Baptism

[gdemoss]

Becoming a Christian THEN growing as one has continued to give me insight! Listening to dog fights about doctrines has taught me much. Thank you to all who participate in the discussion.

[thereselittleflower]

 

 

May I suggest that the whole passage be provided when quoting scripture, in its full context, and not just a partial verse.  Anyone can snip here, take a few word there and pates it all together to make a false teaching sound legit.  I have seen a lot of this lately, which is why I usually stay out of a discussion.

 

Let scripture speak for itself.

Scripture has been shown to eliminate the roman doctrines from truth - the roman doctrines are opposed to Scripture, as MorningGlory, Shiloh, a few others, and myself have posted to oppose the anti-scripture catholic doctrine that has been posted.  

As noted by MorningGlory earlier in one of the threads, we recognize heresy and reject it,  but the ones supporting heresy ignore what Scripture says and post instead and often in very long posts the errors of catholicism as if to promote catholicism,

instead of

accepting Scripture for Scripture.

And as you

said yourself long ago >

"What I am personally against is the doctrinal teachings that go against scripture. no matter what denomination it is. Most of the people who attend church in my area, from what I can gather from the conversations I have had with them, side more with doctrinal statements then scripture. They have not held these doctrines up to scripture to see for themselves if they are truth or not."

 

We have no way that I know of to stop or to shorten the posts that support the heresy, and it does no good as seen for the last few weeks to post the Scripture that refutes it.   Instead of the Scripture being accepted,   more heresy from catholicism is posted , again, often verbose ("a million" of words as MorningGlory put it) ...

re doctrine vs heresy and 'million words' >>

 

 

It looks like you think I am speaking to you.  I am speaking to everyone who reads my post.  If I wanted to address a specific person, I would quote their post and use their name.  Notice that I did neither in my post.

 

Shalom

 

 

 

Well I did think perhaps you were as I haven't been paying attention to anyone else doing so.    No offense taken and I hope no offense given.

 

God bless.

[Guest shiloh357]

Sorry littleflower, but I am not using eisogesis at all. 

 

Your view is very Catholic, but it is not Christian.

 

First of all, if you understood exegesis, you would pay attention to context in I Peter. 3:21.   Peter compares the flood waters with the waters of baptism.  The flood waters were not the means of salvation for Noah and his family.   The flood waters were the means of judgment.  They were saved through and from the water by the ark.  The ark represents or is a type of Jesus.  The flood waters offered no salvation whatsoever.

 

"Baptism saves you"  needs to be understood in the context of the entire passage.  Simply ripping those three words and forcing them to mean that baptism is salvific is where the eisogesis comes from.  Peter is not saying that water  baptism is the means by which we procure salvation.  Paul never teaches that either.  The waters of baptism also represent the judgment of God on sin, and our death to the old self and the resurrection of the new, born again person.   Apart from the resurrection of Jesus, Baptism has no theological significance.  If you have not already been born again, baptism is a meaningless act.  

 

We are saved by baptism the same as Noah and his family were saved by or through the waters of the flood.   Just as their salvation through water was be means of an ark of safety, likewise we are saved from the judgment of God by faith in Christ alone.

 

Eph. 2:8-9 says that we are saved by grace trough faith alone in Jesus Christ, apart from any works.  No passage in the epistles that mention how a person is saved indicate that baptism is necessary for salvation

 

If a person is trusting in baptism for salvation, he is a not a Christian, not an authentic follower of Jesus.

[exrockstar]

 

Does salvation depend on Baptism?  Put another way, is baptism required for salvation?  The answer is, "no."   Baptism is not required for salvation.   Salvation is Jesus plus, nothing. 

 

One verse used is I Peter. 3:21 where Peter says, "Baptism doth  now save you."   Peter is talking about the moment a person comes to the baptismal waters seeking salvation though faith in Jesus Christ.   "Baptism saves you"  is just a shorthand way of saying, "God saves you in and through the act of baptism which is the outward expression of the twin facts that  God regenerates you by his Spirit and on the basis of the atoning, finished work of Christ on the cross and that you now come committing yourself in repentance and faith"  It should never be used to support a doctrine that baptism is necessary for salvation. 

 

(IVP NT Commentary)

 

The words of Jesus:

 

"He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved"

 

Mark 16:16

The words of Peter:

 

Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

 

Acts 2:38

 

Obviously Mark 16 is a different moment in time. In full it says "16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”"

 

So by all means handle snakes and drink poison.

 

In all seriousness, baptism is symbolic. The baptism that John the baptist did ("They kingdom of God is at hand") is not the same baptism in Acts. Keep note that Paul has not come around at these moments in time.

1 Peter 3:21 - Paul refers to a baptism as a "pledge of a clear conscience toward God..." But the clear conscious is really for the individual to . Sometimes, we as Christians, don't think

about a time when individuals did not have access to God. Jews had to go to a High Priest. It is a big deal when we read the apostles mention anything in regards to access to God. The ability to make the pledge was due to Christ dying on the cross and being your mediator (salvation). Baptism has nothing to do with salvation.

