What about Baptism?

FluviusNeckar · Jan 22, 2003

Originally posted by Ben johnson
Perhaps I chose the wrong word---let's say then, ANECDOTE doth not set POLICY. Yes we are told to "model ourselves after Christ, to become Christlike"---but never are we told to follow after all the NT Christians. Take "speaking in tongues"---most all the incidents (or anecdotal recounts) of people getting-saved in the NT, they speak in tongues; are all now required to tongue. [/B]

Paul himself noted that not all speak in tongues. Predecedence still applies. Predence IS policy. Anecdote? Who gets to say what is anecdotal? You?! Jehovah's Witnesses?! Pelagians?!

Precedence remains the stock in trade of the Protestant and Catholic Churches in applying the Scriptures and the Courts in applying the Constitution.

What I find hilarious is that the Old Testament example of tithing enjoys greater respect in Christianity than the example of baptism Jesus set when He was baptized to fulfill all righteousness.

ScottEmerson · Jan 22, 2003

Christ didn't baptize anyone - neither did Paul, really. So we're following their example, right?

FluviusNeckar · Jan 22, 2003

Originally posted by ScottEmerson
Christ didn't baptize anyone - neither did Paul, really. So we're following their example, right?

Jesus commanded baptism. Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Really disingenuous argument, Mr. Emerson. When Jesus tells you to do something, are you really going to tell Jesus, "Why do I have to do it when you didn't?"

cougan · Jan 23, 2003

Originally posted by Ben johnson
They are not sequential, they are simultaneous. Separate things (hence the "KAI-AND", but separate and distinct). In this instance, the water-baptism and the washing-away-sins occurs sumultaneously; other times, one precedes the other, and in different passages the other precedes the one.
Cougan, with great respect, you have only "delt with it" and "buried it" in your own esteem. I think that you can naught but affirm the "three-fold-aspect" of salvation, cited in Hebrews with the word, "Metochos", partakers, partners:

1. Partners in a heavenly calling (3:1)
2. Partners in the Holy Spirit (6:4)
3. Partners in Christ (3:14)

Three-fold, each distinct and different, each indicating SALVATION.

You have affirmed that "baptism in the Holy Spirit", which is to say "immersion in the Holy Spirit" is not through water (as John plainly says in Matt3:11). Thus, ONE of the three-fold-aspect-of-salvation is NOT by water.

Yet the passage in Romans 6, which says: "immersed/buried/united in Christ", which is a SECOND of the three-fold-aspect-of-salvation, you stubbornly insist IT is through WATER. The same word used for "immersion in the Holy Spirit" in Matt3 is used for "immersion in Christ} in Rom6. What grounds are there to not siimply understand the "immersion/buried/united--in-CHRIST" is the same as "immersion in the Holy Spirit which are both simply parts of salvation? And BOTH are EQUIVALENT, that "being partnered with the Holy Spirit IS SAVED", and "being partnered with Christ IS SAVED"?

I change my mind Im goint to comment on this first. I had'nt commented on it before because I just dont really see your point. I really dont even see an arguement here. Maybe I'm missing something perhaps you could expound.

Partner: a sharer; by implication, an associate: KJV -- fellow, partaker, partner Vines says properly an adjective, signifying "sharing in, partaking of,"
Hebrews 3:1 Therefore, holy brethren, partakers of the heavenly calling, consider the Apostle and High Priest of our confession, Christ Jesus,

Hebrews 3:14 For we have become partakers of Christ if we hold the beginning of our confidence steadfast to the end,

Hebrews 6:4 For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost,5 and have tasted the good word of God and the powers of the age to come,
I'm not for sure why you call this a 3 fold aspect of salvation. In Heb 3:1 He is just talking to those that have already had their sins washed away in by means of water baptism. He calls them holy brethren and makes the comment that they are partners or sharers of the heavenly calling. So if one is a partner or sharer of the heavenly calling one will be obedient and continue to obey that call and we learn how to do that from the word of God. So water baptism being a command one would have to be obedient to water baptism to be a partaker of the hevenly calling. I just point out water baptism but one must also obey all the other commands that are necessary to be a partner of the Heavenly call.

Heb 3:14 again if we are partners or shares of Christ we will remain faithful until the end. Being a partner of Christ is to be active partner and as I have already pointed out one does not get into Christ until they are water baptized.

Heb 6:4. is one of those section of scriputure that has been hotly debated and  I dont have time to look at it in detail right now but I will say I think the miracelous indweling of the HS is under consisderation here which came through the laying on of the hands of the apostles after someone had be water baptized. Even if this is not the case one becomes a partner of sharer of the HS as they obey the word the he revealed and of course there is only one way to the father witch is through Jesus. We are led to that truth by the HS throght the written word. When we obey and are water baptized we become parters or shares with the Father, Son and HS.

Again, these are just some thoughts on the verses you presented. I still dont see a valid arguement here and hope that you will explain it better to me so that I  might see what your trying to say exactly. It seems that you are really streching these verses. Oh one last thing your poing on saying that the immersion is the same word in Mat 3 as in ROm 6 is very weak arguement trying to make the HS baptism being what is meant in Rom 6. The same word immerse is used Mat 28:19 and Acts 8 and many other places which refers to water baptism. So that arguement doesnt even hold water. As I have already pointed out to you water baptism was a command HS baptism was a promise and it says in Rom 6 within the context of being baptized that they had OBEYED the word of God.

It will be interesting to see where you go with partner arguement.

Well I did'nt get to the rest of your post but I will. I wont be able to reply for a couple of days. If I was'nt so tired I would continue on.

Cougan

Ben johnson · Jan 23, 2003

If you're tired twice in the same day, you can only be RE-TIRED...

I don't have a doctorate in Greek language. But I have talked with those who DO. People from "reformed theology", or "Calvanistic predestined-election", assert that those spoken of in 2Pet2:20-22 were never really saved in-the-first-place. But according to the words, they were. "Epignosis" doesn't mean "head-knowledge", it means "experiential knowledge". In the same way, "Metochos" in Hebrews doesn't mean merely "sitting at the table enjoying the benefits without really belonging", it actually means MORE than "partakers". The "partnership" is there. A "partaker" conveys the image of a "passerby", who pauses on his bicycle only long enough to pick up a plate of chips and finger sandwiches. A "partner" is one who actually belongs. You say that Heb6 is hotly debated---yes it is, by those who don't understand the Greek. THEY say that in Heb6:4, are those who are "partakers" in the SQUATTER sense---bicycling by and grabbing some cookies, sitting in the church enjoying a "form of godliness but without the substance"---IOW, they never KNOW JESUS. But the word, "METOCHOS", does not, can not, mean "mere spectators"---it means "partakers/partners". There is no way that the writer meant the passage to be about non-Christians. (Also, clearly from the Greek tense and context, the author says: "It is impossible to restore them to repentance WHILE they fall away...")

