Saved by Water

Keep telling yourself that.

What do you think of Peter's 1st and 2nd epistles?

Inspired of God, or not?

1 Peter 3:20-21
“...God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
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:”


I believe the water mentioned in 1 Peter 3:20-21 pertains to water baptism for the following reasons:

1.The water was the means God used to carry Noah and his family to safety. The sin of the world was washed away in the flood waters. The like figure or antitype is the NT water baptism. (Acts 2:38, 22:16)

2. Notice verse 21 makes specific mention of the process having nothing to do with the removal of filth from the flesh. (This is a reference to bath water) Thus, the comment points to a spiritual transaction taking place.

3. The scripture mentions that baptism is the answer of a good conscience toward God. Our own behavior, and in this particular case getting baptized, is what prompts a good conscience. The result is to be free of guilt. God is the giver of the Holy Ghost and we have no control over that other than asking for Him to give it.

4. Lastly, the scripture specifies this is only made possible by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

…
For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him. - 1 Peter 3:18-22 (NKJV)

Greetings! We can't believe the water was the means of salvation for those Adamic souls, can we? No, not at all; they were rescued from the water (flood), and the reason is stated in Genesis 6:9:

This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God. - Genesis 6:9 (NKJV)

The Hebrew language uses the term "tamin," which means "without blemish as to breed or pedigree," and this is the key to understanding this verse.

Here's some more background information, including why God sent the flood in the first place. (The fallen angels are the sons of God):

Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. And the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. So the LORD said, "I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them." But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. - Genesis 6:1-8

And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; - Jude 1:6
…
There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him. - 1 Peter 3:21-22 (NKJV)

Baptism is a type or symbol of a good conscience toward God that is by our faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (that saves us today), much as water floated the ark to save Noah and his family from the flood. We must never lose sight of the fact that only the shed blood of Jesus Christ on the Cross can cleanse us from our sins.

I am generally in agreement with you on this. I am responding to this post to add some information that I hope someone can comment on. A few years back, while studying this verse I started looking at it in the Greek manuscripts. I stumbled on something interesting in P72. In P72 the verse is written as follows ( I am transliterating as well as I can):

kai hymas antitypon nyn sozei; baptisma ou sarkos apothesis rhypou alla syneideseos agathes eperotema eis Theon di anastaseos Iesou Christou

You can see this for yourself on csntm.org. Notice the semicolon between sozei and baptisma. In Greek it is just a dot, but it sticks out like a sore thumb in the manuscript. It is my understanding that this dot is equivalent to a semicolon, and thus separates two independent clauses. If this is the case then wouldn’t the verse read something like this:

and you an antitype now saves; not the immersion of the flesh, a putting away of the filth, but the demand of a good conscience toward God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

This semicolon is also in Codex Sinaiticus.

Has anyone else noticed this?

I've not had any formal Greek training, but I have heard from several scholars that the Greeks didn't use any kind of punctuation.

I have heard that too, but if you read about Sinaiticus you will find that the punctuation in it is discussed and recognized as legitimate. The thing about P72 is the scribe made room between the words for the dot. So, it seems intentional, and this is, I believe, the oldest Greek text of 1 Peter that we have. It is interesting to me that two of the oldest manuscripts have this dot.

Without the dot we are left to decide on our own where baptism fits in the verse. Does it belong in the first part of the verse, which seems to be the way translators have done it. I have heard that it is difficult to understand and translate that way. If baptism begins a new independent clause, then the verse is not the proof text for baptismal regeneration that many people believe it is.

…
For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him. - 1 Peter 3:18-22 (NKJV)

Greetings! We can't believe the water was the means of salvation for those Adamic souls, can we? No, not at all; they were rescued from the water (flood), and the reason is stated in Genesis 6:9:

This is the genealogy of Noah. Noah was a just man, perfect in his generations. Noah walked with God. - Genesis 6:9 (NKJV)

The Hebrew language uses the term "tamin," which means "without blemish as to breed or pedigree," and this is the key to understanding this verse.

Here's some more background information, including why God sent the flood in the first place. (The fallen angels are the sons of God):

Now it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born to them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men, that they were beautiful; and they took wives for themselves of all whom they chose. And the LORD said, "My Spirit shall not strive with man forever, for he is indeed flesh; yet his days shall be one hundred and twenty years." There were giants on the earth in those days, and also afterward, when the sons of God came in to the daughters of men and they bore children to them. Those were the mighty men who were of old, men of renown. Then the LORD saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every intent of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually. And the LORD was sorry that He had made man on the earth, and He was grieved in His heart. So the LORD said, "I will destroy man whom I have created from the face of the earth, both man and beast, creeping thing and birds of the air, for I am sorry that I have made them." But Noah found grace in the eyes of the LORD. - Genesis 6:1-8

And the angels who did not keep their proper domain, but left their own abode, He has reserved in everlasting chains under darkness for the judgment of the great day; - Jude 1:6
…
There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, who has gone into heaven and is at the right hand of God, angels and authorities and powers having been made subject to Him. - 1 Peter 3:21-22 (NKJV)

Baptism is a type or symbol of a good conscience toward God that is by our faith in the resurrection of Jesus Christ (that saves us today), much as water floated the ark to save Noah and his family from the flood. We must never lose sight of the fact that only the shed blood of Jesus Christ on the Cross can cleanse us from our sins.