 

- Rev

[thereselittleflower]

 

 

Does salvation depend on Baptism?  Put another way, is baptism required for salvation?  The answer is, "no."   Baptism is not required for salvation.   Salvation is Jesus plus, nothing. 

 

One verse used is I Peter. 3:21 where Peter says, "Baptism doth  now save you."   Peter is talking about the moment a person comes to the baptismal waters seeking salvation though faith in Jesus Christ.   "Baptism saves you"  is just a shorthand way of saying, "God saves you in and through the act of baptism which is the outward expression of the twin facts that  God regenerates you by his Spirit and on the basis of the atoning, finished work of Christ on the cross and that you now come committing yourself in repentance and faith"  It should never be used to support a doctrine that baptism is necessary for salvation. 

 

(IVP NT Commentary)

 

The words of Jesus:

 

"He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved"

 

Mark 16:16

The words of Peter:

 

Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. And you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

 

Acts 2:38

 

Obviously Mark 16 is a different moment in time. In full it says "16 Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned. 17 And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues; 18 they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well.”"

 

So by all means handle snakes and drink poison.

 

In all seriousness, baptism is symbolic. The baptism that John the baptist did ("They kingdom of God is at hand") is not the same baptism in Acts. Keep note that Paul has not come around at these moments in time.

1 Peter 3:21 - Paul refers to a baptism as a "pledge of a clear conscience toward God..." But the clear conscious is really for the individual to . Sometimes, we as Christians, don't think

about a time when individuals did not have access to God. Jews had to go to a High Priest. It is a big deal when we read the apostles mention anything in regards to access to God. The ability to make the pledge was due to Christ dying on the cross and being your mediator (salvation). Baptism has nothing to do with salvation.

 

- Rev

 

 

 

 

The word "pledge" above from your translation of the bible is also translated   "question" "appeal"   and translates the word eperōtēma  which means:

 

1. an enquiry, a question

2. a demand

3. earnestly seeking

   1. craving, an intense desire

 

 

This is an action towards God that is performed in the act of Baptism.  

 

With the act of Baptism one is earnestly seeking with an intense desire a clear conscience before God.      

 

This does not suggest that baptism is a mere symbol, but an act performed with an end in mind: the earnestly seeking with an intense desire for a clear conscience before God in and through the act of Baptism.  

 

Peter brings this understanding home when he further ties this seeking through baptism to the resurrection of Jesus as does Paul when he ties the death and resurrection of Jesus to baptism:

 

 

Colossians 2:12

 

having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

 

 

Paul and Peter are saying the same thing.

 

Paul says  "having been buried with him in baptism"    using the passive voice in "buried"  - synthaptō  - which means:

 

to bury together with

 

The passive voice means it is not something we do, but something done to us, we are the recipients.    

 

So Paul is saying here that when we go through baptism, God does something to us  -   He buries us with Christ.

 

And Paul then says  "in which [baptism] you were also raised up with Him"   - again using the passive voice in  "raised up with" -  synegeirō - which means:

 

1. to raise together, to cause to raise together

2. to raise up together from mortal death to a new and blessed life dedicated to God

 

Again, the passive voice means it is not something we do, but something done to us, we are the recipients.

 

So Paul is saying here that when we go through baptism, God does something to us again -  He raises us with Christ.

 

It is not enough to simply be buried with Christ.   We must also be raised with Him, both of which God does to us through the act of baptism,  for Peter's words to be true  when he tells us   "baptism now saves us" through which we appeal to God, earnestly seeking "a clear conscience toward God, by the resurrrection of Jesus Christ."

 

Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

 

 

In both passages baptism, our action towards God in our appeal to God for a clear conscience,  is intricately and intimately linked with God's response -  Gods action towards us - burying us with Christ and then raising us with Christ.    

 

Bringing this even more home, we look at what is contained in the previous verse, which Peter refers to by saying  "which corresponds to this" - what is the  "this" ?   The water of the Great Flood :

 

   1Pe 3:20  

 

Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

 

These eight souls were saved by water.

 

This Peter points to the water of the flood of Noah as a 'typ'e and 'shadow' of Baptism, which is the 'anti type', the fulfillment of the 'type.'

 

An anti type is not less real or effective than the type which forshadowed it.   It is more real, it is more effective.   It is the reality,

 

Just as the family of Noah was actually and truly saved through the water, so are we actually and truly saved through the water of baptism as we reach out to God through this act earnestly seeking for a clear conscience towards God,  and God responds in burying and raising us with Christ, through the resurrection of Christ.

 

There is actually nothing that points to baptism being a mere symbol here, but rather that it is an act in which both we and God are participants,  through which we appeal in faith to God for a clear conscience, and  through which God responds to our earnest plea, by granting this appeal through the death and resurrection of Christ, by burying and rising us with Christ.

