Baptism by Fire

[zone]

Oh right Zone you started this thread. Is that what you mean leave it be?

I never meant "you" cant handle the Word of God ...but to take a verse that says He will babtise you with the Holyspirt and fire....and break it up and say.. babtism of fire ...then examine it, isnt right. I never had an issue with your understanding or belief on the text..id have to reread what ive written but i dont think i ever talked againt that...becuase the main parts of it are true.

i understand Abiding. and i have tried NOT to separate the word from its context, but only to expand the context; to examine similar and parallel passages, and patterns seen in God's dealings with men.

also offered were studies by others (modern and historical) who have also considered the passage. i think we all agree that there is no univerally accepted interpretation in the church: that was one of my points.

no, i didn't mean leave the thread be, i meant only to respond to and agree with what you said:...

Well neither of them can find their ideas in these verses. So leave the verses as they are.

...while still holding to my personal conviction that the verses do suggest something specific.

this isn't essential to salvation, and unlikely to find a resolution at CC.
i see the baptism with fire as judgment (not necessarily unto damnation, just as a symbol of judgment)
ok?
love zone.

 

[Abiding]

That is just it. The greeks did not use the word "baptizo" to mean dieing, or even symbolize buried and resurrected again. This aspect is only given to Christian water baptism as a whole as a symbol to Christ. (Baptize with water). In fact it is not even in any Greek definition of the word. It is only found in the modern English definition of a word which is not even native to the English language. And technically only refers to christian water baptism. Thus we should not interpret the word every time we see it in this English interpretation. But use the Greek. For when the NT writers wrote it. the English definition did not even exist yet.

It doesnt matter what the greeks used the word for, it still has a meaning in fully immersing.

The bible takes the word at its value not its historical usage, but its meaning.

It doesnt have to have the meaning of dieing or any other meaning but babtized.

Romans 6:3-5 Know ye not that so many of us were babtized into Jesus Christ were babtized into His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by babtism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted togather in the likeness of His death, we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection

Col2:11-13 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumsion of Christ. Buried with Him in babtism, 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 togather with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses.

 

[zone]

It doesnt matter what the greeks used the word for, it still has a meaning in fully immersing.

The bible takes the word at its value not its historical usage, but its meaning.

It doesnt have to have the meaning of dieing or any other meaning but babtized.

Romans 6:3-5 Know ye not that so many of us were babtized into Jesus Christ were babtized into His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by babtism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted togather in the likeness of His death, we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection

Col2:11-13 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumsion of Christ. Buried with Him in babtism, 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 togather with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses.

Hi Abiding:
so, this confirms the idea of full immersion then.

in odorder tol hold to the position that the Holy Spirit and Fire are part of the ONE single baptism, this means that all believers are baptised with The Holy Spirit and with fire, this when they receive saving faith.

wherei struggle with this a little is tha there are no corresponding passages that clearly say this: baptism itself, whether water or Spirit are mentioned many times, but fire just this once.

the other thing that i have trouble with is that The Pharisees (who Luke told us rejected John's baptism) seem to have been included in those who would be baptised with The Holy Spirit and with fire.

interesting - i'm going to go back and read from the beginning ....i think someone posted on the Sinai signs (the rushing wind, fire, etc...i wonder)
z

 

[Abiding]

i understand Abiding. and i have tried NOT to separate the word from its context, but only to expand the context; to examine similar and parallel passages, and patterns seen in God's dealings with men.

also offered were studies by others (modern and historical) who have also considered the passage. i think we all agree that there is no univerally accepted interpretation in the church: that was one of my points.

no, i didn't mean leave the thread be, i meant only to respond to and agree with what you said:...



...while still holding to my personal conviction that the verses do suggest something specific.

this isn't essential to salvation, and unlikely to find a resolution at CC.
i see the baptism with fire as judgment (not necessarily unto damnation, just as a symbol of judgment)
ok?
love zone.

Cool thanks for letting me stay. sure fire is used in both judgement and in cleansing..blah blah...anyway know im soo thankfull for your labor here in the way you present things. dont think i dont honor your work and testimony or ill cry

 

[Abiding]

Hi Abiding:
so, this confirms the idea of full immersion then.

in odorder tol hold to the position that the Holy Spirit and Fire are part of the ONE single baptism, this means that all believers are baptised with The Holy Spirit and with fire, this when they receive saving faith.

wherei struggle with this a little is tha there are no corresponding passages that clearly say this: baptism itself, whether water or Spirit are mentioned many times, but fire just this once.

the other thing that i have trouble with is that The Pharisees (who Luke told us rejected John's baptism) seem to have been included in those who would be baptised with The Holy Spirit and with fire.

interesting - i'm going to go back and read from the beginning ....i think someone posted on the Sinai signs (the rushing wind, fire, etc...i wonder)
z

I wasnt making an issue of the full immersion but that is what babtizo is and id hate to get a sprinkling of salvation or half saved or drowned...haha its just a symbol and babtism is just a term.

