Baptisms

[mailmandan]

It says that baptism is the representation of the ark that saved. Actually, the word means corresponding, or antitype. So water baptism is the antitype of the type, i.e., the ark.

The Greek word for "figure" is "antitupon." Vine, in his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, defines the word as "a corresponding type." He says, "It is not a case of type and antitype but of two types, that in Genesis, the type, and baptism, the corresponding type." (Vol. 2, page 96). Cremer's Lexicon says the word signifies an "image or similitude." Thayer's Lexicon defines it as "a thing resembling another."

The flood symbolizes baptism and baptism symbolizes salvation. The flood was a figure of baptism in that in both instances the water that spoke of judgment (in the flood the death of the wicked, in baptism the death of Christ and the believer). Baptism is a symbol of salvation in that it depicts Christ's death, burial and resurrections and our identification with Him in these experiences. In reality, believers are saved by what baptism symbolizes--Christ's death and resurrection.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

1 Peter 3:21 does not say the ark represented baptism, it says 'WATER symbolizes baptism that now saves you.'

It says that baptism is the representation of the ark that saved. Actually, the word means corresponding, or antitype. So water baptism is the antitype of the type, i.e., the ark.

I apologize. I went back and read this in the Greek and realized that it says baptism is the anti-type of the waters of the flood, not the ark. So sorry.

 

[roaringkitten]

It says we are saved through water. The ark represents Christ- those who are IN Christ will be saved, but baptism is how we get into Christ (Romans 6 I believe it's verse three). The fact that Christ saves means nothing to us unless we get into Christ, and baptism gets us into Christ- therefore baptism saves- just like the bible says. It says it's not a physical thing like removing dirt from the body, but a spiritual thing by giving us a clean conscience towards God. In this symbol, who ever cleaned their body with a boat instead of with water? What they are trying to do is say that baptism does not save, or that baptism is not how you get into Christ- which is not what the bible says.

By the resurrection of Christ, that is the key....a symbol doesn't save you. 1 Cor 15 explains the importance of the resurrection of Christ. If water baptism was necessary for salvation, that would disqualify a lot of people who don't have access to water. The thief on the cross was not water baptized but simply believed and was saved. That is supported by tons of Scripturs such as:

"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." John 3:18

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

The Greek word for "figure" is "antitupon." Vine, in his Expository Dictionary of New Testament Words, defines the word as "a corresponding type." He says, "It is not a case of type and antitype but of two types, that in Genesis, the type, and baptism, the corresponding type." (Vol. 2, page 96). Cremer's Lexicon says the word signifies an "image or similitude." Thayer's Lexicon defines it as "a thing resembling another."

The flood symbolizes baptism and baptism symbolizes salvation. The flood was a figure of baptism in that in both instances the water that spoke of judgment (in the flood the death of the wicked, in baptism the death of Christ and the believer). Baptism is a symbol of salvation in that it depicts Christ's death, burial and resurrections and our identification with Him in these experiences. In reality, believers are saved by what baptism symbolizes--Christ's death and resurrection.

You're so wrong. Anti-type means the reality, or fulfillment, of the type. Antiupon is the etymological root of the word antitype .

 

[garee]

Yes water baptism is an Old testament ceremonial law that was required when a new priest desired to enter the ministry.

It prefigured the new testament believers that God named Christians in whom he previously named Jews , who with us are all considered a kingdom of priest .

Levites were used as an outward expression to represent those who made claim they did have the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Christ in them .

Christ was not baptised as a sign to indicate he received salvation. But was faithful to do the work of one called to serve as our High Priest. and he followed the old testament order. Its why Christ from the tribe of Judah needed to be baptised by John a Levite before he was led in the dessert to be tried before he began his ministry of bringing the gospel into the world .

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

Yes water baptism is an Old testament ceremonial law that was required when a new priest desired to enter the ministry.

It prefigured the new testament believers that God named Christians in whom he previously named Jews , who with us are all considered a kingdom of priest .

Levites were used as an outward expression to represent those who made claim they did have the Holy Spirit, the Spirit of Christ in them .

