Saved by Water

[FreeGrace2]

Jesus is the author of eternal salvation to all those who obey Him. (Heb. 5:9)

This is a heavily abused verse, taken totally wrong by so many.

Obedience here is to obey the gospel message; that is, to believe in Jesus as the Son of God, who died for our sins and saves those who believe in Him.

Nothing more.

In Mark 16, Jesus said he who believes and is baptized shall be saved. He did not say be saved by believing and afterward get baptized.

It is a well known fact that v.9-20 weren't written in the earliest and most reliable manuscripts, but were added LATER ON.

So, the verses aren't inspired by the Holy Spirit.

However, even though added by a later scribe, how does anyone know whether the scribe was referring to the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which doesn't even include water immersion at all?

 

[FreeGrace2]

I was quoting God's word ..."not that Jesus Himself baptised but His disciples ..." " I [Paul] was not sent to baptise"

Jesus Himself was baptised ... were His sins washed away? was he thereby saved?

Excellent point! Jesus' baptism PROVES that baptism isn't about salvation in ANY sense.

The Greek word for "immersion" began with dyeing cloth. The cloth took on the color of the dye, and was IDENTIFIED with that dye.

So it is with baptism. It is an identification with something or someone else.

For example, when Jesus was baptised, He was identifying with His Father's plan. When a believer (saved person) is baptized, they are identifying with the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and as such are identifying with His Work on the cross.

Recall that Paul said the Exodus generation was "baptized INTO Moses and IN the sea". Yet, they walked across the Red Sea bottom on DRY ground. Obviously NO water was involved.

If you want water and immersion, just ask the Egyptian army how that worked out for them!

 

[Evmur]

And of course, that is not the point that we are making.

The point is that the Holy Ghost is absolutely promised to all those who receive baptism in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38-39).

So, if there is any doubt in your mind as to whether or not you have received remission of sins, or the Holy Ghost, it would be expedeint for you to "get this one done"...

I also did not refuse baptism in Jesus' Name when it was offered to me because I had already received the Holy Ghost and the gift of tongues. The Holy Ghost led me to receive baptism in Jesus' name when it was offered to me.

Likewise, if anyone else has received the gift of the Holy Ghost, they will not refuse baptism in Jesus' Name when it is offered to them. The Holy Spirit will lead them to receive it for the sake of the remission of their sins.

Jesu's blood was shed for the remission of sins and it is 100% efficacious. If after being saved and receiving the promised Holy Ghost you think something is lacking in you then you have a problem and one which all the water of Jordan will not solve.

 

[Evmur]

Regardless of your examples, Acts 22:16 makes it clear that water baptism washes away sins.

It does not eradicate the sin nature....if that were the case, 1 John 1:8 would be a lie.

Jesu's blood was shed for the remission of sin. If you equate the water of baptism as being of equal value as Jesu's precious blood then you have a problem which I cannot help you with.

 

[Mem]

Excellent point! Jesus' baptism PROVES that baptism isn't about salvation in ANY sense.

The Greek word for "immersion" began with dyeing cloth. The cloth took on the color of the dye, and was IDENTIFIED with that dye.

So it is with baptism. It is an identification with something or someone else.

For example, when Jesus was baptised, He was identifying with His Father's plan. When a believer (saved person) is baptized, they are identifying with the death, burial and resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and as such are identifying with His Work on the cross.

Recall that Paul said the Exodus generation was "baptized INTO Moses and IN the sea". Yet, they walked across the Red Sea bottom on DRY ground. Obviously NO water was involved.

If you want water and immersion, just ask the Egyptian army how that worked out for them!

Looking at various referrals to baptism, "baptized into Moses" and 'baptized unto repentance," it becomes apparent that the term signals a complete immersion into the character of the object for which the action is performed, so then, "baptized into The Name of Jesus," would actually be referring to being fully 'bought in' or entirely trusting in the integrity and character of 'The Name of Jesus,' i.e. having faith in not only His Name but also that Name being synonymous with His character, to save and not lie, and all that is attached to it. That Jesus asked James and John, "...Are you able...to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?" support this view. IYAM.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Looking at various referrals to baptism, "baptized into Moses" and 'baptized unto repentance," it becomes apparent that the term signals a complete immersion into the character of the object for which the action is performed, so then, "baptized into The Name of Jesus," would actually be referring to being fully 'bought in' or entirely trusting in the integrity and character of 'The Name of Jesus,' i.e. having faith in not only His Name but also that Name being synonymous with His character, to save and not lie, and all that is attached to it. That Jesus asked James and John, "...Are you able...to be baptized with the baptism with which I am baptized?" support this view. IYAM.

Jesus was asking James and John "are you able to be identified with My death?" And, of course, they were, as Jesus noted.

What needs to be clear is that there are 2 kinds of baptisms in the NT. Ritual (wet) baptisms, and real (dry) baptisms.

Water baptism of believers is a ritual, just as the Communion Table is a ritual. Both are commands of believers, saved people.

