My take on water 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.

Guojing

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2019
4,801
801
113
Again, Philip was not a leader in the Church. If I baptize you and someone writes it down. Does that mean it is now God's will?

Here's some data on Baptism...
The question we must ask, and answer, is why did Jesus command his disciples to stay in Jerusalem? It was to wait for what the Father had promised, i.e., the gift of holy spirit. The disciples had already been baptized in water. If water baptism was all that was important and necessary for salvation, there would have been no need for the disciples to wait in Jerusalem or receive the gift of holy spirit. Sadly, many people reverse what Jesus said here in Acts. They say water baptism is essential for the believer and act as if baptism in holy spirit is not really essential but perhaps “nice to have,” or valuable in many ways. Jesus was teaching quite the opposite. He knew the disciples had already been water baptized. He also knew it would no longer be intrinsically valuable after the Church started on the Day of Pentecost. Thus, he commanded his disciples to stay in Jerusalem and receive baptism in holy spirit “because” John [only] baptized in water, but holy spirit was going to be first poured out in Jerusalem.

“with water.” The Greek is hudōr (#5204 ὕδωρ) in the dative, thus, “with water.” Thus it is clear that the element that people were baptized with was water. However, in the later part of the verse, the specific word “in” (en, #1722 ἐν) is used, emphasizing that the Christian is baptized “in” holy spirit. There is one baptism for the Christian, and it is spirit, not water (cp. Eph. 4:5). John’s baptism was a shadow of what was to come, and even John himself said this (Matt. 3:11; etc.). There is no reason to baptize in water today. Nevertheless, the practice continues, and sadly some even teach that it is necessary for salvation. [For more on baptism, see John Schoenheit, The History & Doctrine of Christian Baptism (Spirit & Truth Fellowship, 2011).]

“in holy spirit.” The Greek text has no article “the.” This holy spirit was the gift of God that He gave to some believers before Pentecost. [For more information on the holy spirit and uses of “holy spirit,” see Appendix 11, “What is the Holy Spirit,” and also see Appendix 6, “Usages of ‘Spirit’”].
So my point is that, there was literally water baptism carried out in Acts.

Whether or not it was in God's will is a separate point.
 
Jun 15, 2020
622
79
28
So my point is that, there was literally water baptism carried out in Acts.

Whether or not it was in God's will is a separate point.
It means nothing. God could have not cared one way or the other if two guys wanted to play in the water. It had nothing to do with church doctrine.
 

Guojing

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2019
4,801
801
113
It means nothing. God could have not cared one way or the other if two guys wanted to play in the water. It had nothing to do with church doctrine.
Whether it means anything now for the Body of Christ, is a separate point. I agree with you that water baptism no longer plays a role for us now.

But I disagree with you, it was a necessary condition for salvation for Israel during the gospel of the Kingdom.
 
Jun 15, 2020
622
79
28
Whether it means anything now for the Body of Christ, is a separate point. I agree with you that water baptism no longer plays a role for us now.

But I disagree with you, it was a necessary condition for salvation for Israel during the gospel of the Kingdom.
Interesting... I too believe it was a necessary condition for salvation for Israel during the gospel of the Kingdom.
 

Guojing

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2019
4,801
801
113
Interesting... I too believe it was a necessary condition for salvation for Israel during the gospel of the Kingdom.
But you don't agree that the baptism, that was necessary for them, is water baptism?
 

oyster67

Senior Member
May 24, 2014
3,367
2,899
113
Immersion is a picture, the outward sign of the inward covenant, it is the public testimony of your faith, states to all that you have died with Christ, are buried with Christ and resurrected a new creation in Christ. It is the first act of obedience after one has been saved by faith and is indeed STILL AN ORDINACE of the Lord's Churches!
Amen. Water baptism is spoken of many times in the Book of Acts. It does not bring about Salvation, but it does testify to it afterwards.

Acts

8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus.
8:36 And as they went on [their] way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, [here is] water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
8:37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
8:38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
10:48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,410
2,527
113
Here's some data on Baptism...
The question we must ask, and answer, is why did Jesus command his disciples to stay in Jerusalem? It was to wait for what the Father had promised, i.e., the gift of holy spirit. The disciples had already been baptized in water. If water baptism was all that was important and necessary for salvation, there would have been no need for the disciples to wait in Jerusalem or receive the gift of holy spirit. Sadly, many people reverse what Jesus said here in Acts. They say water baptism is essential for the believer and act as if baptism in holy spirit is not really essential but perhaps “nice to have,” or valuable in many ways. Jesus was teaching quite the opposite. He knew the disciples had already been water baptized. He also knew it would no longer be intrinsically valuable after the Church started on the Day of Pentecost. Thus, he commanded his disciples to stay in Jerusalem and receive baptism in holy spirit “because” John [only] baptized in water, but holy spirit was going to be first poured out in Jerusalem.

