed within the limits of the forum rules and prove the importance of baptism immediately is "the circumcision of Christ"

11 In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses,

The circumcision of Christ, as described from the hands of Paul, is the "removal of the body of flesh" (v11). This is the act of spiritual circumcision (Philippians 3:3; Romans 2:28-29; Deuteronomy 30:6). Now in Colossians 2:13 and Deuteronomy 30:6, both texts say that it is God who does these things to us, circumcizes our hearts so we may love him. This may present a problem with the idea of water baptism until you read verse 12 of Colossians 2.

Colossians 2:12, "having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead."

I emphasized different portions of the verse to bring out the truth of the text. In baptism those who have faith are raised with Christ by the work of God. Baptism is a work of God in those who have faith.

This proves several things.

Baptism is not a work of man, as in the Ephesians 2:8-9, "not of works" sense. We don't get baptized as a work of righteousness (Titus 3:5), but rather baptism is a work of God in those who have faith in his Son.

BAPTISM IS A WORK OF GOD IN THOSE WHO HAVE FAITH (those are the words of Paul not Bryan *me*)

The other thing this simple statement points out is the those who get baptized WITHOUT faith are doing nothing productive for themselves. Baptism apart from faith in Christ is useless. A person must have faith in Christ, demonstrated by a repentant heart (Acts 2:38, 3:19), in order for baptism to be an effective work of God.

So according to the text of Colossians 2:11-13:

We were dead when in sin and the uncircumcision of our hearts, but God made us alive together in Christ through faith by baptism, in which the body of flesh was cut away.

 

[Frogster]

The reason the writer of Hebrews 6 does not go on and on about baptism is because it was a basic teaching - a subject that did not require deep theological debate. It's purpose was simple and clear.

Hebrews 6:1 (KJ21)
1 Therefore, leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God,
2 of the doctrine of baptisms and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead and of eternal judgment.

NIV
1 let us move beyond the elementary teachings about Christ.

On the other hand, topics such as faith and belief were much more complicated. Faith could waver. Belief could faulter.

So your argument that the claims of baptism are symbolic, and therefore not literal or easily understood must be wrong.

Acts 2:38 "be baptised for the forgiveness of sins."
Acts 22:16 "be baptized, and wash away thy sins"
Rom 6:4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism, ...(that) we too might walk in newness of life.
Gal 3:27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Eph 5:26 ...having cleansed her (the church) by the washing of water with the word
Titus 3:5 he saved us, ...by the washing of regeneration and renewal in the Holy Spirit
1 Peter 3:21 "it (baptism) saves you".

NOTE:If a person has not "put on Christ" in baptism (Gal 3:27), then you are not "heirs according to the promise" (Gal 3:29). God will not have anything to do with you.

The writer of Hebrews, and I, implore you to accept the simple truth, and move on to more pressing subjects.

If you cannot accept these verses on face value, and accept the literal translation, then there is something seriously wrong with the "faith only" doctrine you have inherited from Luther.

Luther wanted to tear the book of James from his Bible because he thought the emphasis on works was unbiblical. I suggest you tear out the references to the above verses from your Bible IF you cannot accept them as the words of God.

no Bob, the reason he did not go on about baptism, was because he was centered on the main purpose, the blood...the atonement, all of which, are not about baptism, we don't need water for sin remission, hebrews is clear, so your interp of hebrews is incorrect.

lol..he even called some things elemental, like baptisms..but the blood was important, without the shedding of blood, no remission in heb 9.


Why wouldn't he mention baptism if it were needed for remission?

 

[Frogster]

No. He should pray that the jet doesn't crash and kill him before he gets a chance to be baptised. The sad truth is, some people wait too late to be saved. They put it off, they make excuses.

As stated previously, the bible doesn't specify whether baptism should be performed publicly or privately, as this is not the issue. The real issue is urgency, as it is a metter of life and death!

The Ethiopian - “See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?” (Acts 8:36)
Jailer and family - "immediately he and all his household were baptized." (Acts 16:33)
The believers discover their sin - "Brothers! What shall we do!?" ... "be baptized" Acts 2
Gentiles saved - "Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water." (Acts 10:47)
Acts 22:16 "And now what are you waiting for? Get up, be baptized and wash your sins away, calling on his name."

Your doctrine of "faith only" says "Stop! Wait! No need to rush! There's a big baptism service in 6 months time. You can get baptised then."

red above, when you answer NO.. you are saying he is not saved because he was not baptized. The mod said, it is not mandatory for salvation, so you are going against the rules, setting up works salvation.


So you are wrong.

 

[Frogster]

no but i did not wish to quote a specific quote .simply get your attention

are you saying water baptism is mandatory to salvation OR are you saying water baptism is mandatory to obedience ie-because having been saved we are now to obey ?

he has to mean it as mandatory, because why else would the miami man not be saved? In Bob's mind, and incorrect doctrine, it was because he was not baptized, that is the only possible reason, in our equation with the miami man.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

The other aspect of baptism that makes it absolutely necessary for new converts to submit to immediately upon conversion is:

ALL BELIEVERS ARE PRIESTS UNTO GOD UNDER THE LEADERSHIP OF OUR HIGH PRIEST, JESUS CHRIST

Jesus is our High Priest (Hebrews 2:17, 3:1, 6:20, 8:1).

