Baptism: is it required to be baptized in water?

  • Thread starter WingsOfFidelity
  • Start date
  • 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.

LW97

Senior Member
Apr 10, 2018
1,140
260
63
People, think about it. What is more powerful? Some simple water or the blood of Christ?
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
People, think about it. What is more powerful? Some simple water or the blood of Christ?
When Peter was baptizing in order to receive the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38), was he bapitizing in blood or water?
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atacama_Desert

Again, if water baptism was required, then the thief on the cross would have been baptized too. And the Apostle Paul would have added baptism to the Gospel in 1 Corinthians 15.
Theology is not determined by geography but the Word of God.

What does the theif on the cross have to do with baptism not being commanded for the remission of sins?

New International Version
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned
 

Didymous

Senior Member
Feb 22, 2018
5,047
2,101
113
When Peter was baptizing in order to receive the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38), was he bapitizing in blood or water?
Why was he baptizing only Jews? Think about that.
 

LW97

Senior Member
Apr 10, 2018
1,140
260
63
Theology is not determined by geography but the Word of God.

What does the theif on the cross have to do with baptism not being commanded for the remission of sins?

New International Version
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned
Did the thief on the cross get saved or not? Did he get water baptized or not? Does Jesus love the thief more than on us or not?
 

notuptome

Senior Member
May 17, 2013
15,050
2,538
113
When Peter was baptizing in order to receive the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38), was he bapitizing in blood or water?
Peter was not baptizing but preaching. The Holy Spirit was baptizing as a result of men receiving what Peter was preaching.

For the cause of Christ
Roger
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,769
113
Why was he baptizing only Jews? Think about that.
Peter (or Peter and his companions) baptized BOTH Jews and Gentiles. Just not at the same time and in the same place. And it was WATER BAPTISM. The baptism with the Holy Spirit is supernatural, and Christ is the Divine Baptizer.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,769
113
AMEN! The Church Age did not start until the middle of this Book
Not sure what you mean by "middle of this Book". The Church Age began on the day of Pentecost, fifty days after the crucifixion.
 

Didymous

Senior Member
Feb 22, 2018
5,047
2,101
113
Peter (or Peter and his companions) baptized BOTH Jews and Gentiles. Just not at the same time and in the same place. And it was WATER BAPTISM. The baptism with the Holy Spirit is supernatural, and Christ is the Divine Baptizer.
Not in Act 2.
 

preston39

Senior Member
Dec 18, 2017
1,675
240
63
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atacama_Desert

Again, if water baptism was required, then the thief on the cross would have been baptized too. And the Apostle Paul would have added baptism to the Gospel in 1 Corinthians 15.
L...,

That is nothing but a spin in an attempt to support your wrong position on scripture;

How do you know that the thief on the cross had not been baptized, back slid and was regaining a position of righteous...you don't.

I Corn, speaks of other...not baptism. Just as others speaks of baptism and not repentance.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,769
113
Why not in Acts 2? Indeed it was the beginning of the Church, and according to Christ's command before His ascension, every believer was to be baptized in water by immersion, and that is exactly what happened.

Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. (Acts 2:41)

This is clearly not speaking about the baptism with the Holy Spirit (which is internal). Only God knows hearts. But when "about 3,000 souls" is mentioned in connection with baptism, there should be absolutely no doubt that this is speaking of Christian baptism.

We should not allow our prejudices to color our interpretation of Scripture. Acts 10 shows that Peter followed the same consistent pattern, except there the evidence of the baptism with the Spirit was that all spoke in tongues. And here, Peter COMMANDED water baptism to show us that it was indeed Christ's command.
 

Didymous

Senior Member
Feb 22, 2018
5,047
2,101
113
Why not in Acts 2? Indeed it was the beginning of the Church, and according to Christ's command before His ascension, every believer was to be baptized in water by immersion, and that is exactly what happened.

Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. (Acts 2:41)

This is clearly not speaking about the baptism with the Holy Spirit (which is internal). Only God knows hearts. But when "about 3,000 souls" is mentioned in connection with baptism, there should be absolutely no doubt that this is speaking of Christian baptism.

We should not allow our prejudices to color our interpretation of Scripture. Acts 10 shows that Peter followed the same consistent pattern, except there the evidence of the baptism with the Spirit was that all spoke in tongues. And here, Peter COMMANDED water baptism to show us that it was indeed Christ's command.
I meant.that the 3,000 were Jews.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,423
13,359
113
58
How do you know that the thief on the cross had not been baptized, back slid and was regaining a position of righteous...you don't.
Regaining a position of righteousness? Chapter and verse please. So you believe that that thief may have been previously converted, was water baptized, and the fruit of that is being crucified as a thief? - (highly unlikely)

In Matthew 27:39-43, we see that those who passed by, along with the chief priests scribes and elders blasphemed, mocked and shook their heads at Jesus and EVEN THE ROBBERS WHO WERE CRUCIFIED WITH HIM REVILED HIM WITH THE SAME THING. More fruit?

I certainly don't see being crucified as a thief, blasheming, mocking and shaking your head at Jesus as being the fruit of repentance/faith. Yet, moments later, we see that the thief had a "change of mind" (repentance) placed his faith in Christ for salvation and was saved (Luke 23:40-43). Of course, he died before having the opportunity to be water baptized.
 

wanderer6059

Senior Member
Oct 27, 2013
1,282
57
48
since baptism just means to be thoroughly submerged to the point of saturation i would say no, because you would drown and die. but as a symbolic means of representing the baptism we receive in Christ, and the public declaration of faith it is an obedience asked by the church. but it is not required for salvation, just like baptism of the Holy Ghost sin not required for salvation, speaking in tongues, or the name that you are baptized in.
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
Regaining a position of righteousness? Chapter and verse please. So you believe that that thief may have been previously converted, was water baptized, and the fruit of that is being crucified as a thief? - (highly unlikely)

In Matthew 27:39-43, we see that those who passed by, along with the chief priests scribes and elders blasphemed, mocked and shook their heads at Jesus and EVEN THE ROBBERS WHO WERE CRUCIFIED WITH HIM REVILED HIM WITH THE SAME THING. More fruit?

I certainly don't see being crucified as a thief, blasheming, mocking and shaking your head at Jesus as being the fruit of repentance/faith. Yet, moments later, we see that the thief had a "change of mind" (repentance) placed his faith in Christ for salvation and was saved (Luke 23:40-43). Of course, he died before having the opportunity to be water baptized.
The thief on the cross is an example of Gods' mercy and sovereignty, nothing more. It is not an example of Gods' plan of salvation or our commission. The promise Jesus made to the thief was a personal one that is not meant for the masses. The promise of the remission of sins is found in Acts 2:38-39.

38 Peter answered them, “All of you must turn to God and change the way you think and act, and each of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins will be forgiven. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift. 39 This promise belongs to you and to your children and to everyone who is far away. It belongs to everyone who worships the Lord our God.”

This is the promise made to us.

It is important to remember that Jesus could have made that promise to the thief whether or not the thief had a "change of mind", He is God. Our promise is proclaimed in Acts 2:38 and pointing at exceptions is nothing more then looking for loopholes in the Great Commission.

On the issue of whether the thief was baptized before dying is one of assumption. There is no, "Of course, he died before having the opportunity to be water baptized". Masses of the common poor was being baptized for the remission of sins years before the death of Jesus. There is no definitive evidence that the thief on the cross could not have been one of them.
 

wanderer6059

Senior Member
Oct 27, 2013
1,282
57
48
The thief on the cross is an example of Gods' mercy and sovereignty, nothing more. It is not an example of Gods' plan of salvation or our commission. The promise Jesus made to the thief was a personal one that is not meant for the masses. The promise of the remission of sins is found in Acts 2:38-39.