Im not saying you guys are wrong either i was getiing ticked a bit at the lack of sharing and the verse disection...Heres my take....whether or not it belongs in this text or no...we are cleansed, washed, and regenerated with the washing of the word by the Holyspirit. We are also purified by fire in trials which also cleanses us by the Holyspirit.

 

[Abiding]

Ill bring it up again the Pharisees were there and being talked to but they were not the only ones there nor was that even only for them.

Also i see it obviously possible to be two statements. related as they were but not melted togather.

I also dont think this babtism represents something that happens at the new birth. Yes it would be in the sense of our standing and our walk by faith. But there will be a working on our state, which if it doesnt continue to be a reality in deed then the seed took no root. Neither water or fire would be necessary for a standing on the finished work of Christ without a operation of grace to conform us to His image.

 

[Abiding]

I think the tabernacle is another picture first in the door is fire and sacrifice(rom12:2)...then washing in laver(eph 5:26)...then ..... you all knew that

 

[Nalu]

I already did this. The days of Penticost shows it by a sign to represent the work...which is not immediate, so give the high fives back

I just saw this post, too funny Abiding, but....I cannot retract the high fives lol.

 

[Grandpa]

I think this baptism by the Holy Spirit and fire occurs simultaneously. Let me try to explain. When you are immersed in the HS your old nature starts to get burned away like chaff. So in effect the Holy Spirit is the fire. But also the fire is trials that you endure or come into. I see the fire as purification in this sense. So the Holy Spirit and the fire are both purifying. Doesn't the word baptism seem to carry this connotation (purification) as well as immersion?

Plus I just have a hard time with the picture image of Jesus in the lake of fire baptizing people. It just doesn't work, imho.

 

[zone]

Cool thanks for letting me stay. sure fire is used in both judgement and in cleansing..blah blah...anyway know im soo thankfull for your labor here in the way you present things. dont think i dont honor your work and testimony or ill cry

haha.
you're funny.

 

[WordGaurdian]

THE BAPTISM OF JESUS:

1) The Lord was baptised with the HOLY SPIRIT at the Jordan (John saw the dove as a sign).

Yes read that one in the Bible...also saw in acts where it happened to the disciples and Peter at the house of cornelius. So yes. That one I see.

2) The Lord was baptised by John in WATER in the Jordan.

Do also agree that this happened both to Jesus and the disciples.

3) The Lord was baptised with FIRE:

Haven't seen this in the Bible... where did that happened... with Jesus? And how does it relate to 1 John 5?

 

[Abiding]

Ok im outnumbered...i lose...not surprised. thanks for all the fun though

 

[eternally-gratefull]

It doesnt matter what the greeks used the word for, it still has a meaning in fully immersing.

The bible takes the word at its value not its historical usage, but its meaning.

Hey Bro. One of the major means of proper hermeneutics is historical perspective. How would the original reader interpret the word. Romans was written to the church in tome. Corinthians to the church in Corinth. All greek speaking peoples. They would have interpreted it they way they knew it. One must also interpret it the way they would have. The word gets its meaning by its historical usage. Just like you would interpret a passage as the people a passage was written to would have interpreted it in their time period. Language changes, and so does tradition and culture. We can't use todays traditions and culture or language to interpret things written 2000 years ago. They would most likely not be the same. And doing so would lead to misinterpretation.

It doesnt have to have the meaning of dieing or any other meaning but babtized.

Romans 6:3-5 Know ye not that so many of us were babtized into Jesus Christ were babtized into His death? Therefore we are buried with Him by babtism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted togather in the likeness of His death, we shall be also in the likeness of His resurrection

Col2:11-13 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh, by the circumsion of Christ. Buried with Him in babtism, 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 togather with Him, having forgiven you all trespasses.

If we take both of these passages, And interpret the same way we interpret thay saying that the children of Israel were Baptized into moses. We would interpret them to mean we were baptized into the literal death and burial of Christ, and the body of Christ. In other words. It is as if we died with Christ and were buried with him. One day we will be raised as he was raised. Since christ died and was buried, and this paid for our sin, And we were baptized into this death and Burial. It is like we experienced this death and burial with him. Since we died and were buried with him, We are cleansed by his death. Since we are buried with him, We will be raised just as he was raised.