John-the-baptist in Matthew 3 asserts that Jesus will baptize with the Holy Spirit. This is part-and-parcel of SALVATION. The BAPTISM of the HOLY SPIRIT, according to John, has nothing to do with water--- because John clearly says "I immerse you in water, but He will immerse you in the Holy Spirit."

This "immersing in the Holy Spirit, is identically the same as the "Metochos" partaking/partnering-of-the-Holy-Spirit spoken of in Heb6. What I am presenting to you from Scripture, is that "partnership with Jesus Christ" is identically equal with partnering/immersion in the Holy Spirit. Salvation is communion with God---fellowship, with ALL THREE PERSONS---Father, Son, and Spirit. While the Father is not-the-Son is not-the-Spirit, so that "immersion in the Holy Spirit" is not the same as "immersion in Christ", both and EACH comprise salvation---one does not occur without the other. We fellowship with the Spirit, we fellowship with Christ, and we fellowship with the Father through Christ.

But Scripture says "the Holy Spirit, given as the seal of our belief (Eph1:13), is an immersion WITHOUT WATER". My question is: if salvation is PARTNERSHIP with the Holy Spirit, if salvation is also PARTNERSHIP with Christ, if the two are EQUAL in CONSIDERATION, then why is one (undeniably) accomplished without water, but the other (you say) must be WITH/THROUGH water?

Romans 6 speaks of our "partnership with Christ". It says, "baptized into Christ". Rather, "immersed into Christ". Though it doesn't SAY water, you are contending that is the meaning. Yet it doesn't say water---it says "immersed into Christ"; then it says "buried", which you also take to mean water. Finally, it says "united with Christ". You and I agree on verses like Gal2:20, 2Cor5:17, and others which say "salvation is CHRIST IN US---a surrender of control, Jesus' real presence in our hearts, guiding, building, doing good deeds THROUGH us. This is the nature of the "partnership". My usage of Heb3:1,14, 6:4 demonstrates the equality in perspectives of "salvation" (heavenly calling), indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and indwelling of Christ. I cannot understand why one must be through water, when the other clearly is not. Romans 6 does not SAY "water"---it says "immersed/buried/united in Christ". Take the "buried"---you say "that MUST be water"---yet it clearly says, "you died, and are made new"; so it could clearly be saying, "your old self was lowered into the SAME TOMB as Jesus was, your sinful inclination, your "Adam-nature", was buried into the tomb with Christ; and as He was raised from the dead, so too shall we walk in newness of life". I don't see why this must refer to water---belief is really the ony qualification to be "in Christ". By belief we receive Christ and the Holy Spirit, we partner in the heavenly calling; we "put to death the old, and do not walk in the flesh" (Rom8); we walk in the Spirit and in Christ (Rom8, Col2:6). This is the substance of being "born again", which is "buried with Christ meaning dead-to-sin, raised with Christ meaning born-again-new-spiritual-creation".

I cannot find a single verse that necessitates water for "getting IN CHRIST".

Because of the equivalent perspectives of "being IN CHRIST", and being "in the Holy Spirit", because Peter specifically said "He gave them the Holy Spirit exactly as He did to us AFTER BELIEVING", I submit that no one can understand Cornelious-&-family-&-friends as NOT-YET-SAVED. They HAD the Holy Spirit (we agree on that), I submit that they had the Spirit by BELIEF---IOW, He was evidence of their salvation. It doesn't matter if this passage is "only one"---it exists. It gives you two choices:

2: Stubbornly cling to "dipped-or-condemned", and strive to present a SECOND PENTECOST (but this time the Spirit came onto not-yet-believers), saying that they WERE NOT REALLY SAVED... ...yet... ...but indwelt by the Spirit ANYWAY...

1: Simply understand what Peter wrote---they HEARD Peter, they HEARD Jesus, they BELIEVED, they RECEIVED THE HOLY SPIRIT; in every definition of the word, they were SAVED. But THEN, after being saved, they were waterbaptized.

I'm just saying that #1 fits Scripture far better. The only reason to resist understanding that they WERE SAVED, is because they would have been saved apart from waterbaptism...

cougan · Jan 25, 2003

Originally posted by Ben johnson
If you're tired twice in the same day, you can only be RE-TIRED...

I don't have a doctorate in Greek language. But I have talked with those who DO. People from "reformed theology", or "Calvanistic predestined-election", assert that those spoken of in 2Pet2:20-22 were never really saved in-the-first-place. But according to the words, they were. "Epignosis" doesn't mean "head-knowledge", it means "experiential knowledge". In the same way, "Metochos" in Hebrews doesn't mean merely "sitting at the table enjoying the benefits without really belonging", it actually means MORE than "partakers". The "partnership" is there. A "partaker" conveys the image of a "passerby", who pauses on his bicycle only long enough to pick up a plate of chips and finger sandwiches. A "partner" is one who actually belongs. You say that Heb6 is hotly debated---yes it is, by those who don't understand the Greek. THEY say that in Heb6:4, are those who are "partakers" in the SQUATTER sense---bicycling by and grabbing some cookies, sitting in the church enjoying a "form of godliness but without the substance"---IOW, they never KNOW JESUS. But the word, "METOCHOS", does not, can not, mean "mere spectators"---it means "partakers/partners". There is no way that the writer meant the passage to be about non-Christians. (Also, clearly from the Greek tense and context, the author says: "It is impossible to restore them to repentance WHILE they fall away...")

John-the-baptist in Matthew 3 asserts that Jesus will baptize with the Holy Spirit. This is part-and-parcel of SALVATION. The BAPTISM of the HOLY SPIRIT, according to John, has nothing to do with water--- because John clearly says "I immerse you in water, but He will immerse you in the Holy Spirit."

This "immersing in the Holy Spirit, is identically the same as the "Metochos" partaking/partnering-of-the-Holy-Spirit spoken of in Heb6. What I am presenting to you from Scripture, is that "partnership with Jesus Christ" is identically equal with partnering/immersion in the Holy Spirit. Salvation is communion with God---fellowship, with ALL THREE PERSONS---Father, Son, and Spirit. While the Father is not-the-Son is not-the-Spirit, so that "immersion in the Holy Spirit" is not the same as "immersion in Christ", both and EACH comprise salvation---one does not occur without the other. We fellowship with the Spirit, we fellowship with Christ, and we fellowship with the Father through Christ.

