baptism

[fredoheaven]

Again you deny the scripture you site.
It is written..."Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;" (Col 2:12-13)
it seems you are incapable of correlating Col 2 with Rom 6.

Again I haven’t denied the scriptures; I have entirely cited the scriptures full well and intact. It is your misunderstanding of your knit picking of the scriptures that is in gross error. Now you are trying to correlate Colossian 2 with your baptismal regeneration formulae but Colossians 2 is not about water baptism as you supposed. It is “…through faith of the operation of God…”. In water baptism, it is man who administers it; here in the book of Colossians, it is God who administers it to this baptism, by placing one’s faith. Just like the” circumcision made not with hands” (material/physical) this baptisms has nothing to do with the water (material/physical). See the difference. Many things have just been fallen out of your posts.

 

[mailmandan]

Ever met any sanctified people?
Surely some of the folks you know who are gradually getting sanctified have reached their goal, right?
How would you recognize a sanctified person?
Wouldn't freedom from sin be the biggest give-away?

The goal of entire sanctification will be met when we are glorified. Freedom from the penalty of sin does not mean sinless perfection in the flesh. I see that you are still suffering from a terminal case of self righteousness (1 John 1:8-10).

You are trying to attain the "impossible dream" by your own works.

It's you who is trying to attain the "impossible dream" by your own works through sinless perfection.

It is written..."And such were some of you: but ye are washed, but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." (1 Cor. 6:11) You too can be washed/sanctified, made new, reborn.

I already have been washed, sanctified and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of God. It's obvious that you are not interested in the truth.

You are clearly deceived.

 

[Donmech]

I thought that God's method included rebirth?
It also included the way to kill the old man-flesh, (Rom 6:3-6), with the affections and lusts. (Gal 5:24)
As fr your Romans 7 allusion...
The first few verses of Ro 7 clearly show that it is speaking of a former time. Verse 5..."For when we WERE in the flesh..."
The entire middle of Ro 7 is about Paul's former life as a Pharisee; trying to live the Mosaic Law, but failing. And again, a reference to the past in verse 18; (that is, in my flesh).
And the end, especially verse 23; "But I see another law in my members, warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to THE LAW OF SIN which is in my members."...points again to a former time. Because....
we read in Romans 8:2...."For the law of the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus hath made me free from THE LAW OF SIN and death.
Why would Paul be subject to something he is free of?
If you could see the truth of Ro 7, and its proximity to Ro 6, which speaks of baptism and the death of the flesh, you would see that Paul is making the past-present transition, and Ro 8 continues on into the life walked in the Spirit.

Paul speaking: Rom. 7:14 (present tense) For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. (verse 18) For I know that in me (that is , in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me ;but how to perform that which is good I find not. (verse 19 also present tense) For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. (verse 25) I think God through Jesus Christ our Lord.( is this also referring to when he was a Pharisee as you said?) So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin. Its as clear as crystal that Paul is saved while he is discussing his struggle with sin, he said; "I think God trough Jesus Christ our Lord", this is not a quote from a lost a Pharisee, as you stated. He is showing how that he has a sin nature to contend with, otherwise why would he think God through Jesus Christ? (All these verses are in the present tense while Paul is speaking). According to verse 25 Paul is a saved man, and he is dealing with a sin nature. You would do well to reconsider your position and understand that although we are saved, until we are glorified, sin will be a nasty Characteristic that we as Christians must deal with daily, and to claim that you are perfectly sinless just go's completely against the clear teachings of Paul.

 

[hornetguy]

The only way I see that we can claim "sinless" status is that we are free from the guilt of sin. Not that we don't slip up and sin, but that we are covered.

So, in that sense, we are "sinless"...

 

[Donmech]

I do not understand why would you not want to be water baptized ?

Where do you get the idea that anyone has said not to get baptized? Not from me!

 

[PJW]

The goal of entire sanctification will be met when we are glorified. Freedom from the penalty of sin does not mean sinless perfection in the flesh. I see that you are still suffering from a terminal case of self righteousness (1 John 1:8-10).

You deny the power of God in the lives of the redeemed.
"My" righteousness is of God, and attainable to everyone who turns from sin and embraces Him.
To imagine that freedom from sin only frees you from the penalty for doing sin is a deceitful lie.
Freedom from sin means freedom from committing sin.
Jesus said as much in John 8:32-34.

It's you who is trying to attain the "impossible dream" by your own works through sinless perfection.

