-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Anyone who desires from the heart to clean up their act, and which the Holy Spirit will clean up the inside and which it is the soul. But cleaning the outside doesn't make a person clean.
Matthew 23:26Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.
Matthew 23:26Blind Pharisee! First clean the inside of the cup and dish, and then the outside also will be clean.
You may want to re read 1Peter3:21 as it says: the "LIKE figure", not anti-type but LIKE figure where baptism also now saves us. And then it says (NOT the putting away of the filth of the flesh (by drowning it), but the answer of a good conscience towards God) BY the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
So I have to disagree with you here on that one.
K
I don't know that we're disagreeing really, but when it says (and I was reading from NIV) 1Peter3:20 he's talking about Noah and the eight being saved by water and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you - not like the removal of dirt from the body (like taking a bath) but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. I don't think it had anything to do with "(NOT the putting away of the filth of the flesh (by drowning it), but rather just taking a bath. We can both agree that the baptism is symbolic of the cleansing of the spirit, but I still stand by the notion that the flood was the original "baptism", or the cleansing of the world.
[disclaimer: I did not/have not read the 30 various comments........just liked the question posed in the OP]
My thoughts. YES. Anyone can baptize anyone else if they choose to do so...............NOW, IF the question is will that baptism be of any spiritual value? Uh, well, they will both get wet..........if there is spiritual value in being dunked, then so be it.
As for new believers obeying Christ's commandment to be baptized, any saved, sanctified believer can baptize a new believer in my opinion.
God bless
My thoughts. YES. Anyone can baptize anyone else if they choose to do so...............NOW, IF the question is will that baptism be of any spiritual value? Uh, well, they will both get wet..........if there is spiritual value in being dunked, then so be it.
As for new believers obeying Christ's commandment to be baptized, any saved, sanctified believer can baptize a new believer in my opinion.
God bless
B
"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."
I believe all Christians are Biblicaly right to baptize and Legally has really nothing to do with this. The gvt,state laws have no bearing on what we do in faith when it comes to whether we baptize or not. As we do this we are following the comands of Christ are we not?
I believe all Christians are Biblicaly right to baptize and Legally has really nothing to do with this. The gvt,state laws have no bearing on what we do in faith when it comes to whether we baptize or not. As we do this we are following the comands of Christ are we not?
I also am not "ordained" by a particular church body, denomination, or such, but I am a disciple of Christ, and it seems to me that He "ordained" me and all disciples to baptize in Matthew 28:19-20.........just my thoughts........
Suppose it depends on what one's definition of "ordained" is.........but I also think one should be comfortable with baptizing a new believer, so you are not wrong to not baptize anyone......God bless
Suppose it depends on what one's definition of "ordained" is.........but I also think one should be comfortable with baptizing a new believer, so you are not wrong to not baptize anyone......God bless
it is best to be discipled and baptized , by the Pastor, in the congregation you believe to be most faithful to the Lord & Scriptures.
but if you can not do that (for whatever reasons), another baptized Christian who professes the true Gospel can baptize you.
get into a simple church that feeds you from the Word of God a.s.a.p. though.
but if you can not do that (for whatever reasons), another baptized Christian who professes the true Gospel can baptize you.
get into a simple church that feeds you from the Word of God a.s.a.p. though.
In the Bible, these types of people baptized:
1. Apostles
2. An evangelist and possibly deacon (one of the Seven)
3 A disciple and brother
Ananias baptized Saul of Tarsus. There is no statement that he was an apostle or evangelist or church elder. The Lord had given him a vision and sent him to minister to Saul, but a command to baptized is not included in the scriptural account.
There is no account of an elder or pastor who is not also called an apostle baptizing. But pastors and elders should also be disciples.
1. Apostles
2. An evangelist and possibly deacon (one of the Seven)
3 A disciple and brother
Ananias baptized Saul of Tarsus. There is no statement that he was an apostle or evangelist or church elder. The Lord had given him a vision and sent him to minister to Saul, but a command to baptized is not included in the scriptural account.
There is no account of an elder or pastor who is not also called an apostle baptizing. But pastors and elders should also be disciples.
A
I really like this thread. It is filled with such thought-provoking replies. Some legalistic, some not.
It hit home to me, and I feel closer to Jesus because of it. He was always teaching the spirit of the law instead of the letter of the law IMHO. Like one of those 3D pictures where you have to let go and forget about everything you ever knew and not focus too much on tradition, but see through into the heart of the matter.