But Scripture says "the Holy Spirit, given as the seal of our belief (Eph1:13), is an immersion WITHOUT WATER". My question is: if salvation is PARTNERSHIP with the Holy Spirit, if salvation is also PARTNERSHIP with Christ, if the two are EQUAL in CONSIDERATION, then why is one (undeniably) accomplished without water, but the other (you say) must be WITH/THROUGH water?

Romans 6 speaks of our "partnership with Christ". It says, "baptized into Christ". Rather, "immersed into Christ". Though it doesn't SAY water, you are contending that is the meaning. Yet it doesn't say water---it says "immersed into Christ"; then it says "buried", which you also take to mean water. Finally, it says "united with Christ". You and I agree on verses like Gal2:20, 2Cor5:17, and others which say "salvation is CHRIST IN US---a surrender of control, Jesus' real presence in our hearts, guiding, building, doing good deeds THROUGH us. This is the nature of the "partnership". My usage of Heb3:1,14, 6:4 demonstrates the equality in perspectives of "salvation" (heavenly calling), indwelling of the Holy Spirit, and indwelling of Christ. I cannot understand why one must be through water, when the other clearly is not. Romans 6 does not SAY "water"---it says "immersed/buried/united in Christ". Take the "buried"---you say "that MUST be water"---yet it clearly says, "you died, and are made new"; so it could clearly be saying, "your old self was lowered into the SAME TOMB as Jesus was, your sinful inclination, your "Adam-nature", was buried into the tomb with Christ; and as He was raised from the dead, so too shall we walk in newness of life". I don't see why this must refer to water---belief is really the ony qualification to be "in Christ". By belief we receive Christ and the Holy Spirit, we partner in the heavenly calling; we "put to death the old, and do not walk in the flesh" (Rom8); we walk in the Spirit and in Christ (Rom8, Col2:6). This is the substance of being "born again", which is "buried with Christ meaning dead-to-sin, raised with Christ meaning born-again-new-spiritual-creation".

I cannot find a single verse that necessitates water for "getting IN CHRIST".

Because of the equivalent perspectives of "being IN CHRIST", and being "in the Holy Spirit", because Peter specifically said "He gave them the Holy Spirit exactly as He did to us AFTER BELIEVING", I submit that no one can understand Cornelious-&-family-&-friends as NOT-YET-SAVED. They HAD the Holy Spirit (we agree on that), I submit that they had the Spirit by BELIEF---IOW, He was evidence of their salvation. It doesn't matter if this passage is "only one"---it exists. It gives you two choices:

2: Stubbornly cling to "dipped-or-condemned", and strive to present a SECOND PENTECOST (but this time the Spirit came onto not-yet-believers), saying that they WERE NOT REALLY SAVED... ...yet... ...but indwelt by the Spirit ANYWAY...

1: Simply understand what Peter wrote---they HEARD Peter, they HEARD Jesus, they BELIEVED, they RECEIVED THE HOLY SPIRIT; in every definition of the word, they were SAVED. But THEN, after being saved, they were waterbaptized.

I'm just saying that #1 fits Scripture far better. The only reason to resist understanding that they WERE SAVED, is because they would have been saved apart from waterbaptism...

Thanks for elobrating on this strange arguement. Maybe I am still missing something but I still dont see much of an arguement. What I mean is there is nothing concrete to it. I did'nt want to comment on predestination/Calvanism because it really isnt part of this thread. Perhaps that would make a good topic for new thread. The only way to the Father is through the son. The HS which imparted the written word to us through men tells us how it is we get into Christ. Once we are water baptized and are added to the the body of Christ we are partners with the Father, son, and HS. I just don't really have much to say about your partneship argument because it just doesnt have any power to it and doesnt help your view at all as far as I can tell. I already gave you strong evidence that Rom 6 is talking about water baptism. In fact I am still trying to find a commentary or Lexicon that doesnt belive that this chapter is talking about water baptisim. Now I havent done an exaustive look I have looked in Thayer, Vines, Enhanced Strong Lexicon, Robertson word picture, Mathew Henry, and Jammison-Faucet-Brown. Of course all the commentaries written by my breathern all state the same that its water in this Chapter. I can't understand why it is you seem to think that this is HS baptism. I want to point out once again that HS baptism was a PROMISE and water baptism was a command. In this very chapter we see the following verses.

16 Do you not know that to whom you present yourselves slaves to obey, you are that one's slaves whom you obey, whether of sin leading to death, or of obedience leading to righteousness?

17 But God be thanked that though you were slaves of sin, yet you obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine to which you were delivered.

18 And having been set free from sin, you became slaves of righteousness.

These verses are all within the context of a person being baptized into Christ and dieing with him. Notice in verse 16 that is is OBEDIENCE that leads a person to rightousness. This means that man has his part. Then in verse 17 he points out that they were slaves of sin that is they had not been baptized into Christ yet. Then watch it. They OBEYED from the heart the word of God that was delivered to them. In OBEYING they had been set free from sin becomeing slaves of righteousness. In other words the accepted the word and they were water baptized just like the text demands. They OBEYED it and we can only OBEY the commands we cannot OBEY the promise of the HS baptism. This is very easy to see and to understand. It happend all the time. People would receive the word then be water baptized.

Acts2:41 Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them. 

Here you clearly see that the heard the word and accepted it and were water baptized and we see that these people that were water baptized were added to them. and in verse 47 within the context that these people that were accpeting the word being water baptized were being saved and added to the church. Just like Peter proclaimed.

cougan · Jan 25, 2003

Acts:2:38 Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

This is very easy to understand. Repent (turn away from you old way of doing things) and be (water) baptized in the name of Jesus Christ FOR the remission of sins. This ties so easily and logically with Rom 6. Rom 6 says that this baptism into Christ makes us freed from our sin. This is just good old fashioned logic my friend.

Now remember once again that in Acts 8:16 that Philp only baptized the people of Samaria in the name of the Lord Jesus the HS had not fallen on any of them yet. In fact Philp ran off and left them after they were water baptized. These people BELIEVED the word and they even OBEYED the command to be water baptized. Ben is forced to say that these people were not saved yet because they had not been immersed in the HS. Even thought they had an ACTIVE FAITH Ben is still forced to say they were lost UNTIL they received the HS by the laying on of hands by the apostles. Why did'nt Philip who was full of the HS lay hands on them? Because he could'nt only the apostles had this abilty Jesus made the promise only to them to be clothed with power on the day of Pentacost. I will expound on this more later. Lets keep it simple. The reason why Philip (being directly led by the HS) only baptized these people in water in the name of the Lord Jesus and left was because he was following the great commission Math 28:19 and he was making disciples. He was doing the same thing that Peter proclaimed at Petacost. When these people were water baptized their sins were washed away and they were saved.

