True Baptism

[mailmandan]

"Implied in genuine repentance"?

"In verses where faith is mentioned yet not repentance, repentance is implied or assumed"?

"Again, when only repentance is mentioned , belief/faith is implied or assumed"?

"When you have one you must have the other"?

This is your reasoning? This is your theology?

Absolutely. You still don't get it? Those who have truly repented believe the gospel and those who believe the gospel have already repented in the process of changing their mind and choosing to believe the gospel. If you truly believed the gospel, then you would understand.

So you and the "trust only" sects have decided what should be assumed/implied with these scriptures. When a scripture commands belief before the remission of sins, repentance is assumed to be commanded but not baptism. Did God tell you this?

God has decided what should be assumed/implied with these scriptures. God has revealed this to me. Prior to my conversion, I was still mixed up about this, just like you still are. Repent and believe the gospel precede water baptism.

You are simply cherry-picking verses that do not mention baptism, you then attempt to explain away the lack of belief or repentance by saying, "well it's assumed".

I already thoroughly explained this in post #182, but the truth just went right over your head. You just don't get it and there is a reason for that.

Why not assume that baptism was expected but not mentioned as well?

Why assume that it was? You can't truly repent and not believe the gospel and you can't truly believe the gospel without repenting, yet you can truly repent and believe the gospel but NOT YET BE WATER BAPTIZED. Believing the gospel is not baptism and believing the gospel precedes baptism and we are saved the moment that we believe the gospel (Romans 1:16) prior to receiving water baptism (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:7-9). It's just that simple.

After all it would be a fair assumption since every conversion after the resurrection of Jesus Christ included it? Many people on this thread have mentioned how intertwined baptism is with the moment of salvation, lets just assume it is mandatory for salvation.

Why are you so obsessed with water baptism? Why wouldn't every conversion result in being water baptized afterwards? We see that baptism is regularly associated with conversion and salvation, rather than absolutely required for salvation. Unless you repent you will perish.. (Luke 13:3). *If we don't repent we will perish because if we don't repent then we won't believe the gospel. He who does not believe will be condemned.. (John 3:18). He who is not water baptized will be condemned? *No such verse.

Belief, repentance and baptism are distinct. One cannot assume that one exists because of the others.

Yet repent and believe the gospel are two sides to the same coin. Repent (change your mind) "new direction of this change of mind" -- believe the gospel. Where you have one you must have the other. "I truly repented but I don't believe the gospel" is an oxymoron; just as, "I believe the gospel but I never repented" is also an oxymoron. "I have truly repented and I believe the gospel" but I have not yet been water baptized is not an oxymoron. You don't baptize unbelievers in order to make them believers, but BECAUSE they are believers.

I have seen you use this faulty human logic on Mark 16:16. Since Jesus does not mention the lack of baptism as a cause of condemnation we can safely assume His words earlier in the same verse are meaningless. Yeah, that's good logic.

Mark 16:16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned. The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely essential to salvation.

Condemnation rests on unbelief, not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. NOWHERE does the Bible say "baptized or condemned." *If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then why did Jesus not mention it in the following verses? (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). *What is the ONE requirement that Jesus mentions 9 different times in each of these complete statements? BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics.

Just in case you are sarcastically thinking, "what happened to repentance?" It already took place in the process of changing our mind and choosing to BELIEVE (two sides to the same coin) so it's already implied or assumed and does not need to specifically be spelled out. There is a clear "distinction" between believes AND getting baptized AFTERWARDS, so baptism does need to be specifically mentioned in John 3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26 if baptism was absolutely necessary for salvation.

John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. *So we cannot say that whoever is not baptized will not be saved based on Mark 16:16. *Those that do so are basing their argument on faulty human logic.

"Then said Jesus to those Jews who believed on him, if ye continue in my word, then are ye my disciples indeed." John 8:31 KJV

This verse states that these people "believed on him" (not mental assent of his existence) but believed on him but were not His disciples! None of your assumptions can change this.

