Saved by Water

FreeGrace2 · Aug 19, 2021

It obviously does, as a SYMBOL for the "baptism that DOES save us".

antitupos: struck back, corresponding to
Original Word: ἀντίτυπος, ον
Part of Speech: Adjective
Transliteration: antitupos
Phonetic Spelling: (an-teet'-oo-pon)
Definition: struck back, corresponding to
Usage: typical of, representing by type (or pattern), corresponding to, an image.
HELPS Word-studies
499 antítypon (from 473/antí, "corresponding to" and 5179/typos, "type") – properly, an antitype which corresponds to (fulfills) a type (a predictive symbol). See 5179 /typos ("a theological type") for extended discussion.

This is quite obviously wrong. Instead, God used the ARK "to carry Noah and his family to safety". btw, 'safety' from what? Water.

The water represented DEATH by drowning. Just ask the rest of humanity in Noah's day. And animals, birds, etc.

Even the title of this thread is in error. 1 Peter 3:21 doesn't say "saved by water". It says "saved THROUGH water". The literal water didn't save anyone. The ARK saved 8 people. The literal water KILLED the rest of mankind. All of them.

Cute fantasy, but totally unbiblical.

The reason for this is clear from the verse. It isn't literal water, which has EVERYTHING to do wtih removal of dirt from the body, that saves, but the baptism of the Holy Spirit, which is a dry baptism.

The spiritual transaction is the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

John the baptizer said this about baptism:
Mark 1:8 - I baptize you with water, but he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.”

This is clearly explained in Acts 10 and 11-
10-
44While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message.
45 The circumcised believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles.

What then followed was the ritual of water baptism, which was AFTER Holy Spirit baptism.

11-
15 “As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning.
16 Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’

No, the "good conscience" is by way of the indwelling of the Holy Spirit, not by getting wet.

jb · Aug 20, 2021

Saved by Water

Click to expand...

NO!

Saved by GRACE through FAITH (and that not of ourselves, it is the GIFT of God). Eph 2v8,9, Zech 4v9, Rom 5v1,2.

mailmandan · Aug 20, 2021

FreeGrace2 said:

You made some good points.

In 1 Peter 3:21, 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). 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.

The Greek word “antitupon,” as used in I Peter 3:21, is “an adjective, used as a noun,” and denotes, in the NT, “a corresponding type,” being “said of baptism.” The circumstances of the flood, the ark and its occupants, formed a type, and baptism forms “a corresponding type.” Noah was saved by the ark “through (via) water.” Water was not the means of their salvation, but the ark. The ark is what both delivered and preserved them, the two aspects of salvation.

peldom10 · Aug 20, 2021

TMS said:

You cannot be saved if you are not baptized.

That is a new age religion teaching which has entered the Christian world since the 60's.* Isn't it telling that it was not a teaching before?

Study scripture and start with Acts 2;38. Words have meaning.

peldom10 · Aug 20, 2021

jb said:

Grace is a provision for being born again if we repent and are baptized.
Study scripture and don't depend on new age religion teachings. ....."in the end times there will be great deceptions".... this is one of them.

peldom10 · Aug 20, 2021

Kidron said:

Wrong.
Why do you avoid Acts 2;38, et al.
Baptism is required for the completion of sin cleansing.

peldom10 · Aug 20, 2021

jb said:

That does not negate the requirement of baptism....just as it does not negate the need for repentance.
That does not negate Acts 2;38, et al.
Study scripture and do not be miss led by new age religion teachings.

FreeGrace2 · Aug 20, 2021

peldom10 said:

Water saves no one.

1 Cor 10-
1 For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.
2 They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.
3 They all ate the same spiritual food
4 and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.
5 Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.

Please ask the Egyptian army how their water baptism worked out for them. Oh, and the Israelites went through the Red Sea on DRY ground. They were baptized all right. The word means an "identification". The Israelites were certainly identified with Moses, as their leader, the cloud, as their spiritual leader, and identified with God's provision of deliverance FROM the literal waters of the Red Sea.

Do you understand the difference between water baptism and Holy Spirit baptism? Mark 1:8 shows the difference.