It hit home to me, and I feel closer to Jesus because of it. He was always teaching the spirit of the law instead of the letter of the law IMHO. Like one of those 3D pictures where you have to let go and forget about everything you ever knew and not focus too much on tradition, but see through into the heart of the matter.
Think about to whom those instructions were given.
A rag-tag bunch of peasants mostly from Galilee.
(In American terms think Kentucky Hillbilly or Mexican illegal immigrant for comparable social status.)
They had no standing or any office.
What we refer to as the Church did not even exist yet.
Pentecost, some days off, had not yet occurred.
No Scripture dealing with water baptism exactly specifies who should be baptising and who not.
The only unambiguous characteristic that shines through is that both the baptiser and the baptised should be believers committed to Jesus Christ.
True Christianity does not place arbitrary gatekeepers between man and God - the priesthood is truly of all believers.
Another aspect of baptism that does truly need to be understood is that it is a public acknowledgment of a spiritual reality. Those who do preach baptismal regeneration are truly deceived - no one is saved by taking a bath, no matter who is doing the baptising!
This is not to diminish the spiritual importance of water baptism as it the most public demonstration of an individual's faith that most will make in their lives.
I personally believe that water baptism should only be the start of publicly making declarations for the reality of the Gospel.
If one really thinks about it the first mention of water baptism in the Christian context is within the larger context of the Great Commission.
The Great Commission is simple enough - the mission of the Church is Missions!
With respect to offices in the Church: they are valid but, and it is a but, one should be careful NOT to ascribe too much to them per se. I might prefer someone with no title or office in any church to baptise people than someone with a title or an office in a church - it will depend absolutely on what I know about that individual, I personally do not care about the office or the title, or lack of it, as a marker of spiritual qualification.
Most people think of water baptism as an induction into a local church. However, as already indicated it is a public demonstration of a spiritual reality. One is already a member of the Church universal - in other words the true body of believers unrestricted by history, ethnicity, language, doctrinal difference, or membership of a local church - before the issue of local church membership becomes a relevant consideration.
(I believe in church membership, but again, church membership and attendance does not necessarily correlate well with any spiritual realities.)
The bottom line: Water baptism needs to be done by people who are committed to Jesus Christ, and the ones being baptised also need to be committed to Jesus Christ.
A rag-tag bunch of peasants mostly from Galilee.
(In American terms think Kentucky Hillbilly or Mexican illegal immigrant for comparable social status.)
They had no standing or any office.
What we refer to as the Church did not even exist yet.
Pentecost, some days off, had not yet occurred.
No Scripture dealing with water baptism exactly specifies who should be baptising and who not.
The only unambiguous characteristic that shines through is that both the baptiser and the baptised should be believers committed to Jesus Christ.
True Christianity does not place arbitrary gatekeepers between man and God - the priesthood is truly of all believers.
Another aspect of baptism that does truly need to be understood is that it is a public acknowledgment of a spiritual reality. Those who do preach baptismal regeneration are truly deceived - no one is saved by taking a bath, no matter who is doing the baptising!
This is not to diminish the spiritual importance of water baptism as it the most public demonstration of an individual's faith that most will make in their lives.
I personally believe that water baptism should only be the start of publicly making declarations for the reality of the Gospel.
If one really thinks about it the first mention of water baptism in the Christian context is within the larger context of the Great Commission.
The Great Commission is simple enough - the mission of the Church is Missions!
With respect to offices in the Church: they are valid but, and it is a but, one should be careful NOT to ascribe too much to them per se. I might prefer someone with no title or office in any church to baptise people than someone with a title or an office in a church - it will depend absolutely on what I know about that individual, I personally do not care about the office or the title, or lack of it, as a marker of spiritual qualification.
Most people think of water baptism as an induction into a local church. However, as already indicated it is a public demonstration of a spiritual reality. One is already a member of the Church universal - in other words the true body of believers unrestricted by history, ethnicity, language, doctrinal difference, or membership of a local church - before the issue of local church membership becomes a relevant consideration.
(I believe in church membership, but again, church membership and attendance does not necessarily correlate well with any spiritual realities.)
The bottom line: Water baptism needs to be done by people who are committed to Jesus Christ, and the ones being baptised also need to be committed to Jesus Christ.