Other translations simply say believed Him, yet regardless, there is a stage in the progress of believing in Jesus which "falls short of genuine or consummated belief resulting in salvation." If you continue to read on in John 8:31-59, you will see that the Jews who were said to have "believed Him" turn out to be: slaves to sin (verse 34), indifferent to the words of Jesus (verses 33, 37), children of the devil (verse 44), liars (verse 55), and guilty of setting out to stone the one they have professed to believe in (verse 59).

*So we can see at best, these Jews believed on Him (based on their own misconceptions and expectations) of Jesus, but they did not truly "believe in His name/believe in Him" and become children of God/saved (John 1:12; 3:18).

In John chapter 6, we see that many of Jesus' so called disciples complained and were offended (verses 60-61) about what Jesus said in verses 51-59. These are the very so called "disciples" who Jesus says "do not believe" (John 6:64). They also walked with Him no more. They did not continue.

*If we CONTINUE in His word, then we demonstrate that we are TRULY His disciples (John 8:31). Those who fail to continue in His word demonstrate that they are NOT TRULY His disciples. None of your assumptions can change all of this.

 

[hornetguy]

Scripture says it does matter. A little leaven leaveneth the whole lump. Gal 5:9

How much arsenic are willing to tolerate in your drinking water?

Let's not add water baptism to the gospel.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Um... I didn't....

Jesus did.

How 'bout, let's not REMOVE water baptism from the gospel?

 

[mailmandan]

Regardless, baptizing unbelievers is absurd, don't you agree?

I agree that baptizing unbelievers is absurd, but it happens all the time.

 

[DJ2]

I agree that baptizing unbelievers is absurd, but it happens all the time.

"it happens all the time"?

With the exception of "pedobaptism" I cannot think of any.

 

[mailmandan]

"it happens all the time"?

With the exception of "pedobaptism" I cannot think of any.

So you truly believe that EVERYONE who receives water baptism is a genuine believer who trusts exclusively in Jesus Christ for salvation? Even people who get water baptized in various false religions and cults? If you can believe that then you can believe anything!

Apparently, what I explained to you in post #184 just went right over your head.

 

[DJ2]

This takes more than a superficial reading of the passage to obtain the correct meaning. The word translated baptized in the passage is "baptizo" in the Greek. That Greek word means to immerse like a sunken ship. If you immerse someone in water like a sunken ship they will die for lack of air. The Holy Spirit would have used the word bapto if He had intended to teach water baptism.

Three thousand souls heard Peter preach the gospel and heard that Jesus was their promised Messiah. They received the word and believed so at that moment they were converted through the baptism of the Holy Spirit. Upon being converted they were added to the church which is the living body of Christ.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

So the 3000 people in Acts 2 obeyed Peter's command by being Spirit baptized? Not water baptized. They asked, "what must we do" and Peter commanded them to be baptized in the Holy Spirit? How did they do this?

Peter did not immerse (baptizo) them for fear of the "lack of air"?

 

[hornetguy]

So the 3000 people in Acts 2 obeyed Peter's command by being Spirit baptized? Not water baptized. They asked, "what must we do" and Peter commanded them to be baptized in the Holy Spirit? How did they do this?

Peter did not immerse (baptizo) them for fear of the "lack of air"?

Plus, as I stated before, the Jews there, from many nations, had NO CONCEPT of a "spiritual baptism"... but they knew precisely what 'baptizo' meant.... it was immersion in water.

They knew EXACTLY what Peter meant in his reply....

Simply because the word 'baptizo' could mean other things doesn't mean that's the usage at that time. The men being told to be immersed obviously didn't think Peter was telling them to go dip themselves in a vat of dye, or to go sink themselves to the bottom of the sea, like a ship...

I mean, come on.... there has to be some common sense applied here.

 

[hornetguy]

So you truly believe that EVERYONE who receives water baptism is a genuine believer who trusts exclusively in Jesus Christ for salvation? Even people who get water baptized in various false religions and cults? If you can believe that then you can believe anything!

Apparently, what I explained to you in post #184 just went right over your head.

I'll let DJ2 answer for himself, but what you said is true.... I'm sure there are people who want to be, and get baptized for many reasons, sometimes the wrong reason. We have no control over that...

Just as many people who claim to have accepted Jesus as their savior, have not actually DONE that. We have no control over that...

