Baptism

  • 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.

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
56,015
26,143
113
#21
I agree but baptism is not symbolic and neither is belief. Both are willful acts on our part that give us our Spiritual rebirth.
The Bible is clear that salvation is by grace through faith in
Jesus Christ, not by works of any kind, including water baptism.
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
#22
Faith is not symbolic but baptism is clearly symbolic of the fact that the believer died, was buried, and rose again with Christ in order to walk in newness of life. So if someone says that it is the outward expression of an inward reality, then that too is acceptable.

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.


For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection
: (Rom 6:3-5).

That word "likeness" indicates symbolism.
You are making my point for me. Our baptism is a "likeness" of our union with the death, burial and resurrection of our Lord. These verses are spoken to
many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ
and why was this spoken to the baptized?
so we also should walk in newness of life
but only
if we have been planted together
if we are not planted
in the likeness of his death
we will not
also in the likeness of his resurrection
.

Romans 6:3-5 was written to the baptized to express the connection of baptism to our union with the work of Jesus. These verses cement the importance of baptism to the resurrection.

and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also--not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ (1st Peter 3:21)

So what saves us? Baptism. How does it save us? By the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
 

Innerfire89

Senior Member
Aug 23, 2017
586
20
0
#23
The word "eis" in Greek means "so that" which is why many bibles use "so that" in Acts 2:38, look up the many translations in Bible Hub or Bible Gateway to see this. There are no bibles that use "because of" as you are suggesting. On your example of the sore throat, why would someone "use a cough drop", to get the remission of "your sore throat".

No cough drop, no remission of your sore throat.

All the faith in the world will not save without the proper response to God's call for the remission of sins.
I found just the opposite at Biblehub. You get a licence plate for a car. You use an aspirin for a headache. You are baptized for the remission of sin. The Greek word "eis" is very similar to the English "for".
Matthew 3:11 I baptize you with water for (eis) repentance. Is john baptizing to cause repentance?


Scripture is clear that we are saved by faith alone, it is Christ death on the cross that took away are sins, not any works.
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
#24
The Bible is clear that salvation is by grace through faith in
Jesus Christ, not by works of any kind, including water baptism.
Do not be so quick to label baptism as a work. It is a willful act, as is belief. If baptism being a work negates its use in salvation so too does the work of faith for the same purpose.
 

Innerfire89

Senior Member
Aug 23, 2017
586
20
0
#25
You sound like a lawyer looking for loopholes in a contract. The bible is rather clear on the purpose of baptism, why this need to look for exceptions? No rule on any subject is void of exceptions but the exceptions do not negate the rule
You sound like a bully with a Bible. There's no need to look for loophole when the rule can only be intenionaly broken.
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
#26
I found just the opposite at Biblehub. You get a licence plate for a car. You use an aspirin for a headache. You are baptized for the remission of sin. The Greek word "eis" is very similar to the English "for".
Matthew 3:11 I baptize you with water for (eis) repentance. Is john baptizing to cause repentance?


Scripture is clear that we are saved by faith alone, it is Christ death on the cross that took away are sins, not any works.
You are struggling to defend what cannot be defended.

This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins (Matthew 26:28 KJV).

Why was Jesus blood shed?

Because of the remission of sins (past tense) or in order to receive the remission of sins (future tense)?
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
#28
You sound like a bully with a Bible. There's no need to look for loophole when the rule can only be intenionaly broken.
You sound like a bully without one. Denying scripture that is clearly written is not a valid excuse for anyone, intentional or not. The wedding guest that was found without the proper garment was not allowed an excuse for being unprepared. This warning should not be ignored.
 
Last edited:

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
56,015
26,143
113
#29
Do not be so quick to label baptism as a work. It is a willful act, as is belief. If baptism being a work negates its use in salvation so too does the work of faith for the same purpose.
One should not conflate the efficacy of Spiritual baptism with the symbolic washing of water.
 

Innerfire89

Senior Member
Aug 23, 2017
586
20
0
#30
You are struggling to defend what cannot be defended.

This is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins (Matthew 26:28 KJV).

Why was Jesus blood shed?

Because of the remission of sins (past tense) or in order to receive the remission of sins (future tense)?
Past tense, once for all of the sins of the elect.
 