Christ was not baptised as a sign to indicate he received salvation. But was faithful to do the work of one called to serve as our High Priest. and he followed the old testament order. Its why Christ from the tribe of Judah needed to be baptised by John a Levite before he was led in the dessert to be tried before he began his ministry of bringing the gospel into the world .

I never understood this verse until I saw what you just described.

But Jesus answered [and] said to him, “Permit [it] now, for in this way it is right for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he permitted him. Matthew 3:15​

 

[PurerInHeart]

By the resurrection of Christ, that is the key....a symbol doesn't save you. 1 Cor 15 explains the importance of the resurrection of Christ. If water baptism was necessary for salvation, that would disqualify a lot of people who don't have access to water. The thief on the cross was not water baptized but simply believed and was saved. That is supported by tons of Scripturs such as:

"He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God." John 3:18

Ok, there are a lot of symbols- Jesus as the vine, Jesus as the capstone, etc. but the one we are focusing on here is the one in 1 Peter 3:21. The ark represents Christ and the water represents baptism. Like I said earlier, yes Jesus saves, but only if you get into Christ, and baptism is how we get in Christ.

Someone said earlier that the flood waters represent judgement, and I agree with them. We will be saved through judgement just like the Israelites were saved when Moses parted the sea and they walked through.

Now I understand what you are saying- that a symbol does not save. God uses symbols to help us understand what is taking place. So what is taking place during baptism? God is doing a work, He is performing spiritual circumcision of the heart- which you can read about in Colossians chapter two. Water baptism is necessary for salvation, it does save like 1 Peter 3:21 says. Being baptized is obeying the gospel of Christ. So what about people who know not about God, the bible, baptism, or can't reach water? God gave everyone a conscience, and we will be judged according to our knowledge and ability. But we are focusing on those who are capable of studying the bible and obeying it.

The thief on the cross died before Christ established His church and the way into It. Therefore that does not apply.

What about other scriptures that speak of being saved? We have to consider all scriptures in order to get the proper meaning. God does not put everything we need to do into one verse. So if for example I said, "One must breathe in order to live." I would be correct. Then, at another time I said, "One must eat in order to live." I would also be correct. But what if someone else said, "No breathing is how you live, not eating." No- you have to accept everything that keeps you alive- breathing, eating, water, clothes, shelter from the elements, etc. We can't only believe, we need to believe, repent, confess, be baptized, obey, stay faithful until death, etc.

 

[BrotherJustin]

Pickles.

"The clearest example that shows the meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physician Nicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making pickles and is helpful because it uses both words. Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be 'dipped' (baptô) into boiling water and then 'baptised' (baptizô) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change."

Source: https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?strongs=G907&t=KJV

 

[B1Davanda]

It says that baptism is the representation of the ark that saved. Actually, the word means corresponding, or antitype. So water baptism is the antitype of the type, i.e., the ark.

HeRoseFtD: You said before that an unbeliever wouldn't bother getting water-baptised. Hmm. So it's the person who is ALREADY a believer...saved...born-again...THAT's the person who then should get water-baptised. Not as a MEANS TO, but as a RESULT OF, salvation.

It says we are saved through water. The ark represents Christ- those who are IN Christ will be saved, but baptism is how we get into Christ (Romans 6 I believe it's verse three). The fact that Christ saves means nothing to us unless we get into Christ, and baptism gets us into Christ - therefore baptism saves- just like the bible says. It says it's not a physical thing like removing dirt from the body, but a spiritual thing by giving us a clean conscience towards God. In this symbol, who ever cleaned their body with a boat instead of with water? What they are trying to do is say that baptism does not save, or that baptism is not how you get into Christ- which is not what the bible says.

Two wrongs don't make a right.

'The fact that Jesus saves may mean nothing to YOU,
prior to water-baptism,
but please drop the word 'US' from that statement.

'The fact that Jesus saves' means everything to me,
and countless others, long before our water-baptisms,
(some of whom might not have taken part in that ceremony,
it doesn't mean they weren't/aren't saved.)