It is Christ in "me", and the "dream" is entirely possible by faith in all that God and His Son accomplished on earth.
For instance...it is written..."[FONT=&quot]There hath no temptation taken you but such as is common to man: but God is faithful, who will not suffer you to be tempted above that ye are able; but will with the temptation also make a way to escape, that ye may be able to bear it." ([/FONT][FONT=&quot]1 Corinthians 10:13)[/FONT][FONT=&quot]
[/FONT]

I already have been washed, sanctified and justified in the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of God. It's obvious that you are not interested in the truth.

Why then are you defending "gradual sanctification" if you know that it is accomplishable?
What are the unsanctified waiting for?
That was a rhetorical question, because I know that those who love sin more than they love God will never be sanctified.

 

[PJW]

Paul speaking: Rom. 7:14 (present tense) For we know that the law is spiritual: but I am carnal, sold under sin. (verse 18) For I know that in me (that is , in my flesh,) dwelleth no good thing: for to will is present with me ;but how to perform that which is good I find not. (verse 19 also present tense) For the good that I would I do not: but the evil which I would not, that I do. (verse 25) I think God through Jesus Christ our Lord.( is this also referring to when he was a Pharisee as you said?) So then with the mind I myself serve the law of God; but with the flesh the law of sin. Its as clear as crystal that Paul is saved while he is discussing his struggle with sin, he said; "I think God trough Jesus Christ our Lord", this is not a quote from a lost a Pharisee, as you stated. He is showing how that he has a sin nature to contend with, otherwise why would he think God through Jesus Christ? (All these verses are in the present tense while Paul is speaking). According to verse 25 Paul is a saved man, and he is dealing with a sin nature. You would do well to reconsider your position and understand that although we are saved, until we are glorified, sin will be a nasty Characteristic that we as Christians must deal with daily, and to claim that you are perfectly sinless just go's completely against the clear teachings of Paul.

Please look-up the "present historical tense", or the "present narrative tense".
Paul is writing of his past perspective as a Pharisee-Jew.
He is describing the difference between what is in Romans 7...his life before conversion, and Romans 8...a life walked in the Spirit.
If I am wrong, then Paul must be some kind of hypocrite for writing..."[FONT=&quot]Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame." (1 Corinthians 15:34[/FONT][FONT=&quot])[/FONT]
Your POV also provided me with a means of justifying ongoing sin, but I realize that is not of God.

 

[PJW]

The only way I see that we can claim "sinless" status is that we are free from the guilt of sin. Not that we don't slip up and sin, but that we are covered.

So, in that sense, we are "sinless"...

Don't buy the false doctrines of those who attempt to justify sin.
Paul writes..."Awake to righteousness, and sin not; for some have not the knowledge of God: I speak this to your shame." (1 Corinthians 15:34)

Jesus came to free the Jews from an enemy much worse than Rome.
He came to free you from servitude to sin.
He said as much in John 8:32-34.

 

[hornetguy]

[SUP]7 [/SUP]but if we walk in the Light as He Himself is in the Light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus His Son cleanses us from all sin. [SUP]8 [/SUP]If we say that we have no sin, we are deceiving ourselves and the truth is not in us. [SUP]9 [/SUP]If we confess our sins, He is faithful and righteous to forgive us our sins and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness. [SUP]10 [/SUP]If we say that we have not sinned, we make Him a liar and His word is not in us.

[SUP]14 [/SUP]For we know that the Law is spiritual, but I am of flesh, sold [SUP][m][/SUP]into bondage to sin. [SUP]15 [/SUP]For what I am doing, I do not understand; for I am not practicing what I would like to do, but I am doing the very thing I hate. [SUP]16 [/SUP]But if I do the very thing I do not want to do, I agree with the Law, confessing that the Law is good. [SUP]17 [/SUP]So now, no longer am I the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me. [SUP]18 [/SUP]For I know that nothing good dwells in me, that is, in my flesh; for the willing is present in me, but the doing of the good is not. [SUP]19 [/SUP]For the good that I want, I do not do, but I practice the very evil that I do not want. [SUP]20 [/SUP]But if I am doing the very thing I do not want, I am no longer the one doing it, but sin which dwells in me.
[SUP]21 [/SUP]I find then the [SUP][n][/SUP]principle that evil is present in me, the one who wants to do good. [SUP]22 [/SUP]For I joyfully concur with the law of God [SUP][o][/SUP]in the inner man, [SUP]23 [/SUP]but I see a different law in [SUP][p][/SUP]the members of my body, waging war against the law of my mind and making me a prisoner [SUP][q][/SUP]of the law of sin which is in my members. [SUP]24 [/SUP]Wretched man that I am! Who will set me free from [SUP][r][/SUP]the body of this death? [SUP]25 [/SUP]Thanks be to God through Jesus Christ our Lord! So then, on the one hand I myself with my mind am serving the law of God, but on the other, with my flesh the law of sin.

Scriptural proof that even as believers, we can, and do, still sin.... but we are free from the guilt of that sin if we confess it, because of the sacrifice Jesus made for us.

The person that claims to never sin is a liar... according to scripture.

and.... nobody is trying to "justify" sin... sin is what it is... it's sin. We, as humans, will always stumble, and sin. That's the nature of being human. Thankfully, we are covered by the blood of Jesus.

 

[mailmandan]

Scriptural proof that even as believers, we can, and do, still sin.... but we are free from the guilt of that sin if we confess it, because of the sacrifice Jesus made for us.

The person that claims to never sin is a liar... according to scripture.

and.... nobody is trying to "justify" sin... sin is what it is... it's sin. We, as humans, will always stumble, and sin. That's the nature of being human. Thankfully, we are covered by the blood of Jesus.

Exactly! Nobody is trying to justify sin, which BTW is a straw man argument. 1 John 1:8 - If we say that we have no sin, (present tense) we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

 

[PJW]

Scriptural proof that even as believers, we can, and do, still sin.... but we are free from the guilt of that sin if we confess it, because of the sacrifice Jesus made for us.

The person that claims to never sin is a liar... according to scripture.

Does that mean 1 John 1:7 and 9 are lies?
They do say that ALL our sins/unrighteousness can be cleansed.

and.... nobody is trying to "justify" sin... sin is what it is... it's sin. We, as humans, will always stumble, and sin. That's the nature of being human. Thankfully, we are covered by the blood of Jesus.

Is Peter a liar for writing..."Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind: for he that hath suffered in the flesh hath ceased from sin;" (1 Peter 4:1)
Or..."Wherefore the rather, brethren, give diligence to make your calling and election sure: for if ye do these things, ye shall never fall:" (2 Peter 1:10)

You can leave the just "human" excuse behind by being reborn.
Quit walking in the flesh and start walking in the Spirit.

 

[PJW]

Exactly! Nobody is trying to justify sin, which BTW is a straw man argument. 1 John 1:8 - If we say that we have no sin, (present tense) we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

You don't seem to understand that John is addressing two different kinds of "walk".
One is in darkness-sin and one is in the light-which is God.
Those in the darkness cannot say they have no sin, but those in the light-God can...as there is no sin in God.

Are you of the opinion that we can walk in the light and at the same time walk in darkness?
I am not.
Life is only in the light, and death resides in darkness.

 

[mailmandan]

You don't seem to understand that John is addressing two different kinds of "walk".
One is in darkness-sin and one is in the light-which is God.
Those in the darkness cannot say they have no sin, but those in the light-God can...as there is no sin in God.

As hornetguy pointed out, the only way we can claim "sinless" status is that we are free from the guilt of sin. Not that we don't slip up and sin, but that we are covered by the blood of Christ. So, in that sense, positionally in Christ, we are "sinless," but that does not mean sinless perfection in the flesh (1 John 1:8-2:1).

Are you of the opinion that we can walk in the light and at the same time walk in darkness?
I am not.

I am not either, which still does not mean sinless perfection in the flesh.

Life is only in the light, and death resides in darkness.

1 John 1:6 - If we say that we have fellowship with Him, and walk in darkness, we lie and do not practice the truth. But if we walk in the light as He is in the light, we have fellowship with one another, and the blood of Jesus Christ His Son cleanses us from all sin. Walking in darkness is descriptive of children of the devil. Walking in the light is descriptive of children of God. *Only those who are saved/believers are in the light.

Acts 26:18 - to open their eyes, in order to turn them from darkness to light, and from the power of Satan to God, that they may receive forgiveness of sins and an inheritance among those who are sanctified by faith in Me.

2 Corinthians 6:14 - Do not be unequally yoked together with unbelievers. For what fellowship has righteousness with lawlessness? And what communion has light with darkness?

Ephesians 5:8 - for you were formerly darkness, but now you are Light in the Lord; walk as children of Light. Children of the devil walk in darkness, not in the light. Children of God walk in the light, not in darkness. IF confirms these positions in verses 6 and 7. It's one or the other.

In 1 John 2:9, we read - He who says he is in the light, and hates his brother, is in darkness until now. In vs. 11 - But he who hates his brother is in darkness and walks in darkness, and does not know where he is going, because the darkness has blinded his eyes.

*Compare with 1 John 3:10 - In this the children of God and the children of the devil are manifest: Whoever does not practice righteousness is not of God, (compare with 1 John 1:6 - does not practice the truth) nor is he who does not love his brother. *Notice that walks in darkness/hates his brother is connected to children of the devil.

KEEP IN MIND THIS THREAD IS ON BAPTISM. IF YOU ARE SO INTERESTED IN PROMOTING THE HERETICAL DOCTRINE OF SINLESS PERFECTION IN THE FLESH THEN YOU SHOULD START A NEW THREAD ON IT.

 

[Endoscopy]

When we examine the verse in context we see that the command is to go and to teach. The baptism here in the Greek is to immerse as a sunken ship. Generally water baptism is a dipping not an immersion like a sunken ship. People tend not to continue living when placed under water for extended periods of time. From the context we are to immerse them in doctrine as verse 20 reveals. We teach Jesus as Savior and teach converts to disciple them.

Mt 28:19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: 20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

This is a prime example of where the English fails to comprehend the original Greek. We often see baptize and apply water where the original text intended a different immersion. This is why many struggle to understand where the text intends Holy Spirit baptism and not water baptism. Different word in the Greek but one word used in the English.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

The problem with your assertion that it is immersion only is there is no definitive statement to that effect in the Bible. I had to wrestle with this issue when I started going to the church my wife went to. The problem is the word baptism comes from one of two words. One is the word for washing the feet. I forget the other words meaning since it didn't seem to apply. In Biblical times sandals were worn so the feet became dirty. A basin of water was used and a cloth was used to clean the feet. Then another cloth was used to dry the feet. It is not clear whether or not the feet were immersed in the basin of water. The symbolism of sins being washed away by the blood of Jesus is implied in the baptism and the word for washing the feet removing the dirt seems analogous. When I was first became a believer I was baptized by immersion. Then my parents changed churches and that church didn't recognize my previous baptism so I was baptized again. Then it happened again.

There are 3 types of baptism used in churches today; sprinkling, pouring, and immersion. There are arguments galore about the method. I finally settled on it doesn't matter since nothing in the Bible definitively defines the method.

 

[Endoscopy]

You don't seem to understand that John is addressing two different kinds of "walk".
One is in darkness-sin and one is in the light-which is God.
Those in the darkness cannot say they have no sin, but those in the light-God can...as there is no sin in God.

Are you of the opinion that we can walk in the light and at the same time walk in darkness?
I am not.
Life is only in the light, and death resides in darkness.

I must disagree with your assertion that it is possible to live without sinning. Paul was in anguish about this issue. He stated he kept doing that which he didn't want to do. We all struggle with this problem and we all fail. I can only give thanks that the blood of Christ washes away my sins since I have the same problem that Paul had. The Bible states that all have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. Therefore we must accept the sacrifice of Jesus.

 

[hornetguy]

The problem with your assertion that it is immersion only is there is no definitive statement to that effect in the Bible. I had to wrestle with this issue when I started going to the church my wife went to. The problem is the word baptism comes from one of two words. One is the word for washing the feet. I forget the other words meaning since it didn't seem to apply. In Biblical times sandals were worn so the feet became dirty. A basin of water was used and a cloth was used to clean the feet. Then another cloth was used to dry the feet. It is not clear whether or not the feet were immersed in the basin of water. The symbolism of sins being washed away by the blood of Jesus is implied in the baptism and the word for washing the feet removing the dirt seems analogous. When I was first became a believer I was baptized by immersion. Then my parents changed churches and that church didn't recognize my previous baptism so I was baptized again. Then it happened again.

There are 3 types of baptism used in churches today; sprinkling, pouring, and immersion. There are arguments galore about the method. I finally settled on it doesn't matter since nothing in the Bible definitively defines the method.

I think you are mistaken about the definition of baptism. I'm pretty sure the word used in Greek was this:

[TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="bgcolor: #ecd8a5"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Strong's Number: 907[/FONT][/TD]
[TD="width: 120, bgcolor: #ecd8a5, align: center"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Browse Lexicon[/FONT][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2"][TABLE]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%, bgcolor: #fff0be"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Original Word[/FONT][/TD]
[TD="width: 50%, bgcolor: #fff0be"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Word Origin[/FONT][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%"]baptizo[/TD]
[TD="width: 50%"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]from a derivative of (911)[/FONT][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%, bgcolor: #fff0be"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Transliterated Word[/FONT][/TD]
[TD="width: 50%, bgcolor: #fff0be"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]TDNT Entry[/FONT][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Baptizo[/FONT][/TD]
[TD="width: 50%"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]1:529,92[/FONT][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%, bgcolor: #fff0be"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Phonetic Spelling[/FONT][/TD]
[TD="width: 50%, bgcolor: #fff0be"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Parts of Speech[/FONT][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="width: 50%"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]bap-tid'-zo [/FONT][/TD]
[TD="width: 50%"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica][/FONT][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]
[/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="bgcolor: #ecd8a5, colspan: 2"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]Definition[/FONT][/TD]
[/TR]
[TR]
[TD="colspan: 2"][FONT=Arial, Helvetica]

1. to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk)
2. to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one's self, bathe
3. to overwhelm

Not to be confused with 911, bapto. The clearest example that showsthe meaning of baptizo is a text from the Greek poet and physicianNicander, who lived about 200 B.C. It is a recipe for making picklesand is helpful because it uses both words. Nicander says that inorder to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be 'dipped'(bapto) into boiling water and then 'baptised' (baptizo) in thevinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in asolution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act ofbaptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change. When used in the New Testament, this word more often refers to ourunion and identification with Christ than to our water baptism. e.g.Mark 16:16. 'He that believes and is baptised shall be saved'.Christ is saying that mere intellectual assent is not enough. Theremust be a union with him, a real change, like the vegetable to thepickle! Bible Study Magazine, James Montgomery Boice, May 1989.[/FONT][/TD]
[/TR]
[/TABLE]

It has nothing to do with washing of feet, or pouring... it was an immersion.

 

[Endoscopy]

I think you are mistaken about the definition of baptism. I'm pretty sure the word used in Greek was this:



It has nothing to do with washing of feet, or pouring... it was an immersion.

You are misunderstanding what I said. I was talking about the derivation of the word. Not the meaning of baptism. Before John the Baptist there was no concept of baptism. There was a repeatable cleansing ritual that had a different name, tevilah. The meaning of the word that is most likely to be where the word baptism came from is what I referred to. That word means washing the feet. It is not the word for baptism. Please read what I state carefully. You jumped to an erroneous conclusion.

 

[Endoscopy]

The symbolism of washing the feet fits with the concept of baptism. The symbolic cleansing that Christ's blood does for us. That is the reason I believe the word for washing the feet fits as the root for baptism. A sinking ship doesn't cut it for me. I am looking at the meaning of the root word. Your choice is used by those trying to make baptism by immersion only. The rest of the definition doesn't fit. Washing the feet is a cleansing ritual back then. That is a much better fit for the definition. I did a lot of research back when I looked into it.

 

[hornetguy]

You are misunderstanding what I said. I was talking about the derivation of the word. Not the meaning of baptism. Before John the Baptist there was no concept of baptism. There was a repeatable cleansing ritual that had a different name, tevilah. The meaning of the word that is most likely to be where the word baptism came from is what I referred to. That word means washing the feet. It is not the word for baptism. Please read what I state carefully. You jumped to an erroneous conclusion.

The word/s that the Greek word baptizo came from don't matter at all, actually. The word used when talking about baptism has its own known Koine Greek meaning.

If what was meant was to wipe the feet off with a cloth, why didn't they simply use the correct Greek words that describe that ritual?

Let's don't grasp too hard for those straws..... sometimes a cigar is just a cigar.....

 

[hornetguy]

There was a repeatable cleansing ritual that had a different name, tevilah. The meaning of the word that is most likely to be where the word baptism came from is what I referred to. That word means washing the feet.

Even if that was the word that "spawned" the word baptism, it still described an immersion... nowhere does it mention wiping something off with a cloth.

In Judaism, ritual washing, or ablution, takes two main forms. A tevilah (טְבִילָה) is a full body immersion in a mikveh, and a netilat yadayim which is the washing of the hands with a cup (see Handwashing in Judaism).