As for the body. We are all placed into vital union with Christ. As the children of Israel were placed in vital union with Moses. Christ is our head, as Moses was their head. I did like it when you said baptism is complete immersion. I agree. We are not placed partway into the body of Christ as Paul said. We are placed all the way in. And then scripture says we are sealed by the spirit in that body. I would not want to be "bapto'd" or dipped in the body either.

Alot of people see the word Baptize and always assume water is involved. This is a major hermeneutical mistake. Most likely caused by not interpreting the word in its historical perspective.

does this make sense?

 

[AnandaHya]

lol look at the poll Abiding and you might rethink that sometimes people just don't post.

 

[zone]

THE BAPTISM OF JESUS:

1) The Lord was baptised with the HOLY SPIRIT at the Jordan (John saw the dove as a sign).

Yes read that one in the Bible...also saw in acts where it happened to the disciples and Peter at the house of cornelius. So yes. That one I see.

2) The Lord was baptised by John in WATER in the Jordan.

Do also agree that this happened both to Jesus and the disciples.

3) The Lord was baptised with FIRE:

Haven't seen this in the Bible... where did that happened... with Jesus? And how does it relate to 1 John 5?

it doesn't say He was baptised with fire: that's the point.

and i realize we can't base the christian's experience on The Lord's, but i wondered if there was a clue per the OP.

since Jesus was baptised both by John (water) and by The Holy Spirit (John saw the dove), in keeping with Matthew 3:11:

Matthew 3:11
"I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

.....i wondered if we would see Him also baptised with fire.

perhaps this examination could be better applied to all the people mentioned in scripture who repent, and are baptised: does it say they are also baptised with fire?

 

[Abiding]

it doesn't say He was baptised with fire: that's the point.

and i realize we can't base the christian's experience on The Lord's, but i wondered if there was a clue per the OP.

since Jesus was baptised both by John (water) and by The Holy Spirit (John saw the dove), in keeping with Matthew 3:11:

Matthew 3:11
"I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me will come one who is more powerful than I, whose sandals I am not fit to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and with fire.

.....i wondered if we would see Him also baptised with fire.

perhaps this examination could be better applied to all the people mentioned in scripture who repent, and are baptised: does it say they are also baptised with fire?[/quote




this is nothing i gave any thought to but the figure Jesus went through for a death and ressurection in babtism would not need purifying, He had not sin, He carried the penalty of our sin. He suffered to learn obedience but if there would have been a need for cleansing He wouldnt have qualified as Messiah.

 

[zone]

this is nothing i gave any thought to but the figure Jesus went through for a death and ressurection in babtism would not need purifying, He had not sin, He carried the penalty of our sin. He suffered to learn obedience but if there would have been a need for cleansing He wouldnt have qualified as Messiah.

hi Abiding:

but you may be superimposing the presupposition of "purification" on this text.

JESUS did suffer GOD'S WRATH (Judgment) on our behalf.

the same Wrath and Judgment unrepentent men will suffer: ultimately that unquenchable fire John mentioned.

zone.

 

[Abiding]

hi Abiding:

but you may be superimposing the presupposition of "purification" on this text.

JESUS did suffer GOD'S WRATH (Judgment) on our behalf.

the same Wrath and Judgment unrepentent men will suffer: ultimately that unquenchable fire John mentioned.

zone.

Yup He sure did, He suffered wrath but not purification, it wasnt my logic that needed Him to need a verse saying He was babtised in fire anyway...this is way far out from the text for me...so ill leave it with the bigger brains

 

[zone]

Yup He sure did, He suffered wrath but not purification, it wasnt my logic that needed Him to need a verse saying He was babtised in fire anyway...this is way far out from the text for me...so ill leave it with the bigger brains

1) the text hasn't been changed, it's still exactly where it was before: in place in matthew, and still says exactly what it did before.

2) i don't need Jesus to have been baptised with fire (or any christian)...so that's not my logic.

3) if i'm not mistaken, purification was your word there, i just wanted to confirm your observation that purification was not what happened At Calvary.

4) do we have different sized brains?

 

[Abiding]

1) the text hasn't been changed, it's still exactly where it was before: in place in matthew, and still says exactly what it did before.

2) i don't need Jesus to have been baptised with fire (or any christian)...so that's not my logic.

3) if i'm not mistaken, purification was your word there, i just wanted to confirm your observation that purification was not what happened At Calvary.

4) do we have different sized brains?

pffft...well ill put it this way miss yoda..yours causes a total eclipse...is that picture you trying to find mine on the floor in the dust with your fancy flashlite?