Oh, and please ask the entire human race in Noah's day about water baptism and how that worked out for them. Noah and his family were saved FROM THE LITERAL WATER of the flood.

Better to start with the verses I've provided above. And Acts 2:38 was only specific and relevant for the Jews were were present at Christ's crucifixion.

If water baptism were necessary for salvation, Paul wouldn't have written this:

1 Cor 1:17 - For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

No evangelist would make such a claim IF water baptism was necessary for soul salvation.

All of the various water baptisms are a RITUAL which reveals an identification. No salvation.

When a person is baptized with the Holy Spirit, THAT is salvation.

peldom10 · Aug 20, 2021

FreeGrace2 said:

Water saves no one.

1 Cor 10-
1 For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.
2 They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.
3 They all ate the same spiritual food
4 and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.
5 Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.

Please ask the Egyptian army how their water baptism worked out for them. Oh, and the Israelites went through the Red Sea on DRY ground. They were baptized all right. The word means an "identification". The Israelites were certainly identified with Moses, as their leader, the cloud, as their spiritual leader, and identified with God's provision of deliverance FROM the literal waters of the Red Sea.

Do you understand the difference between water baptism and Holy Spirit baptism? Mark 1:8 shows the difference.

Oh, and please ask the entire human race in Noah's day about water baptism and how that worked out for them. Noah and his family were saved FROM THE LITERAL WATER of the flood.

Better to start with the verses I've provided above. And Acts 2:38 was only specific and relevant for the Jews were were present at Christ's crucifixion.

If water baptism were necessary for salvation, Paul wouldn't have written this:

1 Cor 1:17 - For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

No evangelist would make such a claim IF water baptism was necessary for soul salvation.

All of the various water baptisms are a RITUAL which reveals an identification. No salvation.

When a person is baptized with the Holy Spirit, THAT is salvation.

You cannot be baptized by the Holy Spirit unless you have repented of your sins and been water baptized.
Start your study with Acts 2;38.

peldom10 · Aug 20, 2021

FreeGrace2 said:

Water saves no one.

1 Cor 10-
1 For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.
2 They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.
3 They all ate the same spiritual food
4 and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.
5 Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.

Please ask the Egyptian army how their water baptism worked out for them. Oh, and the Israelites went through the Red Sea on DRY ground. They were baptized all right. The word means an "identification". The Israelites were certainly identified with Moses, as their leader, the cloud, as their spiritual leader, and identified with God's provision of deliverance FROM the literal waters of the Red Sea.

Do you understand the difference between water baptism and Holy Spirit baptism? Mark 1:8 shows the difference.

Oh, and please ask the entire human race in Noah's day about water baptism and how that worked out for them. Noah and his family were saved FROM THE LITERAL WATER of the flood.

Better to start with the verses I've provided above. And Acts 2:38 was only specific and relevant for the Jews were were present at Christ's crucifixion.

If water baptism were necessary for salvation, Paul wouldn't have written this:

1 Cor 1:17 - For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

No evangelist would make such a claim IF water baptism was necessary for soul salvation.

All of the various water baptisms are a RITUAL which reveals an identification. No salvation.

When a person is baptized with the Holy Spirit, THAT is salvation.

Don't tell me you are going to maintain that repentance isn't necessary either.

Hakawaka · Aug 20, 2021

FreeGrace2 said:

Was it now?

Did you read the very next verse, 39?

The one that mentions this promise is to you, and those who are FAR OFF, "even as many as the Lord our God shall call. " etc?

peldom10 · Aug 21, 2021

FreeGrace2 said:

Water saves no one.

1 Cor 10-
1 For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.
2 They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.
3 They all ate the same spiritual food
4 and drank the same spiritual drink; for they drank from the spiritual rock that accompanied them, and that rock was Christ.
5 Nevertheless, God was not pleased with most of them; their bodies were scattered in the wilderness.

Please ask the Egyptian army how their water baptism worked out for them. Oh, and the Israelites went through the Red Sea on DRY ground. They were baptized all right. The word means an "identification". The Israelites were certainly identified with Moses, as their leader, the cloud, as their spiritual leader, and identified with God's provision of deliverance FROM the literal waters of the Red Sea.