WATER-Baptism is not what 'gets us into Christ',
We 'get into Christ' by grace through faith In Him
and His FINISHED work on the cross and His resurrection.

Why do so many here want to deny people their salvation
unless and until THEY DO a ceremonial water ritual?

(And don't try playing the little game of accusing me
of saying 'don't get baptised'. I never said that.)

I'm saying water-baptism is something we do
as a public declaration of our identity with Christ,
not as a means of 'getting',
but as a result of having 'already gotten'.

And I will go so far as to say Some ppl actually can
and DO 'get water-baptised' before or simultaneously
with salvation.

For those before? Maybe they didn't fully believe
or understand, or felt pressured into it by some legalists
telling them they're not saved unless they get water-baptised.

Hopefully after, they come to fully believe/receive salvation.
They can then get baptised again if they want to.

Many do it again after having a greater understanding,
or as a re-dedication, or they went to the River Jordan.

Maybe for some they are saved simultaneously
as they're being water-baptised.

But many get water-baptised AFTER getting saved,
and some not water-baptised at all.
Who are we to judge their salvation?

The bible says 'Believe' on the Lord Jesus Christ,
and THOU SHALT be saved. Anyone can do that,
anytime, anywhere, with or without a pool of water.
That's the far-reaching love and grace of God
our Savior Jesus Christ, Hallelujah!
Thank you, Lord!

 

[roaringkitten]

Ok, there are a lot of symbols- Jesus as the vine, Jesus as the capstone, etc. but the one we are focusing on here is the one in 1 Peter 3:21. The ark represents Christ and the water represents baptism. Like I said earlier, yes Jesus saves, but only if you get into Christ, and baptism is how we get in Christ.

Someone said earlier that the flood waters represent judgement, and I agree with them. We will be saved through judgement just like the Israelites were saved when Moses parted the sea and they walked through.

Now I understand what you are saying- that a symbol does not save. God uses symbols to help us understand what is taking place. So what is taking place during baptism? God is doing a work, He is performing spiritual circumcision of the heart- which you can read about in Colossians chapter two. Water baptism is necessary for salvation, it does save like 1 Peter 3:21 says. Being baptized is obeying the gospel of Christ. So what about people who know not about God, the bible, baptism, or can't reach water? God gave everyone a conscience, and we will be judged according to our knowledge and ability. But we are focusing on those who are capable of studying the bible and obeying it.

The thief on the cross died before Christ established His church and the way into It. Therefore that does not apply.

What about other scriptures that speak of being saved? We have to consider all scriptures in order to get the proper meaning. God does not put everything we need to do into one verse. So if for example I said, "One must breathe in order to live." I would be correct. Then, at another time I said, "One must eat in order to live." I would also be correct. But what if someone else said, "No breathing is how you live, not eating." No- you have to accept everything that keeps you alive- breathing, eating, water, clothes, shelter from the elements, etc. We can't only believe, we need to believe, repent, confess, be baptized, obey, stay faithful until death, etc.

No you say that baptism is required for salvation, then you turn around and say God made an exception for the thief on the cross with some vague claim for why you "think" God excused him. The thief didn't live a life of obedience when he was hanging on a cross near death. But we know he was saved without any works he did. In essence you are saying God saves some people one way, and other people another way when Jude 1:3 declares a common salvation. By grace through faith, not of works! Your water gospel does not hold up to Scripture.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

HeRoseFtD: You said before that an unbeliever wouldn't bother getting water-baptised. Hmm. So it's the person who is ALREADY a believer...saved...born-again...THAT's the person who then should get water-baptised. Not as a MEANS TO, but as a RESULT OF, salvation.

Faith without obedience is not faith that saves. And vice versa.

 

[oldhermit]

Faith without obedience is not faith that saves. And vice versa.