But what is the criteria for being born? (or born again) ? Is there some sort of test we need to pass, in order to become qualified for baptism?

Scripturally, baptism is an essential part of our new birth into Jesus Christ....

 

[notuptome]

Um... I didn't....

Jesus did.

How 'bout, let's not REMOVE water baptism from the gospel?

Jesus baptizes with a baptism that men cannot administer. Jesus baptizes with the Holy Spirit.

Jesus did not confuse the issue over baptism. Jesus did not baptize with water. Jesus was baptized in water but it was certainly not for salvation.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

So the 3000 people in Acts 2 obeyed Peter's command by being Spirit baptized? Not water baptized. They asked, "what must we do" and Peter commanded them to be baptized in the Holy Spirit? How did they do this?

Peter did not immerse (baptizo) them for fear of the "lack of air"?

Now you are not quoting scripture correctly. The three thousand did not ask what must we do. When they heard the gospel the received, believed and God baptized them.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

I'll let DJ2 answer for himself, but what you said is true.... I'm sure there are people who want to be, and get baptized for many reasons, sometimes the wrong reason. We have no control over that...

Just as many people who claim to have accepted Jesus as their savior, have not actually DONE that. We have no control over that...

But what is the criteria for being born? (or born again) ? Is there some sort of test we need to pass, in order to become qualified for baptism?

Scripturally, baptism is an essential part of our new birth into Jesus Christ....

If the last sentence of your post is true then please show me where the apostles were baptized. They received John's baptism but where did they get NT water baptism?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[mailmandan]

I'll let DJ2 answer for himself, but what you said is true.... I'm sure there are people who want to be, and get baptized for many reasons, sometimes the wrong reason. We have no control over that...

Just as many people who claim to have accepted Jesus as their savior, have not actually DONE that. We have no control over that...

Amen! That is simply the point that I am making. Such people are unbelievers, even though they still may believe "mental assent" in the existence and historical facts about Christ. The demons believe that "there is one God" (James 2:19) and they believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God (which means He is of the same nature as God/He was fully man and fully God) and they also believe that the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus "happened" BUT they do not believe on the Lord Jesus Christ (Acts 16:31) and are not saved.

In other words, they do not believe/entrust their spiritual well being to Christ; have faith/reliance upon Christ for salvation. Their trust and reliance is in Satan, as demonstrated by their rebellion in heaven and continuous evil works. So in regards to the Biblical sense of what it means to be a saved believer, the demons are unbelievers, along with everyone else who falls short of saving belief in Christ (John 3:18).

But what is the criteria for being born? (or born again) ? Is there some sort of test we need to pass, in order to become qualified for baptism?

When the eunuch in Acts chapter 8 asked the question, "what hinders me from being baptized?" Phillip answered him in verse 37 by saying - "If you believe with all your heart, you may."

Scripturally, baptism is an essential part of our new birth into Jesus Christ....

1 Peter 1:23 - having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever. Water is used in the Bible as an emblem of the Word of God, and in such uses it is associated with cleansing or washing. Baptism does not avail to cleanse the heart from sin, but Jesus did say, "Now you are clean through the word which I have spoken unto you" (John 15:3).

In John 3:5, Jesus does not refer to baptismal regeneration but to the need for "cleansing." Thus Jesus makes reference to the spiritual washing or purification of the soul, accomplished by the Holy Spirit through the Word of God at the moment of salvation (Ephesians 5:26; Titus 3:5; 1 Peter 1:23).

In John 3:5, Jesus said, "born of water and the Spirit" He did not say born of baptism and the Spirit. To automatically read baptism into this verse simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted. Scripture interprets itself. Notice in John 7:38-39, "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of LIVING WATER. But this He spoke concerning the SPIRIT. *Did you see that? If "water" is arbitrarily defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again.

In John 4:10, Jesus said, "If you knew the gift of God, and who it is who says to you, 'Give Me a drink,' you would have asked Him, and He would have given you living water." In John 4:14, Jesus said, "but whoever drinks of the water that I shall give him will never thirst. But the water that I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life. Jesus connects this living water here with everlasting life. Living water is not water baptism. In 1 Corinthians 12:13, we also read - ..drink into one Spirit.