As I have already througly covered Pauls conversion, again it is so simple when you let it. IN acts 22:16 Paul is told to arize and be baptized and wash away your sins calling on the name of the lord.

I really dont understand why you think this next verse helps your view.

1Peter 3:20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.

21 There is also an antitype (true likeness) which now saves us -- baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

Peter is declaring that that Noah's salvation was the figure, and our salvation at the point of water baptism is the reality. Here is the point that is being made. Just as the water of the flood transported the inmates of the ark into a new cleansed world, even so, the water of baptism moves us from the world into Christ. Again its easy to see if you will but think about this logically. Noah and family were saved through water and we today are also saved through water baptism. All though we are being physical dipped in water it is a spirtual cleansing that is why Peter adds that its not the removal of filth of the flesh. In submitting to water baptism, we are appealing to God for a godd conscience. The geniune good conscience can not be enjoyed prior to this act of obedience.

I want to repost an arguement I made earlier which goes hand and hand with what I have been saying. Besides no one touched this very clear arguement.

Now I want to show another reason why people are not saved by faith alone but that one must be baptized.

After the death of Stephen, a persecution arose against the church, and the disciples were scattered widely. Some of them went to Antioch, in Syria, preaching the Lord Jesus (Acts 11:20). Luke informs us that the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number that believed turned unto the Lord

21 And the hand of the Lord was with them, and a great number believed and turned to the Lord.
22 Then news of these things came to the ears of the church in Jerusalem, and they sent out Barnabas to go as far as Antioch.
23 When he came and had seen the grace of God, he was glad, and encouraged them all that with purpose of heart they should continue with the Lord.
24 For he was a good man, full of the Holy Spirit and of faith. And a great many people were added to the Lord.

Of special interest here are the terms believed and turned. Turned unto the Lord later becomes the equivalent of added unto the Lord Certainly one is not saved until he is added to the Lord (Acts 2:47).

The word turned is the leading verb of the sentence. Believed is a participle in the aorist tense. In New Testament Greek, there is a rule which suggests that an aorist participle reflects action that transpires prior to that of the leading verb (J.G. Machen, New Testament Greek for Beginners, pp. 116-7). The passage might thus be paraphrased in this fashion: ...a great number, having already believed, turned to the Lord.... Thus, clearly, turning to the Lord, or being added to the Lord, does not occur at the moment one believes. Rather, turning occurs subsequent to believing. So clearly one does not turn to the lord simply by believing.

Second, lets look at the following verse.

Acts 26:20 "but declared first to those in Damascus and in Jerusalem, and throughout all the region of Judea, and then to the Gentiles, that they should repent, turn to God, and do works befitting repentance.

Again, the word of God makes it clear that turning to God is somthing in addition to merely repenting. Both faith and repentence are preliminary to turning to the lord. Just as a side note on the last part of this verse shows that a penitent life is characterized by doing (present tense- continueously doing) works. The idea that a person can repent, yet continue in his wrongful conduct, is absoultly false.

When does one actually turn to God?

We can find the answer by comparing Acts 2:38 with Acts 3:19.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Acts 3:19 Repent ye therefore, and turn again, that your sins may be blotted out, that so there may come seasons of refreshing from the presence of the Lord;

Acts 2:38                  Acts 3:19
Repent                      Repent
Be Baptized                Turn Again
Remission of Sins         Sins Blotted Out
Gift of the Holy Spirit    Seasons of refreshing

Now we see clearly that Peter was preaching the same message here in acts 3:19 as in acts 2:38. He tells them to repent, which involves turning from your iniquities and to turn again, so their sins may be blotted out. The word "turn" (epistrepho , an active verb which corresponds  to be baptized in acts 2:38) indicates there is something to be done after repentance.  There is an overt act following repentance -- immersion -- with which all who choose to complete their obedience unto Christ comply. The baptism here in acts 2:38 is water baptism and not HS baptism so you can't say this is HS baptism here.

Clearly, one does not enter the state of salvation until he has obeyed the Lord's command to be immeresed. The above passages demostrate that one does not turn to the Lord upon the basis of faith alone, or even penitent faith, instead his obedience must be completed in yielding to the command to be baptized. (Acts 2:38, Rom 6:4, Gal 3:27, Acts 22:16, 1Cor 12:13, Mk 16:16...etc)

Now with all of these very easy to understand arguements we can see logically that one must be water baptized to enter into Christ have their sins washed away being added to the church which is Christ body. We know that the bible cannot contridict itself and we should let it interpret itself. We do this by examine the WHOLE THING and we take all the simple examples I have pointed out the show water baptism being part of salvation and compare what they teach against these other verses that are being used by Ben to teach a HS baptism salvation. This has been a long journey but now since we have a strong foundation to stand on lets begin with 1 Cort 12:13.

cougan · Jan 25, 2003

1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body -- whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free -- and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.

Some draw the conclusion that 1 Corinthians 12:13 is referring to Holy Spirit baptism. The context, they say, shows this to be true since Paul has been discussing spiritual gifts given by the Holy Spirit.
 The word "by" (KJV) makes this passage clear that we are baptized by the Spirit, not in the Spirit. This word (Greek, EN) is to be translated instrumentally, as it is in 12:9. Holy Spirit baptism, on the other hand, is quite different. John the Baptizer showed us that he immersed in/ with water, but Jesus would baptize in/ with the Holy Spirit (Mk. 1:8). In other words, the Holy Spirit was to be the element used to perform this baptism by Jesus (as water is the element used in water baptism). In 1 Corinthians 12:13, however, the Spirit is not the element in which one is immersed, but the Spirit is the one doing the baptism. Thus, 1 Corinthians 12:13 cannot be referring to immersion in the Holy Spirit.
 This passage further says that this baptism was "into
one body." This "one body" spoken of in verses preceding is
talking about the church. Ephesians 1:22-23 reminds us that
the body of Christ is the church. Hence, whether we say we
are baptized into the one body, the church, or Christ, we
have in mind the same  thing.
 In Matthew 28:18-20 Jesus told His disciples to teach all men and to baptize them in (EIS, into) "the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Notice in this passage that the disciples were performing the action since Jesus said, "Go," "teach," "baptize." In addition to this baptism being "into" the Father and Holy Spirit, it was also to be into the Son. Since being baptized into the Son is the same thing as being baptized into the body, it is clear that 1 Corinthians is referring to water baptism because it was a type of baptism which the disciples administered. Only Jesus baptized with the Holy Spirit (Mk. 1:8).