You know, I have been looking back on these two related threads at some of the argument on both sides of the point and here is what I have seen.
Acts 2:28 tells us that baptism is for the remission of sin - The critic says "no it is not."
Acts 2:38 tells us that in baptism we receive the Holy Spirit – The critic says "no we do not."
Acts 22:16 tells us that sin is washed away in baptism – The critic says "no it is not."
Romans 6:3 and 4 tells us that baptism is the point at which we come into contact with the death of Christ. The critic says "no it is not."
Romans 6:6 tells us that baptism is the point at which our old man is crucified with Christ that our body of sin might be done away with. The critic says "no it is not."
Col 2:11 tells us that we are buried with Christ in the act of baptism. The critic says "no we are not."
Col. 2:11-13 tells us that baptism is the means by which we are circumcised with a circumcision made without hands. The critic says "no it is not."
Gal. 3:27 tells us that baptism is the point at which we are put into Christ and have put on Christ. The critic says "no it is not."
1 Peter 3:21 tells us that baptism now saves you. The critic says "no it does not."
1 Peter 3:21 tells us that baptism is an appeal to God for a good conscience. The critic says "no it is not."

Who shall we believe, the scripture or the critic? Which one is more to be trusted? There is no scripture that speaks of baptism that the critic has not denied, and vehemently so.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

You know, I have been looking back on these two related threads at some of the argument on both sides of the point and here is what I have seen.
Acts 2:28 tells us that baptism is for the remission of sin - The critic says "no it is not."
Acts 2:38 tells us that in baptism we receive the Holy Spirit – The critic says "no we do not."
Acts 22:16 tells us that sin is washed away in baptism – The critic says "no it is not."
Romans 6:3 and 4 tells us that baptism is the point at which we come into contact with the death of Christ. The critic says "no it is not."
Romans 6:6 tells us that baptism is the point at which our old man is crucified with Christ that our body of sin might be done away with. The critic says "no it is not."
Col 2:11 tells us that we are buried with Christ in the act of baptism. The critic says "no we are not."
Col. 2:11-13 tells us that baptism is the means by which we are circumcised with a circumcision made without hands. The critic says "no it is not."
Gal. 3:27 tells us that baptism is the point at which we are put into Christ and have put on Christ. The critic says "no it is not."
1 Peter 3:21 tells us that baptism now saves you. The critic says "no it does not."
1 Peter 3:21 tells us that baptism is an appeal to God for a good conscience. The critic says "no it is not."

Who shall we believe, the scripture or the critic? Which one is more to be trusted? There is no scripture that speaks of baptism that the critic has not denied, and vehemently so.

What an excellent synopsis. Here's another that IMO flows into Peter's authority in Acts 2:38 to authorize the release of believer's sins through the administration of water baptism.

I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you release on earth will be released in heaven. Matthew 16:19​

I had never thought about water baptism until just recently. I have always thought that it was unnecessary. I got baptized because a brother insisted that I do so. I had no reason to resist what he said.

But lately I am having a change of mind just by reading what scripture says. I'm kind of in shock. I'm still not 100% convinced, but everything seems to point in the direction that water baptism is the sign and seal of entering the new covenant, just as circumcision was for the old covenant. And scripture is clear what would happen to any who kicked against getting circumcised.

 

[roaringkitten]

You know, I have been looking back on these two related threads at some of the argument on both sides of the point and here is what I have seen.
Acts 2:28 tells us that baptism is for the remission of sin - The critic says "no it is not."
Acts 2:38 tells us that in baptism we receive the Holy Spirit – The critic says "no we do not."
Acts 22:16 tells us that sin is washed away in baptism – The critic says "no it is not."
Romans 6:3 and 4 tells us that baptism is the point at which we come into contact with the death of Christ. The critic says "no it is not."
Romans 6:6 tells us that baptism is the point at which our old man is crucified with Christ that our body of sin might be done away with. The critic says "no it is not."
Col 2:11 tells us that we are buried with Christ in the act of baptism. The critic says "no we are not."
Col. 2:11-13 tells us that baptism is the means by which we are circumcised with a circumcision made without hands. The critic says "no it is not."
Gal. 3:27 tells us that baptism is the point at which we are put into Christ and have put on Christ. The critic says "no it is not."
1 Peter 3:21 tells us that baptism now saves you. The critic says "no it does not."
1 Peter 3:21 tells us that baptism is an appeal to God for a good conscience. The critic says "no it is not."