38 Peter answered them, “All of you must turn to God and change the way you think and act, and each of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins will be forgiven. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift. 39 This promise belongs to you and to your children and to everyone who is far away. It belongs to everyone who worships the Lord our God.”

This is the promise made to us.

It is important to remember that Jesus could have made that promise to the thief whether or not the thief had a "change of mind", He is God. Our promise is proclaimed in Acts 2:38 and pointing at exceptions is nothing more then looking for loopholes in the Great Commission.

On the issue of whether the thief was baptized before dying is one of assumption. There is no, "Of course, he died before having the opportunity to be water baptized". Masses of the common poor was being baptized for the remission of sins years before the death of Jesus. There is no definitive evidence that the thief on the cross could not have been one of them.
[FONT=&quot]5 For Moses writes that the man who practices the righteousness which is [b]based on law shall live [c]by that righteousness.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]6 But the righteousness [d]based on faith speaks as follows: “Do not say in your heart, ‘Who will ascend into heaven?’ (that is, to bring Christ down),[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]7 or ‘Who will descend into the abyss?’ (that is, to bring Christ up from the dead).”[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]8 But what does it say? “The word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart”—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching,[/FONT][FONT=&quot][/FONT][FONT=&quot]9 [e]that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]10 for with the heart a person believes, [f]resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, [g]resulting in salvation.[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]11 For the Scripture says, “Whoever believes in Him will not be [h]disappointed.”[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him;[/FONT][FONT=&quot] [/FONT][FONT=&quot]13 for “Whoever will call on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

read the word, there is only one requirement, that is to speak from the heart the confession of Jesus Christ as Lord.[/FONT]
[FONT=&quot][/FONT]
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
25,423
13,359
113
58
The thief on the cross is an example of Gods' mercy and sovereignty, nothing more. It is not an example of Gods' plan of salvation or our commission. The promise Jesus made to the thief was a personal one that is not meant for the masses. The promise of the remission of sins is found in Acts 2:38-39.

38 Peter answered them, “All of you must turn to God and change the way you think and act, and each of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins will be forgiven. Then you will receive the Holy Spirit as a gift. 39 This promise belongs to you and to your children and to everyone who is far away. It belongs to everyone who worships the Lord our God.”

This is the promise made to us.

It is important to remember that Jesus could have made that promise to the thief whether or not the thief had a "change of mind", He is God. Our promise is proclaimed in Acts 2:38 and pointing at exceptions is nothing more then looking for loopholes in the Great Commission.
Acts 2:38 really seems to be your pet verse and stumbling block. I at one time had previously attended the church of Christ and water baptism was about the only thing they talked about. The promise of the remission of sins is also found in Acts 10:43 - ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. *What happened to baptism? As I have already shared with you numerous times:

*In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

So the only logical conclusion *when properly harmonizing Scripture with Scripture* is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony* :)

Nobody is looking for loopholes in the Great Commission. Typical straw man argument. In Matthew 28:19-20, we have here a command of Christ to go and make disciples of all nations, and baptize them. However, it does not say here that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. The same command also includes the clause "teaching them to observe all things" that Christ has commanded them. If we are to assume that baptism is essential to salvation, then by consistent interpretation of the context, we should say that absolute obedience to all of Christ's commands is also necessary for salvation, which would include multiple acts of obedience/works.

On the issue of whether the thief was baptized before dying is one of assumption. There is no, "Of course, he died before having the opportunity to be water baptized". Masses of the common poor was being baptized for the remission of sins years before the death of Jesus. There is no definitive evidence that the thief on the cross could not have been one of them.
There is no definitive evidence that the thief on the cross was one of them, but there is definitive evidence in Matthew 27:39-43 that the thief went from blaspheming, mocking and shaking his head at Jesus, yet later, that same thief had a "change of mind" (repentance) placed his faith in Christ for salvation and was saved (Luke 23:40-43).