Besides all this just keep it simple and look at the example in acts 2. It was those that had accepeted the word and had been baptized that were added to the church and no where can you find that those there had been HS baptized but it is easy to see that they were water baptized. The word of God was revealed by the Holy Spirit and by that word when we obey it and we are water baptized we are being  baptized by what the HS has said. Once again when you use the whole word of God it becomes much easier to shed light on misunderstood verses such as this one.

With this verse out of the way lets deal with Bens John 3:5 arguement where he says there are 2 births mentioned here one is the natural birth refering the water in this passage to Amniotic fluid and the spirit being the HS baptism.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

I belive this verse to go hand and hand with 1Cor 12:13. We could logically based off the evidence from that verse and all the other passages I have clearly showed that this passage can not be refereing to HS baptism. Just for the fun of it lets point out why this view of Bens has many problems.

First problem is the fact that Ben says there are 2 births here, but this goes against grammar of the sentence. The noun "water" and "spirit" are governed by one preposition "and". JEsus is speaking of one birth with two elements, not two seprate births.

Second problem is that the word hudor/water is never used in the sense of a natural birth. Not it the bible nor in ANY of the ancient writtings around the 1st century that would show this word being used this way. You will see however that the word hudor/water is what people were being baptized with. Why would Jesus choose the word hudor/water to refer to natural birth when such usage was not found in the 1st century times?

Jesus was discussing a spiritual birth not a physcal birth. Nicodemus thought that Jesus was speaking of a physcal birth in vrs 4, but Jesus immedataly corrects his misunderstanding in vrs 5-6 as he explains how one is born again. Just think about what you have Jesus saying here. You have him saying you have to be physical born and you have to be born of the spirit to get into the kingdom. I think its obvious that one must exist before they enter the kingdom of God dont you. You have Jesus being redundent.

When you keep it simple Ben you can clearly see that this passage is talking about 1 birth with 2 elements. The water is refering to baptism and the spirit is refering to the HS operation through the word of God that initiates the new birth experience.

1 Peter 1:23 having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever,

Now lets compare the following.

Jn. 3:5        Spirit          water        kingdom
I Cor. 12:13 Spirit          baptism      body
Eph. 5:26    Word          water         cleansed
Titus 3:5     Holy Spirit   washing      saved

These verses explain one another. By the teaching or instruction by the word which the HS spoke through men we are taught that when we are water baptized that are sins are washed away and we become cleansed or saved and added to the kingdom/body of Christ.

I have done my best to make all these arguents simply and easy to understand. They are logical and they all support one another. If you would just consisder this simple message I have presented and not let your denomiational views get in the way you should be able to clearly see that John 3:5 and all the rest are talking about water baptism and not HS baptism. With all of this established one again we can now look at the final arguement that Ben keeps despartly hanging on to. He states that Cornilus household was saved before water baptism because they had the HS poured out on them before they were water baptiszed. Again, by the simple evidence I have presented and the bible can not contridict itself we can know that something was different and special about this event and we also know that they were no saved until they had been water baptized.

Now let us examine this event one last time. This event is talked about in act 10 and 11. The first thing I want to point out is that Chapter 11 is told in order of what happened and 10 is more general. This indeed was a very special event as about 7 years has passed since the day of Pentacost and here is when God decides to let the world know that Gentiles can also become Christians as well. God prepares Peters mind with a vision for what is fixing to take place. Cornelius and his house hold were God fearing people they BELIEVED in him and prayed to him always. God decides to use these God fearing Gentiles to open the door for the rest of us Gentiles. You can imagine the excitment of Cornelious and his household when angel told them in 11:14 that Peter would tell them the WORDS BY WHICH they would be saved. Peter shows up and act 10 tells us what he general said and then he says WHILE he was still speaking those words the HS fell on them. 10:14. Chapter 11 being in order gives us even more infomation. We find out in vrs 11:15 it says As he BEGAN to speak the HS fell on them. When you look at the greek word here for began you see that it denotes that something just started but it was intrupted by something else. Peter did not have time to tell them the words they needed to be saved by before the HS fell on them. We see that Peter and his friends were shocked to see the gentiles get the HS directly from heaven like the apostles did on the day of Pentacost. If things would of went as normal Peter would of preached them the message, then they would of received the message been water baptized then Peter would of laid his hands on them so the could receive the HS. The last time someone had been HS baptized directly from heaven was the day of Pentacost and Peter confirms this in 11:16-17 because he had to remember back to when it happened last and he remembered back to the day of Pentacost. If this HS had been happeing to everyone like Ben claims Peter could of sure recited another instance that happened before 7 years eariler. We do know that after Corneilus household had the HS fall on them that Peter finishished telling them the words by which they needed to be saved. I do not lable this as a 2nd Pentacost but it was at this time that God poured out his spirit on these Gentiles to prove or show to the Jews there including Peter that they could now be a part of his kingdom. Thats why Peter in 11:17 says he could not withstand God. Then we clearly see that these words that they need to here to be saved included the command of water baptism. Peter not wanting to resist God raised the question can any forbid water that these should not be baptized who have received the HS just as we have. In other words God has accepted them as equals with us who are we to forbid them from being baptized in the name of Jesus having their sins washed aways and being added to the church/kingdom. Then Peter commanded them to be water baptized.

1st I want you to notice no where in this context does it say that they were saved when the HS fell on them.

Now Ben says that someone cannot receive the HS baptism that is in unbeliver. Thats not entirely true. I showed you in Luke 1:15 that John was filled with the HS even from the womb. Now surely you cant say that he belived in the womb. Luke 1:41 John mother was filled with the HS as well. I could show you others if you like but this is enough to make my point. You have to remember that Corneilus household were not unbelivers in God but were big time belivers in God. They did not have to know the message about Jesus to have the HS poured out on them. It also did not mean that they were saved when the HS fell on them. No doubt under the old law they were apparently pleasing to God as he listened to their prayers. The HS was contantly revealing stuff and this was another instance where he was revealing to the Jews that the Gentiles could now be water baptized into the body.

 

cougan · Jan 25, 2003

Now finally here is your last quibble on this verse.

Acts 11:17 "If therefore God gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could withstand God?"

You want this verse to say that Cornelius house belived on the Lord Jesus Christ but that is not what this verse says. It does'nt matter wheather you look at it from the Greek or the English your trying to force gramatics where they dont belong.  It is clear that the we is modify Peter and the other Apostles, not Cornelius. Maybe if I put this sentence in a different light you will understand even better.