Who shall we believe, the scripture or the critic? Which one is more to be trusted? There is no scripture that speaks of baptism that the critic has not denied, and vehemently so.

And you mix up Spiritual baptism with water baptism. You lie against God for example by saying He means that water washes sins away when Rev 1:5 clearly states it is the blood of Christ. Then you and others make excuses for the thief on the cross that he was saved, even though he was not water baptized! You go as far as to suggest without any Biblical proof that the thief was baptized before he was on the cross! You have erected salvation by works disguised as salvation by grace.

 

[Grace777x70]

What about all those people that have received Jesus just before they died? The works-based salvationists would have to say that they are not really saved because they have no remission of sins because they weren't water baptized - this is utter foolishness and is in effect anti-Christ in it's nature.

We have been baptized into Christ when we receive Him and water baptism is a symbol of what happened to us because we are in Christ already.

 

[B1Davanda]

And the Bible says while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us.

And the Bible says For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that wosoever believes in Him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
For God sent not His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved.

And the Bible says, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved.

And the sinner says, Hallelujah! Thank you Lord Jesus, I am saved, because you loved me and gave yourself for me! Thank you, Jesus, my Lord, my God, my Savior! Praise You, Jesus, thank you I am saved by You alone!

And the legalist says, No you're not, you haven't been water-baptised....
I know....I read all the scriptures about it....now stop all this silly rejoicing, and either go get water-baptised, or just go away sad. No salvation for you.

 

[HeRoseFromTheDead]

And you mix up Spiritual baptism with water baptism. You lie against God for example by saying He means that water washes sins away when Rev 1:5 clearly states it is the blood of Christ. Then you and others make excuses for the thief on the cross that he was saved, even though he was not water baptized! You go as far as to suggest without any Biblical proof that the thief was baptized before he was on the cross! You have erected salvation by works disguised as salvation by grace.

You talk about grace as if it precludes obedience. Abraham was justified by faith, but was saved through his obedience. We are children of Abraham following his example.

 

[PilgrimPassingThru]

I never understood this verse until I saw what you just described.

But Jesus answered [and] said to him, “Permit [it] now, for in this way it is right for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he permitted him. Matthew 3:15​

Did you ever notice in the 3 1/2 years Jesus brings up (these being between Elijah and Elisha) in Luke 4:25-27 that there are other some similar things between these also? Like John being the Elijah for to come, who is before Elisha (who come after) only to receive a double portion of the Spirit of Elijah. These two seem to have more in them than meets the eye, beyond the obvious 2 King 1:7-8, Mat 3:4, and 2 Kings 2:9, Mat 3:14, the two there as well seem to play into the same. Even Namaan refusing to wash (at the first) and what he expected, but then changed his mind and then doing so (as he was instructed) and the servant was like, it really wasnt a difficult task here, whats your problem with that? LOL

 

[oldhermit]

What an excellent synopsis. Here's another that IMO flows into Peter's authority in Acts 2:38 to authorize the release of believer's sins through the administration of water baptism.

I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth will be bound in heaven, and whatever you release on earth will be released in heaven. Matthew 16:19​

I had never thought about water baptism until just recently. I have always thought that it was unnecessary. I got baptized because a brother insisted that I do so. I had no reason to resist what he said.

But lately I am having a change of mind just by reading what scripture says. I'm kind of in shock. I'm still not 100% convinced, but everything seems to point in the direction that water baptism is the sign and seal of entering the new covenant, just as circumcision was for the old covenant. And scripture is clear what would happen to any who kicked against getting circumcised.

The weight of evidence is rather profound, is it not?

 

[roaringkitten]

You talk about grace as if it precludes obedience. Abraham was justified by faith, but was saved through his obedience. We are children of Abraham following his example.

Believers obey the gospel of grace by believing(Rom 1:5, 10:16, 16:26). People like you disobey the gospel by adding to it. Ultimately those who disobey the gospel end up like those in 2 Thess 1:8. You will now accuse me like you accuse others of giving a license for sinning, which has been refuted ad nauseum on here.