Innerfire89

Senior Member
Aug 23, 2017
586
20
0
#32
You sound like a bully without one. Denying scripture that is clearly written is not a valid excuse for anyone, intentional or not. The wedding guest that was found without the proper garment was not allowed an excuse for being unprepared. This warning should not be ignored.
I'm not denying Scripture. How would that even make me a bully? Understanding the ancient Jewish culture helps in understanding the parable of the wedding guests, when the king invited guest he gave them clothes to wear, the one who didn't have on wedding clothes were uninvited.
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
#33
One should not conflate the efficacy of Spiritual baptism with the symbolic washing of water.
The gift of the Holy Spirit comes after repentance and the baptism for the remission of sins. Acts 2:38
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
56,015
26,143
113
#34
The gift of the Holy Spirit comes after repentance and the baptism for the remission of sins. Acts 2:38
Acts 2:38, “And Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.’” As with any single verse or passage, we discern what it teaches by first filtering it through what we know the Bible teaches on the subject at hand. In the case of baptism and salvation, the Bible is clear that salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not by works of any kind, including baptism (Ephesians 2:8-9). So, any interpretation which comes to the conclusion that baptism, or any other act, is necessary for salvation, is a faulty interpretation. For more information, please see "Is salvation by faith alone, or by faith plus works?"

Why, then, do some come to the conclusion that we must be baptized in order to be saved? Often, the discussion of whether or not this passage teaches baptism is required for salvation centers around the Greek word eis that is translated “for” in this passage. Those who hold to the belief that baptism is required for salvation are quick to point to this verse and the fact that it says “be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins,” assuming that the word translated “for” in this verse means “in order to get.” However, in both Greek and English, there are many possible usages of the word “for.”

As an example, when one says “Take two aspirin for your headache,” it is obvious to everybody that it does not mean “take two aspirin in order to get your headache,” but instead to “take two aspirin because you already have a headache.” There are three possible meanings of the word “for” that might fit the context of
Acts 2:38: 1--“in order to be, become, get, have, keep, etc.,” 2—“because of, as the result of,” or 3—“with regard to.” Since any one of the three meanings could fit the context of this passage, additional study is required in order to determine which one is correct.

We need to start by looking back to the original language and the meaning of the Greek word eis. This is a common Greek word (it is used 1774 times in the New Testament) that is translated many different ways. Like the English word “for” it can have several different meanings. So, again, we see at least two or three possible meanings of the passage, one that would seem to support that baptism is required for salvation and others that would not. While both the meanings of the Greek word eis are seen in different passages of Scripture, such noted Greek scholars as A.T. Robertson and J.R. Mantey have maintained that the Greek preposition eis in
Acts 2:38 should be translated “because of” or “in view of,” and not “in order to,” or “for the purpose of.”

One example of how this preposition is used in other Scriptures is seen in
Matthew 12:41 where the word eis communicates the “result” of an action. In this case it is said that the people of Nineveh “repented at the preaching of Jonah” (the word translated “at” is the same Greek word eis). Clearly, the meaning of this passage is that they repented “because of’” or “as the result of” Jonah’s preaching. In the same way, it would be possible that Acts 2:38 is indeed communicating the fact that they were to be baptized “as the result of” or “because” they already had believed and in doing so had already received forgiveness of their sins (John 1:12; John 3:14-18; John 5:24; John 11:25-26; Acts 10:43; Acts 13:39; Acts 16:31; Acts 26:18; Romans 10:9; Ephesians 1:12-14). This interpretation of the passage is also consistent with the message recorded in Peter’s next two sermons to unbelievers where he associates the forgiveness of sins with the act of repentance and faith in Christ without even mentioning baptism (Acts 3:17-26; Acts 4:8-12).

In addition to
Acts 2:38, there are three other verses where the Greek word eis is used in conjunction with the word “baptize” or “baptism.” The first of these is Matthew 3:11, “baptize you with water for repentance.” Clearly the Greek word eis cannot mean “in order to get” in this passage. They were not baptized “in order to get repentance,” but were “baptized because they had repented.” The second passage is Romans 6:3 where we have the phrase “baptized into (eis) His death.” This again fits with the meaning “because of” or in "regard to." The third and final passage is 1 Corinthians 10:2 and the phrase “baptized into (eis) Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” Again, eis cannot mean “in order to get” in this passage because the Israelites were not baptized in order to get Moses to be their leader, but because he was their leader and had led them out of Egypt. If one is consistent with the way the preposition eis is used in conjunction with baptism, we must conclude that Acts 2:38is indeed referring to their being baptized “because” they had received forgiveness of their sins. Some other verses where the Greek preposition eis does not mean “in order to obtain” are Matthew 28:19; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 19:3; 1 Corinthians 1:15; and 12:13.