If Mary gave them a medal as she did to us when we ran the race who am I to complain. I probably could of used a better example but my it is very late so this will have to do. Here Mary gives these people a medal just like we did when we ran the race. This however does not mean that the other people ran the race. In fact they didnt run a race but it was mary medals to give away and so I cant complain if she gives them to someone else that didnt run the race.

Just remember keep it simple Ben and let the bible interpret itself. I don't know how clearer I could make it.

God bless Cougan

malball · Feb 19, 2003

THE LIES ABOUT BAPTISM

One of the many swerves from the truth and that has produced a multitude of people in error is in regard to baptism. Unfortunately this is a theme that many dont even want to touch because it will produce a theological revolution with catastrophic effects.

How many would not be completely deceived thinking that their salvation is guaranteed just because it was enough to accept Jesus Christ as their only and sufficient savior of their souls?

Do you know the 5 evangelical lies with respect to baptism?

1. BAPTISM IS A SYMBOL

This is the most accepted lie among the majority of evangelicals. This is an answer to another catholic lie. The catholic tradition affirms that BAPTISM is a sacrament, that it has power in itself. Against this, the evangelical tradition wanted to say its not a sacrament, but a symbol. Yet, reading the Bible we find the following:

Or dont you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the Glory of God the Father, we too may live a new life. (Rom 6:3,4)

BAPTISM is an act of faith. It is clothed in significance and spiritual reality. This is what Jesus affirmed (Matt 28:18-20) and was what the apostle taught and practiced.

Read also Acts 2:38,41; 8:12; 8:36-38; 9:17,18; 22:13-16; 10:44-48; 16:13-15; 16:30-34; 18:8; 19:4-5.

IN BAPTISM WE ARE PUT INTO CHRIST JESUS IN HIS DEATH AND CLOTHED IN HIS LIFE.

Because all who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ. (Gal 3:27)

2. BAPTISM IS A PUBLIC TESTIMONY OF OUR FAITH

Being that BAPTISM is an act of faith, it has nothing to do with a public testimony. Its obvious that nobody can baptize himself. Its obvious that BAPTISM is an act in which people important in the conversion of the person participate. It also serves as a witness to the world, but it doesnt have this objective. All of the examples of BAPTISM described in the Acts of the Apostles in the New Testament show that this isnt true.

This became in evangelical circles a ceremony of strictly liturgical character. All the array of clothing, music, environment, preparation, etc indicate that it is only a public testimony. But the reality of BAPTISM for the person is that he is uniting himself to Christ at that moment. It has nothing to do with that show.

There are three necessary element for there to be a baptism: Someone who is repentant, someone that baptizes, and water

3. BAPTISM IS NOT IMPORTANT FOR SALVATION

This is one of the biggest classic lies. To say BAPTISM in itself saves is to give it the character that the catholic tradition gave it. But to say that its nothing and that its not important for salvation, is also a great deceit.
Jesus Said: Whoever believe is baptized will be saved, but whoever doesnt believe is condemned (Mark 16:16)

The context of this text is Matthew 28:18-20. There it begins saying that Jesus received all authority in heaven and earth If he is the absolute authority and determined that whoever believes and is baptized is who will be saved, who cam change this? What authority do men have to change what Jesus determined?

Unfortunately the evangelical practice is a violent aggression against this truth. With a practice many say: whoever believes and is saved can be baptized.

Can someone be saved without believing? The answer is no! But can someone believe and not be saved? The answer is yes! How? When someone believes and is not but into Christ Jesus in his death. When does this happen? When we are baptized.

IF SOMEONE BELIEVES AND IS NOT BAPTIZED (PUT INTO CHRIST JESUS) CAN HE BE SAVED?

4.BAPTISM DOESNT FORGIVE SINS

What do we do with the text Acts 2:38 that says Repent and be baptized everyone of you in the name of the Lord Jesus for the forgiveness of your sins?

But someone says: Its God who forgives sins. It also affirms that the blood of Jesus cleanses of sins. And we say: Its true! But we as: When? When we are baptized! Why, because, in baptism we are put into Chris Jesus into his DEATH. And there, on the cross was where the blood was shed, in which we are washed and redeemed.

What can we say about Ananias testimony when he ordered Saul: Why do you delay? Be baptized and WASH AWAY YOU SINS? (Acts 22:16)

5. THE WATER OF BAPTISM IS NOTHING

Unfortunately BAPTISM is packed with humanism and lowered to an inferior level. They have taken out of baptism its importance.

In BAPTISM WE ARE BURIED WITH JESUS. The water is a visible element and necessary. It represents an invisible element that, by faith, becomes a spiritual reality. In the act of BAPTISM, when someone goes into the water, by faith he believes that he is being put into Christ Jesus, into his death. So that everything that happened to Jesus will happen to that person.
Christ was crucified? He was too! Christ was buried? He was too! Christ rose again? He did too! Christ was exalted? He was too! Christ sat at the right hand of the Father? He did too! Christ inherited all things? He did too!

At that moment, the miracle of Calvary occurs. It occurs this way with other visible elements that, when used with faith, they become a visible, tangible spiritual reality, such as: The bread and wine; oil and anointing; laying on of the hands, etc.

CONCLUSION:

We have to answer for our faith. If we believe in a lie, as sincere as we may be, this will not become a truth. If our faith is based on human concepts and old wives tales, can we guarantee that we wil be accepted by God?

Many do not question anything that is preached to them. Wouldnt it be good to take the same caution that the inhabitants of Berea had when Paul preached the Gospel of the Kingdom to them?

Jesus said: And you will know the truth and the truth will set you free. He is the truth. His word is the truth. Can we have another truth?

Ben johnson · Feb 19, 2003

Hi, Malball. Welcome to the boards. We've been through this before, but happy to re-hash for new people (who have not gone through the past 20 pages---it's twenty for me, 'cause I select "twenty posts per page")...

The word. "Baptize", means "immerse". In what? Just "IMMERSE". In Matt3:11, there is the BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT. There is no way to deny that this is separate from water---because of the exclusionary presentation by John-the-baptist. "I immerse in WATER, but He who comes after me will immerse you in the Holy Spirit". Do you understand the sigificance of that? IMMERSION in the HOLY SPIRIT is apart from water.

WHat about "the immersion into Christ"? Does Paul write in Romans 6, "Immersion into Christ through water immersion"? Nope---Paul simply says, "immersion into Christ". THREE words are used---immersion, buried, united. Buried? IN WATER? No. "United in the likeness of His death". Jesus was buried, we were buried.