According to the word of God in Exodus 29:4, all high priests had to be washed with water before they were allowed to serve in their role. This is why Jesus made the statement at his baptism that his baptism was to fulfill all righteousness. He knew the command of Exodus 29:4 and knew his calling was to become the eternal high priest after Melchezidek. So he had to submit to baptism in order to take on his high priestly office.

Likewise priests served under the high priest. He was their designator and their superior. Like the high priest, ordinary priests were required to be washed with water before serving in their role (Numbers 8:6-7). Peter (1 Peter 2:5,9) and John (Revelation 1:5-6) described all believers in Christ as priests unto God. We are called to offer sacrifices to God that he finds acceptable, and only priests could offer acceptable sacrifices to God. Even in the Old Testament, an anointed king of Israel was not allowed to circumvent the priesthood of God to offer sacrifice as King Saul found out. So we MUST fulfill our priestly calling in order to offer truly acceptable sacrifices to God. This can only... ONLY be done after we have been washed with "water of purification" (Numbers 8:7).

So as Jesus, our High Priest, was baptized to take on his role and calling, we too must be baptized in order to take on our role and calling of priests unto God.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

he has to mean it as mandatory, because why else would the miami man not be saved? In Bob's mind, and incorrect doctrine, it was because he was not baptized, that is the only possible reason, in our equation with the miami man.

Frog if the world was built on what ifs and hypotheticals, what would it now look like? You are the one who always...

ALWAYS...

demands text to prove a point and bob has done that plenty of times. So you revert to "what ifs" and hypotheticals to disprove something that is CLEARLY biblical in nature.

So you have failed bud in this sense...

 

[Frogster]

Another aspect of water baptism that can be discussed within the limits of the forum rules and prove the importance of baptism immediately is "the circumcision of Christ"

11 In him also you were circumcised with a circumcision made without hands, by putting off the body of the flesh, by the circumcision of Christ, 12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead. 13 And you, who were dead in your trespasses and the uncircumcision of your flesh, God made alive together with him, having forgiven us all our trespasses,

The circumcision of Christ, as described from the hands of Paul, is the "removal of the body of flesh" (v11). This is the act of spiritual circumcision (Philippians 3:3; Romans 2:28-29; Deuteronomy 30:6). Now in Colossians 2:13 and Deuteronomy 30:6, both texts say that it is God who does these things to us, circumcizes our hearts so we may love him. This may present a problem with the idea of water baptism until you read verse 12 of Colossians 2.

Colossians 2:12, "having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead."

I emphasized different portions of the verse to bring out the truth of the text. In baptism those who have faith are raised with Christ by the work of God. Baptism is a work of God in those who have faith.

This proves several things.

Baptism is not a work of man, as in the Ephesians 2:8-9, "not of works" sense. We don't get baptized as a work of righteousness (Titus 3:5), but rather baptism is a work of God in those who have faith in his Son.

BAPTISM IS A WORK OF GOD IN THOSE WHO HAVE FAITH (those are the words of Paul not Bryan *me*)

The other thing this simple statement points out is the those who get baptized WITHOUT faith are doing nothing productive for themselves. Baptism apart from faith in Christ is useless. A person must have faith in Christ, demonstrated by a repentant heart (Acts 2:38, 3:19), in order for baptism to be an effective work of God.

So according to the text of Colossians 2:11-13:

We were dead when in sin and the uncircumcision of our hearts, but God made us alive together in Christ through faith by baptism, in which the body of flesh was cut away.

if you say it is water in Col 2, or romans 6, where I say it was union, spiritual things, as everything is in the chapters, which fits the 2 chapters, you are saying it is mandatory, because if one is not water baptized, then he can not have the benefits of the 2 chapters.

both chapters are really describing our conversion moment, all of which do not need water, to be put in union with Christ.

So mandatory is what we get, if you insist that it is water in Col 2, and rom 6.


You are saying really, a conversion is not so, unless it is water born.

 

[Frogster]

It says we were dead in Col 2, right before baptism, that implies that were were unsaved.

Fine, spiritually, we were, until we were born again, had sin remission etc.That works, dead until union with the Lord, raised up into Him.

But if it is water, then you're saying that dead unsaved people were water baptized. That does not happen, unsaved do not get baptized while in an unbelieving state, they get water baptized afterwards.

So col 2, only makes sense, if it is spiritual, like all the rest f the things. Forgiveness, being raised, circumcision, dying on the cross with the Lord, etc is all spiritual, yet somehow you think, the baptism is natural in Col 2, and we need a pool of water for Col 2 and rom 6 to work?

huh!?

I showed you about 7 "in Him's" in chapter 2, it is all about union, being "in Him", but you ignore that, union...it does not need water.


For Col 2 to work, in your view, unbelievers were in the water, then somehow convert in the water, and God can only raise them up if they are coming up out of a baptismal.

sorry, but a LOL is needed after that one!