“with water.” The Greek is hudōr (#5204 ὕδωρ) in the dative, thus, “with water.” Thus it is clear that the element that people were baptized with was water. However, in the later part of the verse, the specific word “in” (en, #1722 ἐν) is used, emphasizing that the Christian is baptized “in” holy spirit. There is one baptism for the Christian, and it is spirit, not water (cp. Eph. 4:5). John’s baptism was a shadow of what was to come, and even John himself said this (Matt. 3:11; etc.). There is no reason to baptize in water today. Nevertheless, the practice continues, and sadly some even teach that it is necessary for salvation.
Thats nice, but the Church continued to baptize with water even after Pentecost. BOTH baptism with water and Holy Spirit should be there, not one or the other!

Acts 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Men who have received the Holy Spirit, and now they are going to WATER baptism. I highlighted the word WATER there.

Acts 8:36-37 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Water highlighted again. Both of these WATER baptisms happen after Pentecost. Case closed.
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
20,496
9,194
113
54
Amen. Water baptism is spoken of many times in the Book of Acts. It does not bring about Salvation, but it does testify to it afterwards.
Amen! Salvation is signified in baptism, but is not procured in baptism.
 

Guojing

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2019
4,801
801
113
Amen. Water baptism is spoken of many times in the Book of Acts. It does not bring about Salvation, but it does testify to it afterwards.
You don't believe Mark 16:16 is legitimate?
 
Aug 1, 2020
33
7
8
Jesus COMMANDED us to baptize all nations. He was talking about water, which they did over and over again in the book of Acts in addition they also were filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues, but baptism in water was still practiced and anyone who says it wasn't is being willfully deceitful with the scriptures. Probably belongs to a cult.
The verse you quote is not found in the originals. It was added later by scribes. Besides Jesus would not contradict himself.
 
Aug 1, 2020
33
7
8
To be accurate, Jesus commanded the 12 to do so, just as he promised the 12 that they will be sitting on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes of Israel. That was why the 11 were quick to replace Judas with Matthias.

If the latter promise was not directed to us, why are you so sure that the former was to us?
Why would the Apostles baptize one way and we another?
 
Aug 1, 2020
33
7
8
You don't believe Mark 16:16 is legitimate?
This is a commentary I found from the REV....
“He who believes and is baptized will be saved.” Mark 16:16 is the only verse in the New Testament that clearly says a person has to be baptized to be saved. Although some people say verses such as Acts 2:38, “repent and be baptized,” say the same thing, that is not actually the case. Acts 2:38 is simply saying if a person did repent and get baptized he would receive the holy spirit, which is true, but different from saying one had to do those things to get the holy spirit.
Salvation is the most serious subject in the Bible, and thus this verse requires our attention. However, studying it in light of the scope of the New Testament, it seems unreasonable that water baptism is necessary for salvation, but it is only mentioned here and not in any of the other clear verses about salvation. For example, Romans 10:9 says very clearly: “That if you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” That fact, along with all the evidence that the closing section of Mark is not original, is very solid evidence that this verse is not original, but was added, and that makes sense because as Christianity developed in the decades after Christ’s ascension, the doctrine that water baptism was necessary for salvation became a part of Church doctrine, even though it had never been a doctrine before then.
If someone did want to insist that Mark 16:16 is original and a person had to be “baptized” to be saved, then the “baptism” in the verse would not refer to baptism in water but to baptism in holy spirit. In that case, the statement “Whoever believes and is baptized [in holy spirit] will be saved” would be true, because at the time a person believes, he is baptized in holy spirit, and then his salvation is assured. See commentary on Mark 16:9.
 
Mar 21, 2009
1,337
468
83
New York
The verse you quote is not found in the originals. It was added later by scribes. Besides Jesus would not contradict himself.
I have studied that claim and it has plenty of authority to be there that is why it is there. Those who have questioned it have never won this argument.