We were IMMERSED IN THE TOMB---not "united with Christ THROUGH WATER". Romans 6 is the excellent explanation for "BORN AGAIN"---the old sinful nature dies (immersed into His death), the new man or woman is born (likewise immersed into the likeness of His resurrection---"If any man be in Christ he is a new creation; old things are pass(ing) away, behold new things have come." 2Cor5:17)

Because we are "immersed into His death", we are to "therefore not let sin reign in our mortal bodies ...but consider ourselves dead to sin and alive to God in Christ Jesus"...

There is not one drop of water implied in the entire chapter of Romans6.

Consider Hebrews 3:1: METOCHOS of a heavenly calling." The GREEK here, "METOCHOS", means "partakers"; actually, a better translation, is PARTNER. "PARTNERS in a heavenly calling." Now verse 6:4: "METOCHOS-partners with the Holy Spirit". This is the "immersion in the Holy Spirit spoken of in Matt3". Partners with the Holy Spirit, partners of a heavenly calling.

Now look at Heb3:14: "METOCHOS-partners of Christ". These three facets are presented as simultaneous and equivalent, each a part of salvation. If "partners/immersion-in-the-Spirit" is undeniably not by water, can we persist in saying "partners in Christ IS by water"? No.

Galatians 3 likewise does not refer to water. No one can deny that the Holy Spirit immersion is SEPARATE from water (John was very clear about that)---no one can deny that "immersion into the Holy Spirit IS salvation---no one can deny that "immersion into Christ IS ALSO salvation"---why does the SPIRIT IMMERSION stand alone (by belief only), but CHRIST IMMERSION requires belief + water? NEITHER ONE requires water.

Why, because, in baptism we are put into Christ Jesus into his DEATH

IMMERSED, UNITED, BURIED---all three the same. ALL meaning "PUT-ON-CHRIST"---and none requires water. We "put-on-Christ", when we BELIEVE---when we receive Christ. "But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name." Jn1:12 To those who believe---not to those who believe AND ARE DIPPED...

Can someone be saved without believing? The answer is no! But can someone believe and not be saved? The answer is yes! How? When someone believes and is not but into Christ Jesus in his death. When does this happen? When we are baptized.

Then---condemned to Hell are all prison-of-war captives who receive Christ but have NOT the chance to be dipped, and the thief-on-the-Cross, and those who repent on their deathbed. I doubt you seriously assert that they all perish.

You say, "One can BELIEVE and NOT BE SAVED" Scripture says "all who believe are saved". Jn3:16, 6:40

But someone says: Its God who forgives sins. It also affirms that the blood of Jesus cleanses of sins. And we say: Its true! But we as: When? When we are baptized! Why, because, in baptism we are put into Chris Jesus into his DEATH. And there, on the cross was where the blood was shed, in which we are washed and redeemed.

I'm sorry, it's His BLOOD that washes us, through belief---not the water. Do Christians sin? Yes. "If we say we have no sin, we deceive ourselves and the truth is not in us; but if we CONFESS our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." Did John forget to mention water in that? No---John didn't mention it, because repentance is all that is required for forgiveness of sins. Repentance, and calling on the name of Jesus (Acts 22:16)

Mark 16:16 offers only disbelief as the disqualifier of salvation---it does NOT say "he who has NOT BEEN DIPPED is condemned". Did Mark forget? No.

Please read Acts 10-11; Cougan first asserted "Peter had only BEGUN to speak, they hadn't heard enough!" Then when did Peter say verses 10:34-43? Did Peter continue to SHOUT, over their TONGUING and EXALTING GOD??? No. Peter said every word (the "begun to speak", 11:15, was exageration...")

Cougan then asserted "they had not believed, the SPIRIT was bestowed BEFORE they believed." Nowhere in the Gospel, EVER, does the Spirit indwell unbelievers. Eph1:13 says "the seal of the Holy Spirit, is THROUGH belief!" The only way for them to have been filled with the Holy Spirit and speaking in tongues, is for them to have been saved.

Peter says (10:47) "They received the Holy Spirit JUST AS WE DID! Peter says (11:17) "God gave them the same gift (Holy Spirit) as He did to us also after believing in the Lord Jesus Christ..." There's no way to understand them as "Spirit-Indwelt-but-not-BELIEVERS". No way.

NOW---Cornelius, family & friends, HAD NOT YET BEEN WATER BAPTIZED!!!

They were saved apart from, and before, water. Doesn't matter the denials, the passage is very clear.

Cougan remains resolute in contending "they had not yet believed"---in spite of the last thing Peter said before they "began tonguing and exalting God", was: "...through His name everyone who believes receives forgiveness of sins." Everyone who believes. Cornelius' group heard Jesus, heard the Apostles, and now heard Peter---can you maintain the case they had not believed? Can you accept that the Spirit indwelt unbelievers?

No, and no. They bellieved, they were "immersed in the Holy Spirit" (and began exalting God and speaking in tongues"; they were "immersed in CHRIST", they had "PUT ON CHRIST"---and they were yet to be dipped.

If you are right, that only through WATER are sins washed away, then we would need to be dipped often---each time that we ask forgiveness of our sins...

@ Cougan...

cougan · Feb 19, 2003

Well howdy Ben,

I only have one thing to say about your last comment. When one is water baptized they are put into Christ Gal 3:27, Rom 6:3-4. Once you have become a new creature in Christ and you continue to walk in the light your sins are continually cleansed.
1 John 1:7 But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin.

One must be ushered from the world into Christ to have all their past sins forgiven. Baptism only has to occur one time from then on one can confess their sin and ask for forgiveness and it will be forgiven.

1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, He is faithful and just to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

ScottEmerson · Feb 19, 2003

Why assume that I John 1:9 is to believers? I think that it is talking about salvation, and salvation only. As Christians, our sins are forgiven. Period. How can they be forgiven again?

Ben johnson · Feb 19, 2003

I think, technically, Scott is right. Colossians 2;6 says: "As therefore you have received Christ Jesus the Lord, so walk in Him, having been firmly rooted and now being built up in Him and established in your faith, just as you were instructed, and overflowing with grattitude..."

Then there is: "So then, brethren, we are under obligation not to the flesh (to live according to the flesh), for if you do you must die. But if by the Spirit you are putting to death the deeds of the body, you will live." Rom8:12-13 Salvation is FELLOWSHIP with God and Christ, and the SPIRIT. Our sins were forgiven, ALL OF THEM, on the Cross; yet salvation is also a daily walk. We abide in Christ, we abide in repentance; we sin, we confess our sins, because we abide in repentance and abide in Him. We abide in Him by BELIEF. Faith. Because it is possible for a true believer to DISBELIEVE, then disbelief ends our repentance, which ends the forgiveness. Salvation is fellowship, is repentance, is forgiveness---is abiding, perseverence, steadfastness. "Abiding IN CHRIST".