[RustyAngeL]

Water baptism is a religious ritual that is not needed. To be saved, one must have faith that Jesus is Lord and God in the flesh. Romans 10:9.

 

In my honest opinion, it's very rare for a child to do this until they reach adulthood. But I'm not one to judge so...

I was 15 when I came to the Lord and was baptized shortly after.  Do you taught them what it means to be baptized, do they understand that it means they accept Jesus as Savior and Lord.  I see nothing wrong with it so long as they know what it means.  No baptisem does not save you but it is something we do when we follow Jesus.

[Guest shiloh357]

The water did not save Noah and his family.   The water was God's judgment, not God's salvation.    "Eight souls saved by water"  is better understood as "through water."    They were saved by through the water, but it was the Ark, not the water, which saved them.

 

The water of baptism is not the means of salvation, and Peter is not saying it is.   It would completely contradict the flood analogy given that the flood was God's judgment on the earth,  not His salvation of Noah and his family.

 

So Peter is not saying that baptism in the water saves us.   The word "baptism"  is not originally a theological word in Greek.  Baptism simply means "immersion."   If I put dirty dishes in a sink of hot soapy water,  I have "baptized"  my dishes.   If I dunk a cookie in milk, I have "baptized" the cookie.   If I put a small  box inside another bigger box, I have baptized that smaller box.

 

Noah and his family were baptized in the ark, the way we are baptized into Jesus by the Holy Spirit according to Romans 6: 3-4.   There is more than one kind of baptism.  We are spiritually baptized into Jesus at the moment we are saved.   We are placed in Christ.   Some people only think of baptism sacramentally, but that is not how the Bible presents it.

 

So Peter is not saying that water baptism saves you.  It is spiritual baptism into Christ that saves you through Christ's resurrection.  This follows your commitment to Christ, coming to him in repentance and faith.   It is faith in Christ that saves you not the washing off of dirt from your body that saves you.  The Ark was built as a means of salvation to save Noah and his family from the judgment to come, namely the flood that would destroy the ungodly.

 

Water baptism is simply a symbolic testimony that we have died to the old self, which is buried and gone and are risen with Christ to walk in the newness of life.

[other one]

well, my pastor even swished me around a bit when he dunked me......   thought I might need the extra cleaning cycle....

[thereselittleflower]

well, my pastor even swished me around a bit when he dunked me......   thought I might need the extra cleaning cycle....

 

lol

[thereselittleflower]

The water did not save Noah and his family.   The water was God's judgment, not God's salvation.    "Eight souls saved by water"  is better understood as "through water."    They were saved by through the water, but it was the Ark, not the water, which saved them.

 

The water of baptism is not the means of salvation, and Peter is not saying it is.   It would completely contradict the flood analogy given that the flood was God's judgment on the earth,  not His salvation of Noah and his family.

 

So Peter is not saying that baptism in the water saves us.   The word "baptism"  is not originally a theological word in Greek.  Baptism simply means "immersion."   If I put dirty dishes in a sink of hot soapy water,  I have "baptized"  my dishes.   If I dunk a cookie in milk, I have "baptized" the cookie.   If I put a small  box inside another bigger box, I have baptized that smaller box.

 

Noah and his family were baptized in the ark, the way we are baptized into Jesus by the Holy Spirit according to Romans 6: 3-4.   There is more than one kind of baptism.  We are spiritually baptized into Jesus at the moment we are saved.   We are placed in Christ.   Some people only think of baptism sacramentally, but that is not how the Bible presents it.

 

So Peter is not saying that water baptism saves you.  It is spiritual baptism into Christ that saves you through Christ's resurrection.  This follows your commitment to Christ, coming to him in repentance and faith.   It is faith in Christ that saves you not the washing off of dirt from your body that saves you.  The Ark was built as a means of salvation to save Noah and his family from the judgment to come, namely the flood that would destroy the ungodly.

 

Water baptism is simply a symbolic testimony that we have died to the old self, which is buried and gone and are risen with Christ to walk in the newness of life.

 

 

I guess Peter didn't know what he was talking about then, because the Greek is very clear.    Finding ways around what the Greek reveal as to what Peter was actually saying doesn't change what he actually said.

 

Additionally, this is what the early christians believed.   

 

Irenaeus (120?-200), “'And dipped himself,' says [the Scripture], 'seven times in Jordan.' It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but it served as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions; being spiritually regenerated as new-born babes, even as the Lord has declared: 'Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.'" (Fragment, 34, A.D. 190).

 

 

 

Origen (185-254), "The Church received from the Apostles the tradition of giving Baptism even to infants. For the Apostles, to whom were committed the secrets of divine mysteries, knew that there is in everyone the innate stains of sins, which must be washed away through water and the Spirit." (Origen, Commentary on Romans, 5:9)

 

 

Tertullian (155-220), “When, however, the prescript is laid down that 'without baptism, salvation is attainable by none" (chiefly on the ground of that declaration of the Lord, who says, "Unless one be born of water, he hath not life.'" (On Baptism, 12:1, A.D. 203).