My take on water baptism...

[Peterlag]

As I have said, numerous Churches used the great commission found in Matt 28 as the foundation for their existence

And because that passage emphasise water baptism, they naturally hold that to be truth

It just means the churches do not understand what being baptized in Christ means. Or they would not still be on the old testament water.

 

[Peterlag]

Pete, i asked what your justification is for asserting that Acts 10:48 is not H2O baptism, given that Acts 10:47 is explicitly H20 baptism, explicitly says thy have already been immersed in the Holy Spirit, and the two verses are literally all one sentence?

you answered:



so you are confessing that you have no justification for your statement about Acts 10:47-48, is this correct?
that your view on it is 100% eisegesis?




i really don't want to join with those who are belittling you. i don't want to be antagonistic to your harm. but i really don't see any way around you being quite wrong in your interpretation of this passage. the language here isn't ambiguous; Simon Peter is the authority in the room at Cornelius' house, and he's clearly expressing that no one has any legitimate right to refuse to allow these Gentiles to be immersed in H20 on account of the fact that they have already been approved by God by clear sign of their being baptized by the Holy Spirit. he clearly speaks of H20 baptism, then commands that all these who are baptized in the Holy Spirit already, to be baptized. that has to be H2O baptism the apostle is commanding.

don't get me wrong, Peter. i believe H2O baptism is not necessary. i have argued very strongly against it in the past, in the first years of my being on this forum -- a man in a desert or outer space all alone with no water and no one to immerse him in it or sprinkle him with it can receive the gospel and be saved. he does not have to do any works, he does not have to take communion, he does not have to attend a congregation, he does not have to give offerings, he does not have to be baptized. the only thing strictly necessary for salvation is faith in Christ Jesus. but until you convince me otherwise, Acts 10 is definitely an example of H2O baptism being commanded to be carried out by the apostles, after Pentecost.

Do you not see my reply...

Water baptism is not a doctrine that belongs to the Church of God and this is why it's not taught in Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, or Thessalonians. In fact, it's not taught in any of the Epistles.

 

[Guojing]

It just means the churches do not understand what being baptized in Christ means. Or they would not still be on the old testament water.

As the saying goes, when the student is ready, the teacher will appear.

Until people are ready, there is no need for any of us to be so aggressive in shoving what we regard as "truth", on other people.

We just share our various opinions on Scripture.

 

[Nehemiah6]

I don't know if I would call them false teachers because they do not see it your way..

They do not see it GOD'S WAY.

 

[Runningman]

Romans 6 and Colossians 2 are about water baptism. Baptism in the New Testament means baptism by IMMERSION. That is the primary meaning of the Greek word baptizo.

The one who is being baptized is *buried* in water, and then raised up out of the water. This signifies (1) the believer's full identification with the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ, and (2) the sinner's death to the old life and *resurrection* into newness of life. Early Christians would renounce the world, the flesh, and the devil at their baptism. This would still be valid.

There are too many who simply do not understand THE POWER of Christian baptism. And then there those false teachers who teach that Christian baptism is no longer necessary.

1. Water baptism does not wash away sins, but confirms that sins have been washed away by the blood of the Lamb.

2. Water baptism does not save, but confirms that the person being baptized is already saved by God's grace through faith in Christ.

3. Water baptism does not confer the gift of the Holy Spirit, but confirms that the believer has already received the gift of the Spirit.

4. Water baptism does not produce the New Birth, but confirms that the sinner has been born again and become a child of God.

The word baptism or baptized in the New Testament within the context of spiritual matters does not immediately mean it is a water baptism unless specifically stated.

In Romans 6, the word used is ἐβαπτίσθημεν (ebaptisthēmen), meaning: Lit: I dip, submerge, but specifically of ceremonial dipping; I baptize.

Given that there is more than one type of baptism referenced in the NT, baptism of the Holy Ghost and baptism of water, it is necessary to parse out which one it's talking about given a context.