When one is water baptized they are put into Christ Gal 3:27, Rom 6:3-4. Once you have become a new creature in Christ and you continue to walk in the light your sins are continually cleansed.

Romans 6:3-4 uses "immersed, united, and buried" identically and interchangeably. We were buried into His death and resurrection, through belief---nothing to do with water at all. We are immersed into the Spirit (which is not by water), we are immersed into Christ's death-and-resurrection (which is not by water)---but by BELIEF.

Gal3:27 "For all of you who were immersed into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ"---again, this is salvation, "immersed into the SPIRIT" (which is not by water---Matt3:11), and immersed into Christ (which is not by water---Rom6:3-4).

Salvation is by belief---the foundation of fellowship with our Creator. Only UNBELIEF is the disqualifier from salvation.

Show me the verse, one single verse that says "He who is not waterbaptized is condemned." Can you?

No...

belle200714 · Feb 20, 2003

Baptism is for anyone who knows and believes in Jesus.  It is also for anyone who is over 12.  When you get baptised early in life you really don't know what or who Jesus is.  You also need to be ready for baptism to get baptised. :priest:

lared · Feb 21, 2003

Baptism is a public expression of your personal dedication to Jehovah God.

Jase · Feb 21, 2003

Cougan, i haven't been baptised but Jesus is my Saviour.

Not that i have anything against Baptism but i'm a Messianic Jew and the only Messianic synagogue i know of in my area doesn't perform Baptisms afaik.  Plus my entire family wouldn't let me go so i would get no support in doing it.  Does this mean i'm going to hell since i haven't and probably won't be Baptised in the near future?

And what about during the Tribulation? A multitude of people will be saved according to Revelation.  Do you think people cowering in caves trying not to be executed by the AC or killed by the horseman, earthquakes, asteroids etc are really gonna rush out to dunk themselves in water?  What if someone died on the way to church to get Baptised - would they be lost?

Ben johnson · Feb 21, 2003

Jase---welcome to the boards! And, touche'!

What if someone died on the way to church to get Baptised - would they be lost?

According to the arguments or our beloved brothers here (and that is how I consider them), those folks are forever lost.

But salvation is by belief. Belief that causes obedience, causes good works, that causes waterbaptism.

...(or in your case, Jase, the spirit of baptism---God does not play games; He honors the heart, not necessarily the circumstance. THINKING righteous IS righteous; thinking sinfully IS sinful.)

Our technology may be cutting-edge---state-of-the-art; but our spirituality is state-of-the-heart...

setfreebeliever · Feb 22, 2003

The concept of "baptism" is another of those that through the ages the church has succeeded in causing confusion over. The word we use itself proves this point, since it has been transliterated, not translated from the Greek "baptizo".

If we actually translate this Greek word, we find that it literally means:

to cover over completely, saturate, immerse

and of course the word itself has nothing to do with water, so the context must prove water is involved in order to consider this concept as meaning anything to do with water.

Most verses concerning "baptism" (sic) have nothing to do with water, such as Matthew 28, which should read as follows:

18 And Yahshua came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in Shamayin and on Earth.

19 Go therefore and make talmudim of all the nations, immersing them in the authority and the teachings of the Father and of the Son and of the Sacred Breath,

20 Teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, to the end of the age." So may it always be. 

---- from The Writings of the Prophets and Apsotles, the Scriptures of the People of the Living Way

The above passage, when rendered without religious bias and dogma, shows that water never entered into this command to preach Yahshua's message to the world. The church added that concept much later.[/size]

Don't get me wrong - we are to immerse in water after our relationship to the Father is restored through Yahshua's sacrifice. But until then, water immersion has no meaning and/or effect upon anyone, other than to make one wet.

And for those who play at churchianity, their having been dunked in a tank of water does nothing for them if they have not made a sincere alteration of their nature through repentance.[/font]

cougan · Feb 23, 2003

19th February 2003 at 09:48 PM ScottEmerson said this in Post #413

Why assume that I John 1:9 is to believers? I think that it is talking about salvation, and salvation only. As Christians, our sins are forgiven. Period. How can they be forgiven again?

You have got to be kidding me Scott. So what you saying is that when someone belives and confess there sins to God he will forgive them then they are saved. Since they have had there sins forgiven they no longer can sin or need to ask forgivenness for sins that they commit. So a person can confess there sins to God and they are forgiven and then they can go and murder someone but they do not need to be forgiven of that after all their sins are already forgiven. Thats one warped view you got there partner.

When a person belives, repents, confesses Jesus as lord and is water baptized out of obedience of faith then there sins are washed away by the blood of Jesus Christ. This however does not give a person a free ride to heaven because a person can enter into Christ and then because of sin fall away. Once a person realizes or decides to turn back to God all they have to do is repent and confess their sin to God and he will forgive them of that sin.

1 Corinthians 10:12 Wherefore let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.

James 4:17 Therefore to him that knoweth to do good, and doeth it not, to him it is sin

Hebrews 2:1 Therefore we must give the more earnest heed to the things we have heard, lest we drift away.

2 For if the word spoken through angels proved steadfast, and every transgression and disobedience received a just reward,

3 how shall we escape if we neglect so great a salvation, which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed to us by those who heard Him,
Hebrews 10:26 For if we sin willfully after we have received the knowledge of the truth, there no longer remains a sacrifice for sins,

Galatians 5:4 Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

It seems pretty obvious that 1John is written to belivers. The author calls the people he wrote this to  "children" six times (1 John 2:12,18,28; 3:18; 4:4; 5:21) and five times "beloved" (1 John 3:2,21; 4:1,7,11), which indicates a close relationship between author and recipient. In 1 John 2:21, "I have not written unto you because ye know not the truth, but because ye know it, and because no lie is of the truth." 1 John 2:26 reveals one of the major purposes of the epistle, "These things have I written unto you concerning them that would lead you astray."  The false teachers troubling the churches of the area in and around Ephesus were of great concern to John.  In 1 John 5:13, John reassured his readers that they may have confidence in their own salvation, "These things have I written unto you, that ye may know that ye have eternal life, even unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God."

It seems very clear to me that he was addressing belivers and not unbelivers. I could expound in even greater detail but this should suffice. Just read the book again and you should be able to tell over and over again that he is addressing belivers and not unbelivers.

What about Baptism?

Active Member

I Like Traffic Lights

Active Member

Senior Member

Legend

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Senior Member

Member

Legend

Senior Member

I Like Traffic Lights

Legend

Member

Well-Known Member

Well-Known Member

Legend

Active Member

Senior Member

Similar threads