Baptism

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

Jesus's words are pretty clear to me in john 3:5 that you need to be born again by water and the spirit.

The rejection of salvation through baptism is a new teaching. And is not held by most Christians.

[Guest shiloh357]

Jesus's words are pretty clear to me in john 3:5 that you need to be born again by water and the spirit.

The rejection of salvation through baptism is a new teaching. And is not held by most Christians.

The notion that Jesus, in John 3:5 was referencing christian baptism violates historical propriety.   Christian baptism, as we know it,  didn't exist during Jesus' ministry  You  are trying to read Christian baptism into John 3:5.  Washing with water is an image the Bible uses in connection with the new birth.  It has nothing to do with baptism (Ezek. 36:26-27, Tit. 3:5).

 

If Baptism were required for salvation, it would be directly and explicitly mentioned in every passage dealing with how we are saved, but it's not the case.   Just because a teaching is older, doesn't make it more true.  To argue that a teaching is true because it is older, is a logical fallacy.

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

To say that the Churh taught error for 1800 years goes against Christ teaching. Jesus said that the gates of hell would not prevail. So for 1800 years of believing salvation through baptism you would have to say using your point of view that there was no salvation.

And john 3:5 is very explicit and directly from Christ himself

[Guest shiloh357]

To say that the Churh taught error for 1800 years goes against Christ teaching. Jesus said that the gates of hell would not prevail. So for 1800 years of believing salvation through baptism you would have to say using your point of view that there was no salvation.

And john 3:5 is very explicit and directly from Christ himself

the Church has taught error for 1800 years.  And it has been the Church that went against Christ's teaching.   Jesus proclamation that the gates of hell would not prevail against it doesn't provide the Church with the mantle of infallibility.

 

John 3:5 is NOT an explcit reference to baptism at all.  YOU are assigning that value to it. 

 

For a long time, "the Church" kept people dumb and illiterate, and told them that they had to pay for people to leave purgatory, called on to people venerate dead saints, persecuted and murdered Jews, and in some cases, popes murdered their own way into office.

 

So I don't put too much faith in the "Church" as the standard by which we interpret Scripture.

[Guest Judas Machabeus]

Liturgical Protestants believe the same thing regarding salvation through baptism. My mother is Lutheran and showed me her Sunday school booms and I checked the Anglican Catechism and they believe the same thing.

I'm not sure about the other denominations so I don't want to speculate. As for your allegation regarding the Catholic church that's just a typical red herring response. It has nothing to do with the topic being discussed.

It's not a one or the other. It's a both and. Let me explain:

You can baptize a non believer and all that will happen is they get wet. So I'm not discounting the need to believe. But it's through baptism that we are untied with Christ's body.

As for the claim I am assigning baptism to john 3:5. Jesus went to the river Jordan and was baptized with WATER and the Holy SPIRIT descended upon him. Than Jesus says that to enter into the kingdom of heaven you need to be born again by water and spirit.

1 Peter 3:21 also spells it out that baptism now saves you.

[Guest shiloh357]

But it's through baptism that we are untied with Christ's body.

 

More correctly is the baptism in the Holy Spirit that we are baptized into one body (I Cor. 12:13)   Water baptism doesn't unite us with the body.   There is more than one kind of baptism mentioned in the New Testament so you need to study which baptism is being referenced before assuming it is referencing water baptism.

 

 

As for the claim I am assigning baptism to john 3:5. Jesus went to the river Jordan and was baptized with WATER and the Holy SPIRIT descended upon him. Than Jesus says that to enter into the kingdom of heaven you need to be born again by water and spirit.

 

That is bad hermeneutics.  You are mixing contexts.   Jesus was not talking about baptism.  Furthermore, Jesus wasn't born again at the Jordan River.  You are making a fallacious comparison

 

I Pet. 3:21....  Again, you are misapplying that verse.   Peter is making an allusion to Noah's flood.  The water didn't save Noah and His family; the ark saved them.  The flood water was the result of judgment.   Without the ark Noah and his family would have been drowned.

 

Peter is making clear that he is not referring to physical water in v. 21.  He is making a spiritual application in that verse.   He is talking about our baptism into the resurrection of Jesus Christ. 

 

The flood immersed the people of Noah's day in the judgment of God.  And people wilil one day be immersed again in God's judgment but those of who have trusted in Jesus will be safe from God's judgement because we are "in Christ"  just as noah and his family were "in the ark."

 

So you are completely missing Peter's point in that verse.

[Guest]

Jesus's words are pretty clear to me in john 3:5 that you need to be born again by water and the spirit.

The rejection of salvation through baptism is a new teaching.

 

And is not held by most Christians.

 

 

Even That "New" Teacher John The Baptist Got It

 

I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire: Matthew 3:11

 

And The LORD Jesus

 

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

 

That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

 

Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again. John 3:5-7

 

Asserts

 

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. John 6:63

 

It

 

Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever. 1 Peter 1:23

[JesusIsLordMinistry]

1 Peter 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.

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:

[GoldenEagle]

One key Scripture reference to being "born again" or "regenerated" is John 3:5, where Jesus says, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

Early Christians uniformly identified this verse with baptism. Water baptism is the way, they said, that we are born again and receive new life—a fact that is supported elsewhere in Scripture (Rom. 6:3–4; Col. 2:12–13; Titus 3:5)

Water Baptism doesn't save. It is a picture of our death, burial, and resurrection. It is telling the world and the local church that "Hey! I follow Jesus!"

When the Holy Spirit enters a person that is when that person is saved. Otherwise, if a person wasn't baptized would they not go to paradise right?

God bless,

GE

[GoldenEagle]

To say that the Chur{c}h taught error for 1800 years goes against Christ teaching. Jesus said that the gates of hell would not prevail. So for 1800 years of believing salvation through baptism you would have to say using your point of view that there was no salvation.

And john 3:5 is very explicit and directly from Christ himself

The Church (and again I assume you mean the RCC) taught many wrong doctrines for many years including the office of the Pope, the infallibility of the Pope, salvation that requires works (either to earn salvation or to keep it), good works (such as baptism for example) are required for justification, the doctrine of purgatory, indulgences (where one can pay money to have forgiveness of sins), apostolic succession, priesthood of all males who cannot marry, praying to or asking for the intercession of Mary and the saints, Mary’s conception without sin, etc.

And as Shiloh pointed out the clerics kept the population illiterate and didn't want to translate the Bible into common language.

God bless,

GE