Do you understand the difference between water baptism and Holy Spirit baptism? Mark 1:8 shows the difference.

Oh, and please ask the entire human race in Noah's day about water baptism and how that worked out for them. Noah and his family were saved FROM THE LITERAL WATER of the flood.

Better to start with the verses I've provided above. And Acts 2:38 was only specific and relevant for the Jews were were present at Christ's crucifixion.

If water baptism were necessary for salvation, Paul wouldn't have written this:

1 Cor 1:17 - For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

No evangelist would make such a claim IF water baptism was necessary for soul salvation.

All of the various water baptisms are a RITUAL which reveals an identification. No salvation.

When a person is baptized with the Holy Spirit, THAT is salvation.

Paul's teaching has nothing to do with the requirements of baptism. We must keep elements of scripture in context. There are several, including Acts 2;38 which requires baptism to complete the sin cleansing process.
Any other teaching is changing the Bible meaning and intent and is in violation Rev 22; 18,19 as well as the same repeated in 2 other books of the Bible...that we have no authority to change the Bible meaning and if we do all the wrath of God will be on our heads.

FreeGrace2 · Aug 21, 2021

peldom10 said:

That verse doesn't teach what you are claiming. And Acts 2:38 was said to a very specific group of people. Those who were PRESENT at the crucifixion and supported it. Were you there? No. Peter wasn't addressing the entire human race. Just those people.

And read 1 Cor 1 until the truth begins to sink in about Paul's comments about water baptism.

Angela53510 · Aug 21, 2021

JBTN said:

I'm glad you have researched this out. But people who have not studied Koine Greek, or for that matter, any other language, falter in these so-called word-for-word translations. (Which are not even possible because Greek uses cases and the word order has to change in order for it to make sense in English!) my Greek teacher for 2 years was Bill Mounce, who is one of the top translators in the world, we used his material in seminary, and the second course I took online with Dr. Mounce.

The other important thing he says, is that Koine (common) Greek was a language in transition. The prepositions in particular, are very fluid. "Eis" is one that has different meanings, because it was an older word, being replaced by "en." The gloss, I would agree, is "into." But a glossary in a grammar book notes that eis is "into, in, among." Seriously, "into" is a word that is dying in English, so there is no need to pin it down as only meaning "into." Learn the Greek alphabet, then get Bauer, or BDAG, the best Greek lexicon. Then you can the full means of words. The alphabet isn't hard, and when you use it a bit, you will remember it.

Just because a translation translates a word a certain way, doesn't mean it is right. Some Bibles, like the ESV follow the "KJ tradition," meaning that the rely heavily upon an older translations. Looking it up in multiple modern translations can help to pin down the meaning. Sometimes a certain passage uses the preposition in the same way in every translation. Other times, things get more slippery. This might be a case where eis = into. I'll leave that to you to figure out. Just be careful about flatly translating. And if you are really interested in Greek, which I always was, study it, either in a class or online. You will be amazed at what you learn.

"Πέτρος δὲ [a]πρὸς αὐτούς· Μετανοήσατε, καὶ βαπτισθήτω ἕκαστος ὑμῶν ἐπὶ τῷ ὀνόματι Ἰησοῦ Χριστοῦ εἰς ἄφεσιν [c]τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν [d]ὑμῶν, καὶ λήμψεσθε τὴν δωρεὰν τοῦ ἁγίου πνεύματος·" Acts 2:38

For example:

"Peter said to them, “Repent, and each one of you be baptized[a] in the name of Jesus Christ for[c] the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." Acts 2:38 NET

The NET basically used "for" for, for eis. The NET Bible is renowned for its its 60,000 footnotes [c] is attached here. As you can see, it is much more complicated translating it, than you make it to be in your post.