*The Holy Spirit is the source of living water and instrument of both the cleansing and the birth of the divine nature in us.*

 

[hornetguy]

If the last sentence of your post is true then please show me where the apostles were baptized. They received John's baptism but where did they get NT water baptism?

For the cause of Christ
Roger

This is silly.... why would I have to show scriptural evidence the apostles were ALL baptized? Paul was, and he had a direct communication with Jesus.

Peter told the 3000 to do it, why would he tell them to, and not be, himself?

Show me scriptural proof that the apostle James "believed" and "accepted" Jesus... or most of the others. Lack of specific, scriptural evidence that something happened does not mean it did NOT happen.

Silliness... chasing the wind.

 

[shrume]

the salvation plan was this..... that you hear the gospel.. the good news about Jesus and his sacrifice for us. You are "pricked in your heart", and believe in him, and you accept the gift of salvation (it's free, you know?) and accept Jesus as your savior, and you, in obedience, are baptized... immersed in water, which symbolizes the death, burial, and resurrection of our Savior.
You are resurrected from the death of your old life, and you come out of the water (are born again) a new creation... a baby, in Christ, and you begin your life as a believer/follower of Jesus.

this is the simple plan God laid out for us....

Your plan has too many steps:

Rom 10:
9) That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.
10) For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

Eph 1:
13) In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
14) Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

 

[hornetguy]

When the eunuch in Acts chapter 8 asked the question, "what hinders me from being baptized?" Phillip answered him in verse 37 by saying - "If you believe with all your heart, you may."

While I agree that is a good (perhaps the best and only) criteria for baptism, there are many Biblical scholars that question the authenticity of that statement... many believe that it was added in by a translator, somewhere early on.

I, personally, am not accomplished enough as a textual scholar to say "yea or nay" on this, however.

 

[hornetguy]

Now you are not quoting scripture correctly. The three thousand did not ask what must we do. When they heard the gospel the received, believed and God baptized them.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

This sounds pretty plain to me....

[SUP]37 [/SUP]Now when they heard this, they were [SUP][aj][/SUP]pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, “[SUP][ak][/SUP]Brethren, [SUP][al][/SUP]what shall we do?” [SUP]38 [/SUP]Peter said to them, “Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

 

[mailmandan]

While I agree that is a good (perhaps the best and only) criteria for baptism, there are many Biblical scholars that question the authenticity of that statement... many believe that it was added in by a translator, somewhere early on.

I, personally, am not accomplished enough as a textual scholar to say "yea or nay" on this, however.

You and I would agree then that genuinely believing in Him (Acts 10:43-47) is the best and only criteria for baptism. Of course, baptizing unbelievers is futile and you don't baptize unbelievers in order to make them believers. People get water baptized (for the right reason) BECAUSE they are genuine believers.

 

[hornetguy]

Yes... I agree completely with that.

this was in response to MMDan's most recent post.... I forgot to "reply with quote"....

 

[notuptome]

This sounds pretty plain to me....

You are not following the text. The baptism in 38 is Holy Spirit and not water. The reason it seems plain is because that is what you are reading into the text. The Holy Spirit pricked their heart prompting them to seek relief. Receiving the word resulted in salvation through baptism of the Holy Spirit.

I was thinking of the Philippian jailer in my previous post.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

This is silly.... why would I have to show scriptural evidence the apostles were ALL baptized? Paul was, and he had a direct communication with Jesus.

Peter told the 3000 to do it, why would he tell them to, and not be, himself?

Show me scriptural proof that the apostle James "believed" and "accepted" Jesus... or most of the others. Lack of specific, scriptural evidence that something happened does not mean it did NOT happen.

Silliness... chasing the wind.

We have evidence of Paul receiving water baptism but none of the other apostles baptisms after the resurrection are recorded. You would think if it was as you put it essential the Holy Spirit would have recorded it for our instruction. Paul was water baptized for an anointing to his ministry. The other apostles were anointed at Pentecost, anointed by the Holy Spirit for ministry.

You still need to understand that Peter was not telling three thousand people to receive water baptism for salvation.

Don't want you hanging in the wind.

For the cause of Christ
Roger