FreeGrace2 said:
j1 Pet 3:21 isn't about literal water, but what literal water SYMBOLIZES, which is the baptism (by the Holy Sprit) that does save.

What Peter wrote is quite clear. It isn't "that water" (from v.20, being flood water, or literal water) that saves.

If water saves, then Jesus doesn't. It isn't Jesus AND water. It's Jesus. Period.

Paul's answer to the jailer was very clear. Believe on the Lord Jesus and you will be saved.

If you are here to "primarily give rather than receive," I find it to be incredibly curious that when asked of you to "give," you refuse to do so.

What you're not seeing is that being immersed in water is the only real way that someone can properly identify themselves with the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Can you think of another way to symbolize burial with Christ than to be immersed in water and coming out of the grave than coming up out of the water?

If you can, then that might be a valid way to confess Jesus in identification with His death, burial, and resurrection.

Otherwise, you need to confess Him properly by being baptized in Jesus' Name.

Of course it is not the water that saves; but it is the symbol of being identified with Christ in his death, burial, and resurrection (the confession of Jesus before men) that will do the saving in the life of the person who submits to the ordinance in Jesus' Name.

I disagree. The saving is done through faith in Christ. Eph 2:8, Acts 16:31

Where have I refused to give?

I had said all that I had to say on the subject of the thread that you had invited me to, in the thread previous to it in which you invited me to the new thread. I had nothing further to say on the matter and other people had also covered my point of view in the newer thread.

If we confess Jesus before men, He will also confess us before His Father and before the angels of God (Matthew 10:32, Luke 12:8).

Remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Ghost is absolutely promised to those who fulfill the condition of the promise in Acts 2:38-39) (i.e. "repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth for the remission of sins").

I suppose that you can also receive these things through faith alone.

However, for some, a point of contact is needed by which a person can operate their faith.

Baptism in Jesus' Name is one such point of contact; for there is an absolute promise that is given in Acts 2:38-39, that if someone fulfills the condition of the promise, the promise will absolutely be given.

The fact that those who have not fulfilled that condition so often disagree with those who have as concerning doctrine, indicates to me that perhaps those who have not fulfilled the condition of the promise have also not received the promise. For Jesus promised us that the Holy Spirit would "guide us into all truth" (John 14:26, John 16:13).

Therefore, those who have been given the Holy Ghost are not generally going to disagree as concerning "what is truth?".

Acts 2:37,38 isn't applicable to anyone today.

I disagree. There are many Bible scholars among evangelicals who disagree on a wide range of issues.

Acts 2:38-39 is applicable to all those who fulfill the condition of the promise written therein. Those who do so will absolutely receive the promise.

I believe that you are referring to scholars who have not been baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.

FreeGrace2 said:
Acts 2:37,38 isn't applicable to anyone today.

Only those present when Peter spoke to them. That was a special crowd. They witnessed the miracles of Jesus personally. Have you done that? I mean you saw Jesus perform miracles? No, you haven't. That verse doesn't apply to you. Period.

FreeGrace2 said:
I disagree. There are many Bible scholars among evangelicals who disagree on a wide range of issues.

Why do you discount the very words of Jesus in Matt 28:20?

And Acts 2:38 doesn't apply to ANY scholar, since none of them personally witnessed Jesus performing miracles.

Those who fail to realize the key issue about Acts 2:38 will fail to understand why it doesn't apply to anyone other than those present to whom Peter spoke.

I think that we will have to agree to disagree here...

And my faith will stand as a testimony and as the substance of the things that I hope for and the evidence of that which you do not see (Hebrews 11:1)...

You can try to undermine that faith...nevertheless it stands as a testimony to you that what I am saying is true.

I know that every time that I have applied water to my body as a point of contact for the remission of sins, that the Lord did a work in my heart to bring me that much closer to victory over besetting sins.

God truly used baptism in Jesus' Name in order to bring about the remission of sins in my life.

Here is a testimony that I think that you cannot deny...

Eze 36:25, Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
Eze 36:26, A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
Eze 36:27, And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Yes, you are. But realize, please, that the crowd that Peter was speaking to was unique. They actually witnessed miracles of Jesus and yet participated in putting Him on the cross.

Yes, yes, I know that everyone's sins contributed to putting Him on the cross. Got it.

However, this crowd was unique as sinners because they HAD witnessed the miracles of Jesus, directly with their own eyeballs.

Who else after that could say that?

I'm not trying to undermine anyone's faith. How ridiculous. I AM, however, showing the truth of the matter, which you are free to reject, since God has given mankind the freedom to do so.

So how many times have you baptized yourself?? And where do you find this taught in the Bible.

Water baptism is a ritual, a symbol of the baptism that DOTH save. It is applied ONCE.

So, what "application of water to your body for remission of sins" is taught in Scripture.

This is a totally NEW notion for me.

Do you have any idea what is being said here? If so, please exegete each verse.

Thanks.