 

[peldom10]

So you believe that water baptism washes away sin.

... Simon the magician was baptised ... probably Judas and Ananias and Saphira

Yes...required;.....

Peter 3: 21.... whereunto even baptism doth also now save us.......

That should satisfy any God fearing, bible believing Christian.

 

[peldom10]

When are we going to stop playing this awful game of Scriptorture?

1 Corinthians 1:14-17 NLT - "I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 for now no one can say they were baptized in my name. 16 (Oh yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas, but I don't remember baptizing anyone else.) 17 For Christ didn't send me to baptize, but to preach the Good News--and not with clever speech, for fear that the cross of Christ would lose its power."

It is offensive that we REFUSE to even attempt to understand what is so simple to understand that a little child . . . I mean . . . LITTLE CHILD could understand?

Wow......what new age religion bible edition did that come from?

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

In the context of 1 Corinthians 1:14-17, Paul says that he baptized only a few people...

Yet, in Acts 18:8, we find that many were baptized in Corinth.

Which leads me to believe that Paul utilized the same tactic, concerning baptism, as did Jesus in John 4:2.

So, the fact that Paul did not personally baptize many does not preclude that many in Corinth were not baptized.

So thr argument falls apart that says that baptism is not necessary because Paul was no sent to personally baptize.

Because the people were baptized.

The apostles did not neglect their duty to baptize the people in Corinth to whom this letter is bein addressed (whcih contains 1 Corinthians 1:14-17).

If baptism saves, it would be near heretical for Paul to say, "I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except . . ."

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

Regardless of your examples, Acts 22:16 makes it clear that water baptism washes away sins.

It does not eradicate the sin nature....if that were the case, 1 John 1:8 would be a lie.

What is the context of the Entire Bible? Water Baptism?

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

Yes...required;.....

Peter 3: 21.... whereunto even baptism doth also now save us.......

That should satisfy any God fearing, bible believing Christian.

How were people saved prior to the death, burial and resurrection of Christ? Please don't skip this, as some do, here. Ignoring is completely unacceptable.

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

Wow......what new age religion bible edition did that come from?

They all say the same basic things. Again, what is the context of the Entire Bible? Water Baptism?

 

[justbyfaith]

If baptism saves, it would be near heretical for Paul to say, "I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except . . ."

The fact is that many in Corinth were baptized (Acts 18:8) and the reason why Paul said that he thanked God that he only baptized a few people was because he understood that if he had done so, sectarianism in the church may have led some people to claim that Paul had baptized in his own name.

So, his reasoning behind that statement did not have to do with any concept that baptism isn't necessary...for many were baptized in Corinth (Acts 18:8); even though Paul was not the one who did the baptizing.

Again, I will say that Paul utilized the same tactic as concerning baptism as did Jesus in John 4:2.

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

The fact is that many in Corinth were baptized (Acts 18:8) and the reason why Paul said that he thanked God that he only baptized a few people was because he understood that if he had done so, sectarianism in the church may have led some people to claim that Paul had baptized in his own name.

So, his reasoning behind that statement did not have to do with any concept that baptism isn't necessary...for many were baptized in Corinth (Acts 18:8); even though Paul was not the one who did the baptizing.

Again, I will say that Paul utilized the same tactic as concerning baptism as did Jesus in John 4:2.

Pure speculation. To assume these kinds of thoughts seems unrealistic.

What is the context of the Entire Bible? Water baptism? Can we really interpret Scripture through the lens of water baptism?

To properly interpret the Bible, we MUST understand it's core doctrine . . . and it surely isn't physical water.

 

[peldom10]

If baptism saves, it would be near heretical for Paul to say, "I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except . . ."

Pure conjecture......Has nothing to do with the clear word of God.
Paul was deferring all credit to God...as we all must do in our travels.

 

[peldom10]

What is the context of the Entire Bible? Water Baptism?

It is a required step in the sin cleansing process...clearly illustrated by scriptures.

 

[peldom10]

They all say the same basic things. Again, what is the context of the Entire Bible? Water Baptism?

Keeping it together the way it is presented to us by God....is the proper context. The requirement of water baptism is part of it.

 

[FreeGrace2]

Yes...required;.....

Peter 3: 21.... whereunto even baptism doth also now save us.......

That should satisfy any God fearing, bible believing Christian.

j1 Pet 3:21 isn't about literal water, but what literal water SYMBOLIZES, which is the baptism (by the Holy Sprit) that does save.

 

[FreeGrace2]

2ndTimothyGroup said:
If baptism saves, it would be near heretical for Paul to say, "I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except . . ."

Pure conjecture......Has nothing to do with the clear word of God.
Paul was deferring all credit to God...as we all must do in our travels.

Has everything to do with truth.

And Paul's answer to the jailer who asked specifically what he MUST DO to be saved. No mention of water in Paul's answer.

 

[2ndTimothyGroup]

Pure conjecture......Has nothing to do with the clear word of God.
Paul was deferring all credit to God...as we all must do in our travels.

??