Of course, he died moments later before having the opportunity to be water baptized. Being crucified as a thief, blaspheming, mocking and shaking your head at Jesus is certainly NOT the fruit of repentance/faith or the demonstrative evidence of one who has been converted, so it's highly unlikely that the thief on the cross had previously been water baptized.
 

DJ2

Senior Member
Apr 15, 2017
1,660
57
48
Acts 2:38 really seems to be your pet verse and stumbling block. I at one time had previously attended the church of Christ and water baptism was about the only thing they talked about. The promise of the remission of sins is also found in Acts 10:43 - ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. *What happened to baptism? As I have already shared with you numerous times:

*In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

So the only logical conclusion *when properly harmonizing Scripture with Scripture* is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony* :)

Nobody is looking for loopholes in the Great Commission. Typical straw man argument. In Matthew 28:19-20, we have here a command of Christ to go and make disciples of all nations, and baptize them. However, it does not say here that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. The same command also includes the clause "teaching them to observe all things" that Christ has commanded them. If we are to assume that baptism is essential to salvation, then by consistent interpretation of the context, we should say that absolute obedience to all of Christ's commands is also necessary for salvation, which would include multiple acts of obedience/works.

There is no definitive evidence that the thief on the cross was one of them, but there is definitive evidence in Matthew 27:39-43 that the thief went from blaspheming, mocking and shaking his head at Jesus, yet later, that same thief had a "change of mind" (repentance) placed his faith in Christ for salvation and was saved (Luke 23:40-43).

Of course, he died moments later before having the opportunity to be water baptized. Being crucified as a thief, blaspheming, mocking and shaking your head at Jesus is certainly NOT the fruit of repentance/faith or the demonstrative evidence of one who has been converted, so it's highly unlikely that the thief on the cross had previously been water baptized.
Acts 10:43 really seems to be your pet verse and stumbling block. I at one time attended the Campus Crusade for Christ and faith alone regeneration theology was about the only thing they talked about. The promise that is given to the unsaved masses is found in Acts 2:38 -39 ..."each one of you must be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ so that your sins will be forgiven ...this promise belongs to you, your children and all those far off." Here is your faith, here is your repentance and here is the promise of the gift of the Holy Spirit. As for Acts 10:43, just go five verses more and there is your baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.

*In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.
We have gone over this before, your grammar hocus pocus is not going to fly. Not one Bible translation in any language has ever presented Acts 2:38 in such a manner. You have no reasonable basis to claim such a thing.

In Acts 22:16 Ananias told a believing Paul to "arise and be baptized and wash away your sins". Why wash away his sins if he already believed? In Mark 16:16 Jesus proclaimed "whoever believes and is baptized will be saved". Why add baptized if belief is enough. In 1st Peter 3:21 Peter states that "baptism is a request to God for a clear conscience, which now saves you". These plus many more and no verses that state "faith alone.

So the only logical conclusion "when properly harmonizing Scripture to Scripture" is that God has made water baptism the moment of the remission of sins and the gifting of the Holy Spirit rather then simply faith alone.

Nobody is looking for loopholes in the Great Commission.
You most certainly are. Regardless of what Jesus wanted the apostles to teach and do, baptism was singled out. No loophole will change this.

There is no definitive evidence that the thief on the cross was one of them, but there is definitive evidence in Matthew 27:39-43 that the thief went from blaspheming, mocking and shaking his head at Jesus, yet later, that same thief had a "change of mind" (repentance) placed his faith in Christ for salvation and was saved (Luke 23:40-43).
No one is debating if the thief had a change of mind. The issue is using the thief as an example of baptism not being being commanded for the remission of sins.

The Bible does not address the issue of the thief being baptized or not nor does it matter since the promise was made to him alone. So unless you have some esoteric knowledge, the issue is moot.
 
Last edited: