Baptism: is it required to be baptized in water?

[garee]

Originally Posted by DJ2
Or He simply meant water and Spirit. Both being distinct, hence the need for the conjunction. No esoteric knowledge needed.

Its not needed if a person is not interested in the spiritual understanding.

Without parables (esoteric knowledge ) Christ the Holy Spirit of God spoke not.. hiding the spiritual meaning from natural man

Yes the water of the word delivered by the Spirit of the word coming down from heaven .

Deu 32:2 My doctrine shall drop as the rain, my speech shall distil as the dew, as the small rain upon the tender herb, and as the showers upon the grass:

A good example is found when God rained down manna (what is it) also called the secret Manna in respect to the spiritual understanding. not seen .

Dew represents the Holy Spirit it is laid as the foundation of "what it is" . There you can see the water and the Spirit working together as one.

And it came to pass, that at even the quails came up, and covered the camp: and in the morning the dew lay round about the host.And when the dew that lay was gone up, behold, upon the face of the wilderness there lay a small round thing, as small as the hoar frost on the ground.And when the children of Israel saw it, they said one to another, It is manna: for they wist not what it was. And Moses said unto them, This is the bread which the LORD hath given you to eat.

 

[preston39]

You both keep ignoring the FACT that water means Spirit, and Jesus said so.

Oh, I do not forget that this is too abstract, general, and esoteric for some

On the last and greatest day of the festival, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.”

By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive.
John 7:37-39a​

You are applying liberties resulting in change of G-d's intent ....expressively forbidden in Rev 20, et al.

 

[DJ2]

You ignore Scripture, for it specifically says HE MEANT THE SPIRIT.

Just read it again. The "and" is the scripture. Your "meant" is the esoteric .

 

[Magenta]

Just read it again. The "and" is the scripture. Your "meant" is the esoteric .

It is not my meant.

On the last and greatest day of the festival, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice,

“Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.” By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. John 7:37-39a​

 

[Nehemiah6]

It is not my meant.

On the last and greatest day of the festival, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice,

“Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.” By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. John 7:37-39a​

True enough. Water is used as a metaphor for the Holy Spirit in this passage. At the same time water is used as a metaphor for the Word of God in other passages. Also "the water of life" is a metaphor for eternal life. So we need to take each passage in context, and understand how it relates to the others.

 

[DJ2]

It is not my meant.

On the last and greatest day of the festival, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice,

“Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.” By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. John 7:37-39a​

Once more, the "and" in "water and of the Spirit" makes the two subjects distinct. You may think Jesus "meant" for them to be the same but that is not expressed in John 3:5. Jesus does not refer to the "water" as rivers of living water. If when speaking to Nicodemus that night, Jesus "meant" to say that a person must be only born again of the Spirit by living rivers of water He would not have used water and the Spirit.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Once more, the "and" in "water and of the Spirit" makes the two subjects distinct. You may think Jesus "meant" for them to be the same but that is not expressed in John 3:5. Jesus does not refer to the "water" as rivers of living water. If when speaking to Nicodemus that night, Jesus "meant" to say that a person must be only born of the Spirit by living rivers of water He would not have used water and the Spirit.

In the context of John 3, "water" means the Word of God, and more particularly the Gospel. Not the water of baptism.

23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:

25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you. (1 Peter 1:23-25).

 

[Magenta]

You are applying liberties resulting in change of G-d's intent ....expressively forbidden in Rev 20, et al.

Laughably sad that you would think physical water saves.

Plus, you bear false witness. AGAIN!

On the last and greatest day of the festival, Jesus stood and said in a loud voice, “Let anyone who is thirsty come to me and drink. Whoever believes in me, as Scripture has said, rivers of living water will flow from within them.” By this he meant the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were later to receive. John 7:37-39a

 

[DJ2]

In the context of John 3, "water" means the Word of God, and more particularly the Gospel. Not the water of baptism.

23 Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

24 For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away:

25 But the word of the Lord endureth for ever. And this is the word which by the gospel is preached unto you. (1 Peter 1:23-25).

There is nothing in the verbiage between Jesus and Nicodemus to assume the "water" is a metaphor. Water baptism for the remission of sins was an established context (John the Baptist's ministry) for its meaning. Attempting to see a metaphor in place of a literal is clearly esoteric.

 

[mailmandan]

No, what you have is simply a distracting strawman argument:

Regardless of what some Roman Catholic told you, it is not part of the debate. I will not attack your strawman.

It's not a straw man argument and it is absolutely part of the debate. To say that we are saved through faith + obedience that follows is to say that we are saved through faith + obedience/works. The Roman Catholic church teaches salvation through faith "infused" with works and the church of Christ teaches salvation through faith "conjoined" with works. Difference in style, but same in substance -- "works based" false gospel. I once heard someone who attends the church of Christ make this statement:

"It is works of obedience and not works of the law or works of merit that help save us."

That sounds like what you are saying and it's an oxymoron, because works of obedience are good works that cannot be dissected from the moral aspect of the law (Matthew 22:37-40) and would be works of merit if they helped save us, as if Christ needs our help which would render Him and IN-sufficient Savior. I grew up in the Roman Catholic church and at one time had temporarily attended the church of Christ so I understand how they both try to "shoe horn" works "into" salvation through faith. None of your arguments are anything new or enlightening.

Obedience is necessary, whether you label it a work or not. Salvation is predicated on acts of obedience, we may debate what needs to be obeyed but not the need itself. Your attitude toward any and all physical acts being works of righteousness is a but a farce. By your definition the applying of blood on the door posts to protect the Hebrews in Egypt would be a "work of righteousness" and therefore not needed.

Obedience which follows saving faith in Christ is works and it's obvious that you are trusting in acts of obedience/works AND NOT IN CHRIST ALONE as the means of your salvation. What needs to be obeyed is the gospel and we OBEY the gospel by CHOOSING TO BELIEVE THE GOSPEL (Romans 1:16; 10:16). The significance of putting blood on the doorposts is that it foreshadowed the future shedding of blood of Christ, that protects us from judgment, just as the blood here protected the Hebrews in Egypt from the destructive plague. Does God say that we are saved by works of righteousness (Titus 3:5) or by grace through faith? (Ephesians 2:8,9).

Your defense is no different then any other person caught up in faith alone regeneration theology.

Your defense is not different than any other person caught up in salvation by works theology/baptismal regeneration.

You label verses written in the general as definitive.

You try to "shoe horn" works "into" salvation through faith by taking BOTH faith AND works and wrapping them up in a package, then merely stamping "faith" on the package.

You label commands for obedience as suggestions.

I never said that commands are merely suggestions (that is a straw man argument) yet there is a difference between a command for us to become saved (Acts 10:43) and a command for us AFTER we have been saved (Acts 10:47-48).

You bring up issues that are not pertinent to the subject such as Roman Catholicism.

If Roman Catholicism errors in the same manner by trying to "shoe horn" works "into" salvation through faith and also teaches salvation by water baptism, then it is pertinent to the subject. If that does not raise a red flag for you then nothing will. I understand how people become indoctrinated by their church and also how extremely difficult it is for them to acknowledge the errors of their ways and admit they are wrong. It's very devastating to their pride for them to admit they were wrong, not to mention having to admit that to their congregation and their family.

You shamelessly offer bizarre explanations for such clear and definitive verses such as Acts 2:38, 1st Peter 3:21, Mark 16:16 etc.

My explanations are only bizarre to those who don't have ears to hear. Your interpretation of these alleged clear and definitive verses are not in harmony with a multitude of clear and definitive verses such as Luke 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 11:17,18; 13:39; 15:7-9; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:5-6; 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; Ephesians 1:13; 2:8; 2 Timothy 3:15; Hebrews 10:39; 1 John 5:4; 13 etc..

Explanations so convoluted as to be labeled childish.

There is nothing convoluted or childish about *properly harmonizing scripture with scripture,* but there is about distorting and perverting passages of scripture in an effort to "patch together" your so called gospel plan.

Again, your defense is based on "all" human acts of obedience as works of righteousness. This argument is both biblically unsound and logically empty. God predicating our need for obedience does not negate the existence of His grace any more then knocking earns salvation (Matthew 7:7-8).

Your defense of saved by "these" works and just not "those" works, yet "these" works do not earn/merit salvation is just sugar coated double talk. So how much obedience must we accomplish and "add" as a supplement to Christ's finished work of redemption in order to "help" Christ save us?

Romans 5:1 - Therefore, having been justified by faith, we have peace with God through our Lord Jesus Christ, 2 through whom also we have access by faith into this grace in which we stand, and rejoice in hope of the glory of God.

Romans 4:5 - But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness, 6 just as David also describes the blessedness of the man to whom God imputes righteousness apart from works:

Romans 11:6 - And if by grace, then it cannot be based on works; if it were, grace would no longer be grace.

 

[mailmandan]

In John 3:5, Jesus said, "born of water and the Spirit". He did not say born of rivers of living waters and the Spirit. To automatically read rivers of living waters into this verse simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted. Scripture interprets itself.

Jesus said rivers of living water in John 7:38 and connects living water with eternal life in John 4:14, so it's not unwarranted and Scripture does interpret itself (John 3:5; 4:10,14; 7:37-39). Again, the Holy Spirit is the source of living water and spiritual cleansing. If "water" is arbitrarily defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again.

Notice in Acts 2:38, "Peter replied, Repent and be baptized so that your sins will be forgiven and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit". As the scriptures say water and Spirit.

The scriptures say "water and Spirit," NOT baptism and Spirit in John 3:5. In John 4:10, Jesus said the "water" I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life. He was not talking about plain ordinary H20. You need to go back and meditate on post #835 without the blindfold this time.

In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. It was established that they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ BEFORE water baptism - Acts 11:17 - and this is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

So the only logical conclusion *when properly harmonizing Scripture with Scripture* is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

*Did you see that?* The Holy Spirit is gifted at the act of water baptism.

The Holy Spirit was gifted when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17). *Did you see that?* Of course you didn't, because you are still wearing your blinders.

If "water" is arbitrarily denied as baptism, then we can insert any mention of water no matter how rarely mentioned in the bible, such as "rivers of living waters".

Just one chapter later, Jesus mentioned "water/living water/rivers of living water" and says whoever drinks the "water" that he will give them will never thirst and connects this water with eternal life (John 4:10,14; 7:37-39) but you choose to ignore that for the sake of your biased church doctrine. You are drinking the wrong water.

If this sounds ridiculous, you are correct it is ridiculous.

The idea that plain, ordinary H20 is the source of spiritual cleansing and causes us to become born again is ridiculous. The natural man can only seem to understand natural water.

In Mark 16:16. Jesus said, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved but whoever does not believe will be damned.

Mark 16:16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned. The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief, not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. NOWHERE does the Bible say "baptized or condemned."

If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then why did Jesus not mention it in the following verses? (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). What is the ONE requirement that Jesus mentions 9 different times in each of these complete statements? BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics.

John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

In 1st Peter 3:21 it states, "Baptism, which is like that water now saves you." Jesus connects water with the Holy Spirit the same as did Peter.

Peter tells us that baptism now saves you, yet when Peter uses this phrase he continues in the same sentence to explain exactly what he means by it. He said that baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh (that is, not as an outward, physical act which washes dirt from the body--that is not what saves you), "but an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (that is, as an inward, spiritual transaction between God and the individual, a transaction that is symbolized by the outward ceremony of water baptism).

*Just as the eight people in the ark were "saved THROUGH water" as they were IN THE ARK. They were not literally saved "by" the water. Hebrews 11:7 is clear on this point (..built an ARK for the SAVING of his household). *NOTE: The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE. In contrast, ONLY THE WICKED IN NOAH'S DAY CAME IN CONTACT WITH THE WATER AND THEY ALL PERISHED.

In Acts 22;16 Ananias commanded, "What are you waiting for, get up, be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord." Ananias is not speaking of "rivers of living waters" but the waters of baptism. Notice how I harmonized scripture with scripture before reaching my conclusion. Water baptism is not the source of our salvation but the point of our salvation.

You actually did a terrible job of harmonizing scripture with scripture and water baptism is NOT the point of salvation (John 3:18; Acts 10:43; 11:17; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28 etc..). As Greek scholar AT Robertson points out - baptism here pictures the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ. Water baptism does not wash the soul. This occurred earlier when Paul came to faith in Christ. Paul tells that he did not receive or hear the Gospel from Ananias, but rather he heard it directly from Christ. Galatians 1:11-12 says, "For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ." So, Paul heard and believed in Christ on the road to Damascus. Paul had already believed in Christ when Ananias came to pray for him to receive his sight (Acts 9:17).

*It also should be noted that Paul at the time when Ananias prayed for him to receive his sight, he was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17) and this was before he was water baptized (Acts 9:18).

Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary makes not of the importance of the Greek in Ananias' statement. When Ananias tells Paul to "arise, be baptized, wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord," the tense of the last command is literally "having called" (aorist middle participle). "Calling on [epikalesamenos] --- 'having (that is, after having) called on,' referring the confession of Christ which preceded baptism." [Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, vol. 3 pg. 160]. Kenneth Wuest picks up on this Greek nuance and translates the verse as follows: "And now, why are you delaying? Having arisen, be baptized and wash away your sins, having previously called upon His Name." (Acts 22:16, Wuest's Expanded NT).

 

[RNCM]

Ephesians 4:3 Endeavouring to keep the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace.

4 There is one body, and one Spirit, even as ye are called in one hope of your calling;

5 One Lord, one faith, one baptism,

6 One God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.

It is absolutely amazing that there are some here who do not believe in the one Baptism according to the scriptures. Regardless of our understanding of it's implications, there are some what simply just don't believe. They have the opportunity to believe IN THE WORD OF GOD but they don't.
IF YOU DO NOT BELIEVE IN THE WORD you are not a Christian. Everything the Bible tells us about Baptism is TRUE before GOD...ALL OF IT.
You need to be baptized according to scripture according to every verse posted by everyone involved in this discussion....EVEY VERSE IS RIGHT.

NOT one over the other...Sola and tota Scriptora
renewedcovenantministry.com

 

[preston39]

Jesus said rivers of living water in John 7:38 and connects living water with eternal life in John 4:14, so it's not unwarranted and Scripture does interpret itself (John 3:5; 4:10,14; 7:37-39). Again, the Holy Spirit is the source of living water and spiritual cleansing. If "water" is arbitrarily defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again.

The scriptures say "water and Spirit," NOT baptism and Spirit in John 3:5. In John 4:10, Jesus said the "water" I shall give him will become in him a fountain of water springing up into everlasting life. He was not talking about plain ordinary H20. You need to go back and meditate on post #835 without the blindfold this time.

In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. It was established that they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ BEFORE water baptism - Acts 11:17 - and this is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

So the only logical conclusion *when properly harmonizing Scripture with Scripture* is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

The Holy Spirit was gifted when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17). *Did you see that?* Of course you didn't, because you are still wearing your blinders.

Just one chapter later, Jesus mentioned "water/living water/rivers of living water" and says whoever drinks the "water" that he will give them will never thirst and connects this water with eternal life (John 4:10,14; 7:37-39) but you choose to ignore that for the sake of your biased church doctrine. You are drinking the wrong water.

The idea that plain, ordinary H20 is the source of spiritual cleansing and causes us to become born again is ridiculous. The natural man can only seem to understand natural water.

Mark 16:16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned. The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief, not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. NOWHERE does the Bible say "baptized or condemned."

If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then why did Jesus not mention it in the following verses? (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). What is the ONE requirement that Jesus mentions 9 different times in each of these complete statements? BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics.

John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

Peter tells us that baptism now saves you, yet when Peter uses this phrase he continues in the same sentence to explain exactly what he means by it. He said that baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh (that is, not as an outward, physical act which washes dirt from the body--that is not what saves you), "but an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (that is, as an inward, spiritual transaction between God and the individual, a transaction that is symbolized by the outward ceremony of water baptism).

*Just as the eight people in the ark were "saved THROUGH water" as they were IN THE ARK. They were not literally saved "by" the water. Hebrews 11:7 is clear on this point (..built an ARK for the SAVING of his household). *NOTE: The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE. In contrast, ONLY THE WICKED IN NOAH'S DAY CAME IN CONTACT WITH THE WATER AND THEY ALL PERISHED.

You actually did a terrible job of harmonizing scripture with scripture and water baptism is NOT the point of salvation (John 3:18; Acts 10:43; 11:17; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28 etc..). As Greek scholar AT Robertson points out - baptism here pictures the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ. Water baptism does not wash the soul. This occurred earlier when Paul came to faith in Christ. Paul tells that he did not receive or hear the Gospel from Ananias, but rather he heard it directly from Christ. Galatians 1:11-12 says, "For I would have you know, brethren, that the gospel which was preached by me is not according to man. For I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it, but I received it through a revelation of Jesus Christ." So, Paul heard and believed in Christ on the road to Damascus. Paul had already believed in Christ when Ananias came to pray for him to receive his sight (Acts 9:17).

*It also should be noted that Paul at the time when Ananias prayed for him to receive his sight, he was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17) and this was before he was water baptized (Acts 9:18).

Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary makes not of the importance of the Greek in Ananias' statement. When Ananias tells Paul to "arise, be baptized, wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord," the tense of the last command is literally "having called" (aorist middle participle). "Calling on [epikalesamenos] --- 'having (that is, after having) called on,' referring the confession of Christ which preceded baptism." [Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, vol. 3 pg. 160]. Kenneth Wuest picks up on this Greek nuance and translates the verse as follows: "And now, why are you delaying? Having arisen, be baptized and wash away your sins, having previously called upon His Name." (Acts 22:16, Wuest's Expanded NT).

m...,

With another person.......I asked if they had been baptized and their answer startled me in view of their stance on baptism...so, I ask.........have you been baptized?

 

[mailmandan]

m...,

With another person.......I asked if they had been baptized and their answer startled me in view of their stance on baptism...so, I ask.........have you been baptized?

Absolutely!

 

[DJ2]

That just simply is not true. Unless it specifically mentions that "spiritual baptism" is being discussed, "baptism" means being immersed into water.

The same as taking a "bath" or "shower" means with water. Water may not be mentioned but there is a tacit understanding that the bath or shower will be with water. Unless stated otherwise baptism is not amniotic fluid, rivers of living waters or tongues of fire.

 

[RNCM]

" MAILMANDAN
*Just as the eight people in the ark were "saved THROUGH water" as they were IN THE ARK. They were not literally saved "by" the water. Hebrews 11:7 is clear on this point (..built an ARK for the SAVING of his household). *NOTE: The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE. In contrast, ONLY THE WICKED IN NOAH'S DAY CAME IN CONTACT WITH THE WATER AND THEY ALL PERISHED "

I'd like to comment on this thought if I may, thank you.
1Pe 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ..

This verse has a few points I'd like to offer that perhaps you are over looking, or I'm misunderstanding you ? Happens all the time with me!

Consider:
The wicked of Noah's day were the filth, Noah's Folk the saved (literally), God cleansed Noah's ark and those inside by Washing away the uncleanness of the world.
Throughout the Law and the Prophets, water cleaning has represented the concept Peter teaches "the putting away of the filth of the flesh" Yet is this baptism which is offered in in the resurrection of Christ one may "answer of a good conscience toward God", which is more important than taking a bath. Yhwh God looks at our heart, He desires his people to worship in spirit and in truth, even if it is as simple as a "bath" in the name (power) of the Lord Jesus Christ which attests to the evidence of of a believing heart, mind and soul...the answer of a clean conscience before God and not just a bath.
Thanks.

 

[garee]

The same as taking a "bath" or "shower" means with water. Water may not be mentioned but there is a tacit understanding that the bath or shower will be with water. Unless stated otherwise baptism is not amniotic fluid, rivers of living waters or tongues of fire.

Water represents the cleaning action of the gospel To be born of water and the spirit is to be born by the Spirit that does work of cleansing . Living or moving waters to include rivers is used that way through out scripture. It describes a living faith.

 

[garee]

Originally Posted by Lewiz
How come that you, sir, don't seem to know the Bible?
Haven't you read that apostles are listed in Paul's list of ministries in the church?
That plainly is written to the church as current and future reference, meaning more of them in the future.

Sounds like a Catholic doctrine of men they call fathers.

More of what? Those he sends out those given the name Apostle? the word means sent ones . it would be like sending somone to a store with a list of the sender. Can we add our own meaning to the word apostle?

Matthew 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:

If it applied to those apotles it applies to us today ... same words of God different time period.

The great commission is still in effect. He is still sending men with the authority of His word .If not there would be no Christian board as this one .The gospel did not die with the death of the twelve.

 

[Truthcomber]

Hi All,

Very good posts here. Here’s my contribution:


The more scriptures that one can put together to form a cohesive whole, the more is the proof of the pudding. This includes bringing into view seemingly contradictory scriptures. For I believe that this is the essence in coming to a deeper understanding. And this will include meditation on God’s word.

The true baptism occurs when we are baptized in the spirit. In order to be baptized in the spirit, one must die with Christ first. That is the reality.

Acts 1:5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the holy spirit not many days from now.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Being baptized in water symbolizes being baptized of the spirit (soul) one with the holy spirit. This was not possible prior to the resurrection of the Messiah.

John 20:22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.

Heb 11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: 40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

Acts 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted and having received of the Father the promise of the holy spirit, he (Christ) hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

What is the promise of the holy spirit? All the prophets, king David, John the Baptist and Christ had the holy spirit in them. But none had received the promise of the holy spirit. But those from the birth of Christ until his resurrection had not received the holy spirit. They had received the baptism of John instead. Even the apostles had not received the holy spirit until Christ was resurrected from the dead (John 20:22). Even here, they had not received the “promise of the holy spirit” until Pentecost.

John 7:39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the spirit was not yet (and not was not yet given); because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

John 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour (time) is coming, and now is (at Pentecost), when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. This is in contrast with the rest of the dead (vs 28-29).

1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
The promise of the holy spirit is that the Word of God (spirit of God) would be one with the soul of Christ in Christ.

 

[DJ2]

Hi All,

Very good posts here. Here’s my contribution:


The more scriptures that one can put together to form a cohesive whole, the more is the proof of the pudding. This includes bringing into view seemingly contradictory scriptures. For I believe that this is the essence in coming to a deeper understanding. And this will include meditation on God’s word.

The true baptism occurs when we are baptized in the spirit. In order to be baptized in the spirit, one must die with Christ first. That is the reality.

Acts 1:5 for John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the holy spirit not many days from now.

John 3:5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

Being baptized in water symbolizes being baptized of the spirit (soul) one with the holy spirit. This was not possible prior to the resurrection of the Messiah.

John 20:22 And when He had said this, He breathed on them and said to them, "Receive the Holy Spirit.

Heb 11:39 And these all, having obtained a good report through faith, received not the promise: 40 God having provided some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect.

Acts 1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. 31 He seeing this before spake of the resurrection of Christ, that his soul was not left in hell, neither his flesh did see corruption. 32 This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. 33 Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted and having received of the Father the promise of the holy spirit, he (Christ) hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear.

What is the promise of the holy spirit? All the prophets, king David, John the Baptist and Christ had the holy spirit in them. But none had received the promise of the holy spirit. But those from the birth of Christ until his resurrection had not received the holy spirit. They had received the baptism of John instead. Even the apostles had not received the holy spirit until Christ was resurrected from the dead (John 20:22). Even here, they had not received the “promise of the holy spirit” until Pentecost.

John 7:39 (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the spirit was not yet (and not was not yet given); because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)

John 5:25 Verily, verily, I say unto you, The hour (time) is coming, and now is (at Pentecost), when the dead shall hear the voice of the Son of God: and they that hear shall live. This is in contrast with the rest of the dead (vs 28-29).

1Co 15:21 For since by man came death, by man came also the resurrection of the dead.
The promise of the holy spirit is that the Word of God (spirit of God) would be one with the soul of Christ in Christ.

If I am understanding you correctly, you are implying that a non-physical baptism (Holy Spirit) is the point/moment of the forgiveness of sins and not water baptism. Is this correct?