So no it doesn't refer to water submersion in all instances of its use which actually is part of the reason for doctrinal misinterpretation in some cases.

Read Romans 6 again with the questions in mind:

Does getting dunked in water do any of the following:

Bury believers with Christ in his death?
Raise believers from the dead to walk in new life?
Unite us with Christ?
Guarantee we will be involved in a future resurrection?
Does water baptism crucify our old self?
Does it do away with the body of sin?

Or is this describing a born again Christian who has been baptised by the power of the Holy Ghost himself?

 

[fredoheaven]

Do you not see my reply...

Water baptism is not a doctrine that belongs to the Church of God and this is why it's not taught in Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, or Thessalonians. In fact, it's not taught in any of the Epistles.

There's two in Corinthians and the household of Stephanas.

1 Timothy 6: 3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

1 Corinthians 1:14 King James Version (KJV)
14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
King James Version (KJV)

 

[fredoheaven]

The word baptism or baptized in the New Testament within the context of spiritual matters does not immediately mean it is a water baptism unless specifically stated.

In Romans 6, the word used is ἐβαπτίσθημεν (ebaptisthēmen), meaning: Lit: I dip, submerge, but specifically of ceremonial dipping; I baptize.

Given that there is more than one type of baptism referenced in the NT, baptism of the Holy Ghost and baptism of water, it is necessary to parse out which one it's talking about given a context.

So no it doesn't refer to water submersion in all instances of its use which actually is part of the reason for doctrinal misinterpretation in some cases.

Read Romans 6 again with the questions in mind:

Does getting dunked in water do any of the following:

Bury believers with Christ in his death?
Raise believers from the dead to walk in new life?
Unite us with Christ?
Guarantee we will be involved in a future resurrection?
Does water baptism crucify our old self?
Does it do away with the body of sin?

Or is this describing a born again Christian who has been baptised by the power of the Holy Ghost himself?

If we follow the word of the scripture, it has "like", "likeness" so if your definition is true or coorect then it is a literal dipping in the water, " I baptize" hence, not a speaking of Spiritual baptism, but water baptism portraying the death, burial and ressurrection.

 

[fredoheaven]

As I have said, numerous Churches used the great commission found in Matt 28 as the foundation for their existence

And because that passage emphasise water baptism, they naturally hold that to be truth

We hold to be truth because the scripture of truth teaches it.

 

[Guojing]

We hold to be truth because the scripture of truth teaches it.

Can you be 100% sure you are correct?

 

[fredoheaven]

Can you be 100% sure you are correct?

but why do you not believe them or Christ? Are you not consenting to the wholesome words, even Christ words?

1 Timothy 6: 3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

 

[Runningman]

If we follow the word of the scripture, it has "like", "likeness" so if your definition is true or coorect then it is a literal dipping in the water, " I baptize" hence, not a speaking of Spiritual baptism, but water baptism portraying the death, burial and ressurrection.

So, according to you, by baptizing someone with water the Apostle Paul, and not the Holy Spirit, has the power to do the following things, as described in Romans 6?

Bury believers with Christ in his death.
Raise believers from the dead to walk in new life.
Unite us with Christ.
Guarantee we will be involved in a future resurrection.
Crucify our old self.
Do away with the body of sin.

 

[fredoheaven]

So by baptizing someone with water the Apostle Paul has the power to do the following things, as described in Romans 6?

Bury believers with Christ in his death.
Raise believers from the dead to walk in new life.
Unite us with Christ.
Guarantee we will be involved in a future resurrection.
Does water baptism crucify our old self.
Does it do away with the body of sin.

I think we gonna put that in context as you have said. Maybe, it's good to quote the context, hence, Romans 6 has something to compare to ("likeness" "that like")

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

4 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.

5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

 

[Guojing]

but why do you not believe them or Christ? Are you not consenting to the wholesome words, even Christ words?