The grammatical evidence surrounding this verse and the preposition eis are clear that while both views on this verse are well within the context and the range of possible meanings of the passage, the majority of the evidence is in favor that the best possible definition of the word “for” in this context is either “because of” or “in regard to” and not “in order to get.” Therefore,
Acts 2:38, when interpreted correctly, does not teach that baptism is required for salvation.

Besides the precise meaning of the preposition translated “for” in this passage, there is another grammatical aspect of this verse to carefully consider—the change between the second person and third person between the verbs and pronouns in the passage. For example, in Peter’s commands to repent and be baptized the Greek verb translated “repent” is in the second person plural while the verb “be baptized,” is in the third person singular. When we couple this with the fact that the pronoun “your” in the phrase “forgiveness of your sins” is also second person plural, we see an important distinction being made that helps us understand this passage. The result of this change from second person plural to third person singular and back would seem to connect the phrase “forgiveness of your sins” directly with the command to “repent.” Therefore, when you take into account the change in person and plurality, essentially what you have is “You (plural) repent for the forgiveness of your (plural) sins, and let each one (singular) of you be baptized (singular).” Or, to put it in a more distinct way: “You all repent for the forgiveness of all of your sins, and let each one of you be baptized.”

Another error that is made by those who believe
Acts 2:38 teaches baptism is required for salvation is what is sometimes called the Negative Inference Fallacy. Simply put, this is the idea that just because a statement is true, we cannot assume all negations (or opposites) of that statement are true. In other words, just because Acts 2:38 says “repent and be baptized….for the forgiveness of sins…and the gift of the Holy Spirit,” it does not mean that if one repents and is not baptized, he will not receive forgiveness of sins or the gift of the Holy Spirit.

There is an important difference between a condition of salvation and a requirement for salvation. The Bible is clear that belief is both a condition and a requirement, but the same cannot be said for baptism. The Bible does not say that if a man is not baptized then he will not be saved. One can add any number of conditions to faith (which is required for salvation), and the person can still be saved. For example if a person believes, is baptized, goes to church, and gives to the poor he will be saved. Where the error in thinking occurs is if one assumes all these other conditions, “baptism, going to church, giving to the poor,” are required for one to be saved. While they might be the evidence of salvation, they are not a requirement for salvation. (For a more thorough explanation of this logical fallacy, please see the Question:
Does Mark 16:16 teach that baptism is required for salvation?).

The fact that baptism is not required to receive forgiveness and the gift of the Holy Spirit should also be evident by simply reading a little farther in the book of Acts. In
Acts 10:43, Peter tells Cornelius that “through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins” (please note that nothing at this point has been mentioned about being baptized, yet Peter connects believing in Christ with the act of receiving forgiveness for sins). The next thing that happens is, having believed Peter’s message about Christ, the “Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message” (Acts 10:44). It is only after they had believed, and therefore received forgiveness of their sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit, that Cornelius and his household were baptized (Acts 10:47-48). The context and the passage are very clear; Cornelius and his household received both forgiveness of sins and the Holy Spirit before they were ever baptized. In fact, the reason Peter allowed them to be baptized was that they showed evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit “just as Peter and the Jewish believers” had.

In conclusion,
Acts 2:38 does not teach that baptism is required for salvation. While baptism is important as the sign that one has been justified by faith and as the public declaration of one’s faith in Christ and membership in a local body of believers, it is not the means of remission or forgiveness of sins. The Bible is very clear that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone (John 1:12; John 3:16; Acts 16:31; Romans 3:21-30; Romans 4:5; Romans 10:9-10; Ephesians 2:8-10; Philippians 3:9; Galatians 2:16).
https://www.gotquestions.org/baptism-Acts-2-38.html
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
#35
I'm not denying Scripture. How would that even make me a bully? Understanding the ancient Jewish culture helps in understanding the parable of the wedding guests, when the king invited guest he gave them clothes to wear, the one who didn't have on wedding clothes were uninvited.
Name calling is a classic tool of the bully.

You are quite wrong on the wedding guest not being invited. The parable in Matthew 22 states that all were invited but the guest in question was not wearing the proper garments, intentional or not. The guest was without excuse, the proper garments were available. He chose to ignore them.
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
#36
Acts 2:38, “And Peter said to them, ‘Repent, and let each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.’” As with any single verse or passage, we discern what it teaches by first filtering it through what we know the Bible teaches on the subject at hand. In the case of baptism and salvation, the Bible is clear that salvation is by grace through faith in Jesus Christ, not by works of any kind, including baptism (Ephesians 2:8-9). So, any interpretation which comes to the conclusion that baptism, or any other act, is necessary for salvation, is a faulty interpretation. For more information, please see "Is salvation by faith alone, or by faith plus works?"