There are plenty of other scriptures besides. Acts 10 is one that should convince anyone who is confused. All those in the house of Cornelius who heard words from Peter on how they should be saved were filled with the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues and then Peter said who can forbid water that they should be baptized since they have received the Holy Spirit just like us for they heard them speak with tongues. They were then baptized in water.

This is still the requirement today. Saved people should get baptized in water. As immediately as possible. Same day should be the practice but we still have need of reformation in this area of the church as we have let many changes to this original practice to be creep in over the centuries and the protestant reformation never really got this back to the way it was in Acts. But I will. When I pastor I will have the baptismal ready every Sunday and will baptize people the same day they commit to Christ. We will have a set of baptismal clothes for any size available for them to change into. No need to plan it for another day, invite relatives and take pictures, no need to have classes for new converts first. No need to make sure they are living the christian life first. Yes, that has been taught by many on the mission field. They were taught that the new converts should show by their lives that they have been converted before baptizing them becuase baptizing them made them a member of the local church and they did not want to make members out of people who were still practicing witchcraft and other heathen idolatry and just had no clue about Jesus yet. It get's complicated on the mission field but in a typical American church I believe baptize them the same day they make a decision for Christ and repent and teach them that this is indeed a baptism of repentance, is the biblical method.
 
Mar 21, 2009
1,337
468
83
New York
This is a commentary I found from the REV....
“He who believes and is baptized will be saved.” Mark 16:16 is the only verse in the New Testament that clearly says a person has to be baptized to be saved. Although some people say verses such as Acts 2:38, “repent and be baptized,” say the same thing, that is not actually the case. Acts 2:38 is simply saying if a person did repent and get baptized he would receive the holy spirit, which is true, but different from saying one had to do those things to get the holy spirit.
Salvation is the most serious subject in the Bible, and thus this verse requires our attention. However, studying it in light of the scope of the New Testament, it seems unreasonable that water baptism is necessary for salvation, but it is only mentioned here and not in any of the other clear verses about salvation. For example, Romans 10:9 says very clearly: “That if you confess with your mouth, ‘Jesus is Lord,’ and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.” That fact, along with all the evidence that the closing section of Mark is not original, is very solid evidence that this verse is not original, but was added, and that makes sense because as Christianity developed in the decades after Christ’s ascension, the doctrine that water baptism was necessary for salvation became a part of Church doctrine, even though it had never been a doctrine before then.
If someone did want to insist that Mark 16:16 is original and a person had to be “baptized” to be saved, then the “baptism” in the verse would not refer to baptism in water but to baptism in holy spirit. In that case, the statement “Whoever believes and is baptized [in holy spirit] will be saved” would be true, because at the time a person believes, he is baptized in holy spirit, and then his salvation is assured. See commentary on Mark 16:9.
Agreed. We have been through this many times in these threads. That is why I say that the bible teaches that only SAVED people got baptized in water. Acts 10 being a good example. We all know that the act of baptism in water does not save us. (well most of us do, there are some Church of Christ folks among us who will not depart from that) However the act of faith that baptism represents does save you and that is why scriptures Mark 16 and others say it that way. We are called to baptize people in water as a way of helping them to make that decision in the heart of faith that does save them. No one has the authority to change the command to go into all the world and teach all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost. God knew what he was doing when he instituted the ordinance of baptism in water and any church that says we don't need to do it today is not a church but anathema maranatha.
 

garee

Senior Member
Mar 28, 2016
15,195
1,424
113
Here's some data on Baptism...
The question we must ask, and answer, is why did Jesus command his disciples to stay in Jerusalem? It was to wait for what the Father had promised, i.e., the gift of holy spirit. The disciples had already been baptized in water. If water baptism was all that was important and necessary for salvation, there would have been no need for the disciples to wait in Jerusalem or receive the gift of holy spirit. Sadly, many people reverse what Jesus said here in Acts. They say water baptism is essential for the believer and act as if baptism in holy spirit is not really essential but perhaps “nice to have,” or valuable in many ways. Jesus was teaching quite the opposite. He knew the disciples had already been water baptized. He also knew it would no longer be intrinsically valuable after the Church started on the Day of Pentecost. Thus, he commanded his disciples to stay in Jerusalem and receive baptism in holy spirit “because” John [only] baptized in water, but holy spirit was going to be first poured out in Jerusalem.