1 Timothy 6: 3 If any man teach otherwise, and consent not to wholesome words, even the words of our Lord Jesus Christ, and to the doctrine which is according to godliness;

Do you think it is possible, just possible, that Matthew 28 Great Comm, were instructions directed only to the 12, as Genesis 6, the instructions of building an ark was directed only to Noah?

 

[garee]

Water baptism is not a doctrine that belongs to the Church of God and this is why it's not taught in Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, or Thessalonians. In fact, it's not taught in any of the Epistles.

Sure it is . Its what the question was about in John 3 :25-26.

What is a person from the tribe of Judah doing having been baptized by the last of member of the tribe of Levi (John) and now Jesus is performing that ceremonial law baptizing others?

John knew that a change in the priesthood was coming after the order of Melchedik our high priest eternally for ever and ever continually.

Psalm 110:4 The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

Hebrews 5:6 As he saith also in another place, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

Hebrews 5:10 Called of God an high priest after the order of Melchisedec.

Hebrews 6:20 Whither the forerunner is for us entered, even Jesus, made an high priest for ever after the order of Melchisedec.

John the last Levi.... did not say; "I have no idea what a person from the tribe of Judah is doing in the place of a Levi"?

But rather as the Holy Spirit put his words of John's tongue. . . "A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven".

John 3:25-27 Then there arose a question between some of John's disciples and the Jews about purifying. And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him. John answered and said, A man can receive nothing, except it be given him from heaven.

 

[fredoheaven]

Do you think it is possible, just possible, that Matthew 28 Great Comm, were instructions directed only to the 12, as Genesis 6, the instructions of building an ark was directed only to Noah?

why think? not believe? are you giving way to doubt? so what do you think then? Thanks

 

[Guojing]

why think? not believe? are you giving way to doubt? so what do you think then? Thanks

As in my first post to you, I am trying to find out whether you will insist that you are 100% correct in your doctrine.

After all, you are 100% sure the instructions in Genesis 6 regarding the ark was not written to you correct?

 

[garee]

Don't know. What I do know is the Eunich was a Christian for 10 seconds. Do you think in 10 seconds that he was now an expert on Church doctrine?

I think being converted by hearing the gospel in the twinkling of the eye (under ten seconds)

The Eunuch like Philip had a desire as a member of the priesthood of believers to apply the ceremonial law as a shadow . So that he too like Phillip could plant the seed and water it with the doctrines of God in a living Hope Christ would apply it to the hearts of those who hear the call of faith. Away he went with his new tongue the gospel, preaching the good news.

1 Corinthians 3:6 I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase.

No man will be found with a self-righteousness edifying their own self.

 

[posthuman]

Do you not see my reply...

Water baptism is not a doctrine that belongs to the Church of God and this is why it's not taught in Romans, Corinthians, Galatians, Ephesians, Philippians, Colossians, or Thessalonians. In fact, it's not taught in any of the Epistles.

Yeah i quoted it. That reply is not an answer to justifying your private interpretation of Acts 10:47-48

Unless the justification you are resting your case on is 100% eisegesis, that is, you have no Biblical basis for this claim you just project your personal feelings onto it despite what the text says.

Is that the substance of your view?
That you cannot defend it, you only assert it?
I can't just take your assertion about Acts 10. As I explained, as far as I can tell, without you giving a better explanation, the Bible clearly contradicts what you are saying about it.

 

[Chester]

As the saying goes, when the student is ready, the teacher will appear.

Until people are ready, there is no need for any of us to be so aggressive in shoving what we regard as "truth", on other people.

We just share our various opinions on Scripture.

LOL! Just let it be known when you yourself are a ready student, and some of us here will instruct you properly!

 

[Chester]

Do you think it is possible, just possible, that Matthew 28 Great Comm, were instructions directed only to the 12, as Genesis 6, the instructions of building an ark was directed only to Noah?

If it was directed only to the 12, then they would have needed to be sure to tell their converts not to evangelize. Furthermore what then was Paul and others in Acts doing evangelizing the world?