Why, then, do some come to the conclusion that we must be baptized in order to be saved? Often, the discussion of whether or not this passage teaches baptism is required for salvation centers around the Greek word eis that is translated “for” in this passage. Those who hold to the belief that baptism is required for salvation are quick to point to this verse and the fact that it says “be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins,” assuming that the word translated “for” in this verse means “in order to get.” However, in both Greek and English, there are many possible usages of the word “for.”

As an example, when one says “Take two aspirin for your headache,” it is obvious to everybody that it does not mean “take two aspirin in order to get your headache,” but instead to “take two aspirin because you already have a headache.” There are three possible meanings of the word “for” that might fit the context of
Acts 2:38: 1--“in order to be, become, get, have, keep, etc.,” 2—“because of, as the result of,” or 3—“with regard to.” Since any one of the three meanings could fit the context of this passage, additional study is required in order to determine which one is correct.

We need to start by looking back to the original language and the meaning of the Greek word eis. This is a common Greek word (it is used 1774 times in the New Testament) that is translated many different ways. Like the English word “for” it can have several different meanings. So, again, we see at least two or three possible meanings of the passage, one that would seem to support that baptism is required for salvation and others that would not. While both the meanings of the Greek word eis are seen in different passages of Scripture, such noted Greek scholars as A.T. Robertson and J.R. Mantey have maintained that the Greek preposition eis in
Acts 2:38 should be translated “because of” or “in view of,” and not “in order to,” or “for the purpose of.”

One example of how this preposition is used in other Scriptures is seen in
Matthew 12:41 where the word eis communicates the “result” of an action. In this case it is said that the people of Nineveh “repented at the preaching of Jonah” (the word translated “at” is the same Greek word eis). Clearly, the meaning of this passage is that they repented “because of’” or “as the result of” Jonah’s preaching. In the same way, it would be possible that Acts 2:38 is indeed communicating the fact that they were to be baptized “as the result of” or “because” they already had believed and in doing so had already received forgiveness of their sins (John 1:12; John 3:14-18; John 5:24; John 11:25-26; Acts 10:43; Acts 13:39; Acts 16:31; Acts 26:18; Romans 10:9; Ephesians 1:12-14). This interpretation of the passage is also consistent with the message recorded in Peter’s next two sermons to unbelievers where he associates the forgiveness of sins with the act of repentance and faith in Christ without even mentioning baptism (Acts 3:17-26; Acts 4:8-12).

In addition to
Acts 2:38, there are three other verses where the Greek word eis is used in conjunction with the word “baptize” or “baptism.” The first of these is Matthew 3:11, “baptize you with water for repentance.” Clearly the Greek word eis cannot mean “in order to get” in this passage. They were not baptized “in order to get repentance,” but were “baptized because they had repented.” The second passage is Romans 6:3 where we have the phrase “baptized into (eis) His death.” This again fits with the meaning “because of” or in "regard to." The third and final passage is 1 Corinthians 10:2 and the phrase “baptized into (eis) Moses in the cloud and in the sea.” Again, eis cannot mean “in order to get” in this passage because the Israelites were not baptized in order to get Moses to be their leader, but because he was their leader and had led them out of Egypt. If one is consistent with the way the preposition eis is used in conjunction with baptism, we must conclude that Acts 2:38is indeed referring to their being baptized “because” they had received forgiveness of their sins. Some other verses where the Greek preposition eis does not mean “in order to obtain” are Matthew 28:19; 1 Peter 3:21; Acts 19:3; 1 Corinthians 1:15; and 12:13.

The grammatical evidence surrounding this verse and the preposition eis are clear that while both views on this verse are well within the context and the range of possible meanings of the passage, the majority of the evidence is in favor that the best possible definition of the word “for” in this context is either “because of” or “in regard to” and not “in order to get.” Therefore,
Acts 2:38, when interpreted correctly, does not teach that baptism is required for salvation.