“with water.” The Greek is hudōr (#5204 ὕδωρ) in the dative, thus, “with water.” Thus it is clear that the element that people were baptized with was water. However, in the later part of the verse, the specific word “in” (en, #1722 ἐν) is used, emphasizing that the Christian is baptized “in” holy spirit. There is one baptism for the Christian, and it is spirit, not water (cp. Eph. 4:5). John’s baptism was a shadow of what was to come, and even John himself said this (Matt. 3:11; etc.). There is no reason to baptize in water today. Nevertheless, the practice continues, and sadly some even teach that it is necessary for salvation.
Here's some data on the Holy Spirit .

The body or bride of Christ had it beginning in Genesis not Pentecost . Abel the first apostle, martyr full of the Holy Spirit that lived in his earthen body of death just as a believer today. No outward sign (no water of confirmation that a person had the Holy Spirit.) rather than walking by faith.

2 Corinthians 4:7 But we have this treasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be of God, and not of us.

The idea that men did not have the the Spirit of Christ in them until Pentecost is simply a wile of the evil one. If any man has not the Spirit of Christ then neither do they belong as a member of the bride .Every Old testament saint had the same power working in them to both will and do the good pleasure of God. No power coming from the body of death of their own self.

Pentecost fulfilled the promise that God would restore his bride to a kingdom of priest after all the nations, men and woman priests.

The time of reformation had come . Kings in Israel "the abomination of desolation" had come to a end . The Holy Spirit was restored to His unseen place of Holy place faith. No outward representation. Satan could no longer deceive the whole word all the nations that they first had to become a Jew.

The reformation at Pentecost became a sign against those who desired to hold on to the Old testament order of priesthood (Levitical) Kings in Israel. Those faithless Jew thought the believers were drunk .

Acts 2:15-17 King James Version (KJV) For these are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the day. But this is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel; And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out of my Spirit upon all flesh: and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy, and your young men shall see visions, and your old men shall dream dreams:

Water baptism is a ceremonial sign shadow that was used when a person had a desire to become a member of the priesthood of believers. The first two Aaron's sons added their own personal self edifying, self righteous touch call strange fire . They were consumed by fire. The priestly garments used to represent the unseen Holy Spirt remained intact (no smell of smoke ) .No sign gift

Like those today that say it a a sign that confirms a person has the Holy Spirt As If God was literal water and not Spirit .

It originally was set up after the tribe of Levi and anticipated beforehand that a change would come after the order of Melchezedek a theophany or vision (Not actual corrupted flesh and blood).

John was the last Levi to be used temporally. Jesus came in powerless flesh and blood from the tribe of Judah to represent our High priest continually to fill the promised demonstration. It is not a sign to confirm a person is a believer but remained a shadow that was fulfilled.

Corrupted flesh and blood signified as sinful was used for the one time propmised demonstration of the lamb. . who was slain from before the foundation .Having rested on the 7th from all the work necessary to bring men the Holy Spirit.

Again the first to be shown with the Spirit of Christ the Holy Spirit of God was working in a body of death was Abel . Not Stephen .
 

mailmandan

Senior Member
Apr 7, 2014
20,496
9,194
113
54
We all know that the act of baptism in water does not save us.
Amen! (y)

(well most of us do, there are some Church of Christ folks among us who will not depart from that)
Church of Christ folks are absolutely obsessed with promoting salvation by water baptism and would walk around mountains of grace in order to find water. :cautious:
 
Aug 1, 2020
33
7
8
I have studied that claim and it has plenty of authority to be there that is why it is there. Those who have questioned it have never won this argument.

You are entitled to your opine but I respectfully disagree... Do you believe the KJ 1611 to be the "God breathed" word of God?
 
Aug 1, 2020
33
7
8
I am saying the entire great commission found in Matt 28 was directed only to the 12
Perhaps, but Paul said "Be ye followers of me" I think Jesus was referring to all Christians in what you quoted, but be that as it may, I am not here to convince you, just making suggestions.
 

Guojing

Well-known member
Jan 12, 2019
4,801
801
113
Perhaps, but Paul said "Be ye followers of me" I think Jesus was referring to all Christians in what you quoted, but be that as it may, I am not here to convince you, just making suggestions.
As I have said, if we are so sure that the promise of sitting on 12 thrones judging the 12 tribes are only to the 12 and not to all of us, I wonder what makes people so sure about the gc.

As for Paul , yes I agree with you, we follow his instructions in romans to Philemon, he is the apostle Jesus raised specifically for the body of Christ.

Instead of commanding us to water baptise others, he tells us he was sent not to baptize