"Acts 2:38 tn There is debate over the meaning of εἰς in the prepositional phrase εἰς ἄφεσιν τῶν ἁμαρτιῶν ὑμῶν (eis aphesin tōn hamartiōn humōn, “for/because of/with reference to the forgiveness of your sins”). Although a causal sense has been argued, it is difficult to maintain here. ExSyn 369-71 discusses at least four other ways of dealing with the passage: (1) The baptism referred to here is physical only, and εἰς has the meaning of “for” or “unto.” Such a view suggests that salvation is based on works—an idea that runs counter to the theology of Acts, namely: (a) repentance often precedes baptism (cf. Acts 3:19; 26:20), and (b) salvation is entirely a gift of God, not procured via water baptism (Acts 10:43 [cf. v. 47]; 13:38-39, 48; 15:11; 16:30-31; 20:21; 26:18); (2) The baptism referred to here is spiritual only. Although such a view fits well with the theology of Acts, it does not fit well with the obvious meaning of “baptism” in Acts—especially in this text (cf. 2:41); (3) The text should be repunctuated in light of the shift from second person plural to third person singular back to second person plural again. The idea then would be, “Repent for/with reference to your sins, and let each one of you be baptized…” Such a view is an acceptable way of handling εἰς, but its subtlety and awkwardness count against it; (4) Finally, it is possible that to a first-century Jewish audience (as well as to Peter), the idea of baptism might incorporate both the spiritual reality and the physical symbol. That Peter connects both closely in his thinking is clear from other passages such as Acts 10:47 and 11:15-16. If this interpretation is correct, then Acts 2:38 is saying very little about the specific theological relationship between the symbol and the reality, only that historically they were viewed together. One must look in other places for a theological analysis. For further discussion see R. N. Longenecker, “Acts,” EBC 9:283-85; B. Witherington, Acts, 154-55; F. F. Bruce, The Acts of the Apostles: The Greek Text with Introduction and Commentary, 129-30; BDAG 290 s.v. εἰς 4.f." NET

You can access all the footnotes in Biblegateway.com, for free! And if you are interested in Greek, don't rely in Concordances, but learn the alphabet and get a good quality lexicon, like Bauer, BDAG, which is what Biblical scholars use, and tax some classes!

FreeGrace2 · Aug 21, 2021

peldom10 said:

Define "repentance". There's a lot of misunderstanding going around about that word.

I'll respond to your comment after you define what you mean by it.

FreeGrace2 · Aug 21, 2021

Hakawaka said:

Jews considered Gentiles to be "far off" in relation to God. And they considered themselves as being "near". Read Eph 2 where Paul addresses that.

The promise is salvation, btw. And THAT IS to the entire human race. Titus 2:11

FreeGrace2 · Aug 21, 2021

peldom10 said:

Sin cleansing comes from faith in Christ. Read Acts 10 and 11 for the biblical perspective on baptism by the Holy Spirit and water baptism. Cornelius and family received the Holy Spirit BEFORE water baptism.

I stand for biblical truth. 1 Pet 3:21 is very clear regarding water baptism. It does NOT save. It is a symbol (ritual) that identifies the believer with Christ.

eternally-gratefull · Aug 21, 2021

mailmandan said:

You made some good points.

In 1 Peter 3:21, 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). 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.

The Greek word “antitupon,” as used in I Peter 3:21, is “an adjective, used as a noun,” and denotes, in the NT, “a corresponding type,” being “said of baptism.” The circumstances of the flood, the ark and its occupants, formed a type, and baptism forms “a corresponding type.” Noah was saved by the ark “through (via) water.” Water was not the means of their salvation, but the ark. The ark is what both delivered and preserved them, the two aspects of salvation.

amen,

Water was Gods means of destruction or Judgment, not the means of salvation.

eternally-gratefull · Aug 21, 2021

peldom10 said:

Thats not grace my freind

Thats works.

we are saved BY GRACE, through faith.

not BY faith plus baptism,

eternally-gratefull · Aug 21, 2021

peldom10 said:

We are not avoiding it. We interpret acts 2 correctly. As you should.

Saved by Water

Banned

Senior Member

Senior Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Banned

Active member

Banned

Banned

Senior Member

Banned

Banned

Banned

eternally-gratefull

Guest

eternally-gratefull

Guest

eternally-gratefull

Guest