Besides the precise meaning of the preposition translated “for” in this passage, there is another grammatical aspect of this verse to carefully consider—the change between the second person and third person between the verbs and pronouns in the passage. For example, in Peter’s commands to repent and be baptized the Greek verb translated “repent” is in the second person plural while the verb “be baptized,” is in the third person singular. When we couple this with the fact that the pronoun “your” in the phrase “forgiveness of your sins” is also second person plural, we see an important distinction being made that helps us understand this passage. The result of this change from second person plural to third person singular and back would seem to connect the phrase “forgiveness of your sins” directly with the command to “repent.” Therefore, when you take into account the change in person and plurality, essentially what you have is “You (plural) repent for the forgiveness of your (plural) sins, and let each one (singular) of you be baptized (singular).” Or, to put it in a more distinct way: “You all repent for the forgiveness of all of your sins, and let each one of you be baptized.”

Another error that is made by those who believe
Acts 2:38 teaches baptism is required for salvation is what is sometimes called the Negative Inference Fallacy. Simply put, this is the idea that just because a statement is true, we cannot assume all negations (or opposites) of that statement are true. In other words, just because Acts 2:38 says “repent and be baptized….for the forgiveness of sins…and the gift of the Holy Spirit,” it does not mean that if one repents and is not baptized, he will not receive forgiveness of sins or the gift of the Holy Spirit.

There is an important difference between a condition of salvation and a requirement for salvation. The Bible is clear that belief is both a condition and a requirement, but the same cannot be said for baptism. The Bible does not say that if a man is not baptized then he will not be saved. One can add any number of conditions to faith (which is required for salvation), and the person can still be saved. For example if a person believes, is baptized, goes to church, and gives to the poor he will be saved. Where the error in thinking occurs is if one assumes all these other conditions, “baptism, going to church, giving to the poor,” are required for one to be saved. While they might be the evidence of salvation, they are not a requirement for salvation. (For a more thorough explanation of this logical fallacy, please see the Question:
Does Mark 16:16 teach that baptism is required for salvation?).

The fact that baptism is not required to receive forgiveness and the gift of the Holy Spirit should also be evident by simply reading a little farther in the book of Acts. In
Acts 10:43, Peter tells Cornelius that “through His name everyone who believes in Him receives forgiveness of sins” (please note that nothing at this point has been mentioned about being baptized, yet Peter connects believing in Christ with the act of receiving forgiveness for sins). The next thing that happens is, having believed Peter’s message about Christ, the “Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message” (Acts 10:44). It is only after they had believed, and therefore received forgiveness of their sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit, that Cornelius and his household were baptized (Acts 10:47-48). The context and the passage are very clear; Cornelius and his household received both forgiveness of sins and the Holy Spirit before they were ever baptized. In fact, the reason Peter allowed them to be baptized was that they showed evidence of receiving the Holy Spirit “just as Peter and the Jewish believers” had.

In conclusion,
Acts 2:38 does not teach that baptism is required for salvation. While baptism is important as the sign that one has been justified by faith and as the public declaration of one’s faith in Christ and membership in a local body of believers, it is not the means of remission or forgiveness of sins. The Bible is very clear that we are saved by grace alone through faith alone in Christ alone (John 1:12; John 3:16; Acts 16:31; Romans 3:21-30; Romans 4:5; Romans 10:9-10; Ephesians 2:8-10; Philippians 3:9; Galatians 2:16).
https://www.gotquestions.org/baptism-Acts-2-38.html
Purposley viewing scripture through a preconceived theology filter will always slant the verse toward the desired understanding. And this is what you are admitting to. If Acts 2:38 can be made to mean that baptism is not for the remission of sins then no verse is safe from your filter.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
56,015
26,143
113
#37
Purposley viewing scripture through a preconceived theology filter will always slant the verse toward the desired understanding. And this is what you are admitting to. If Acts 2:38 can be made to mean that baptism is not for the remission of sins then no verse is safe from your filter.
There you go again, confusing things. You accusing me of something does not equate to me admitting to what you erroneously assume.
 

Innerfire89

Senior Member
Aug 23, 2017
586
20
0
#38
Think long and hard about your answer, sleep on it.
Provide an argument instead of simply telling people their wrong. Your intimidation tactics don't work, that's just lazy and careless, you argue for nothing more than feeding your ego.
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
#39
There you go again, confusing things. You accusing me of something does not equate to me admitting to what you erroneously assume.
There is simply nothing I can say. By your own admission you will filter whatever I present through your filter of what is true. Unless you are at least willing to admit your filter can be wrong this is not a debate but a one way discourse.
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
#40
Provide an argument instead of simply telling people their wrong. Your intimidation tactics don't work, that's just lazy and careless, you argue for nothing more than feeding your ego.
The wedding guest was not invited, but I am the one "lazy and careless"?