Baptism?

[Guest tiggr]

Challenge

Show me one verse in the KJV of the Bible where the word accept is used in conjunction with Jesus Christ and salvation.

You, like the Pharisees

AH once again with the name calling and comparisons how " christian" of you.

The "baptism" performed as a physical act is a testimony and symbol of what the Holy Spirit had already accomplished. You folks are fixated on 1Pet. 3:21 and Mark 16:16. Oh, from time to time you quote verses that deal with water immersion in other places, but you are trying to make the ritual accomplish only what the Holy Spirit can do in the heart.

Ok how about the following

Acts 2:38

38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

KJV

or maybe Acts 22:16

16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

KJV

or Acts 8:36-37

36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?

37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God

KJV

How about this one Acts 8:16-17

16(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

KJV

They had been baptised in the name of the Lord but had not recieved the Holy Ghost this one scripture destroys your arguement shiloh.

How about this one

Acts 10:46-48

46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

KJV

Hey this one does too.

So does this one

Acts 19:4-6

4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

KJV

Eph 5:26

26 That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word,

KJV

Nothing is being taken away from the work that Christ has done on the contrary I am showing you where obedience is reqiured of us. Obedience to God is not works but simply obedience, Jesus said "if you love me keep my commandments" Jesus commanded the disciples to Baptize people I dont think they did against the person's will but when the person heard the gospel and asked

Acts 2:37

37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?

Acts 2:38-43

38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.

41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

43 And fear came upon every soul: and many wonders and signs were done by the apostles.

KJV

I'm sure that you will continue to argue against the word of God because you argue not with man.

2 Peter 1:20-21

20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.

21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost.

KJV

[Guest shiloh357]

I'm sure that you will continue to argue against the word of God because you argue not with man.

I am not arguing against the Word of God. I am arguing against your poor usage of hermenuetics, and your mishandling of Scripture.

[WayneB]

351 posts...working on a new record I see.

Shiloh and others, hang in there brothers (and sister). Unfortunately, the opposition isn't wavering. Your arguements are rock solid and sound. Your energy level and patience is amazing. By now, I would have just "cut & paste" my old posts to their same old arguements.

Bless Y'all,

Wayne

[Guest shiloh357]

Ok how about the following

Acts 2:38

38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Actually, the Greek can be rendered "because of the remission of sins." So it is not necessarily indicating that one is baptized for remission of sins, but rather on account of their remission. It is out of obedient gratitude we are immersed in water, not out of need to be saved.

or maybe Acts 22:16

16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

First, a careful study of the Greek text shows that "wash away" is coordinated with "calling." That is, it is by "calling on the name of the Lord" that Paul was to "wash away" his sins, not by being baptized.

Even the English does not say, "be baptized washing away your sins," or "wash away your sins being baptized," but rather "be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord." This shows that washing away the sins and being baptized were separate acts, and that the washing away of the sins was done by calling on the name of the Lord.

Second, being baptized was not a part of the Gospel which Paul preached. We know this for two reasons. First, Paul carefully distinguished baptizing from preaching the Gospel in I Corinthians, chapter one. There he wrote:

I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other. For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel... (verses 14-17a)

Baptism, then, cannot be part of the Gospel. The Gospel is the "power of God to salvation" (Romans 1:16). It tells us what is necessary to know in order to be saved. Paul left baptism out of the Gospel. Therefore Paul did not consider baptism necessary to salvation. It is possible, by isolating this verse from its context and from other New Testament teaching on the subject, to take this as teaching baptismal regeneration. But again, this is only one way to understand it. It has already been shown that this would not fit the context, it does not fit the most clear understanding of the grammar, and most importantly, it is contrary to Paul's entire teaching of what the Gospel is (Acts 16:31; Romans 10:9-10; I Corinthians 1:17; Galatians 1:11-12). Possibility must not be confused with either probability or actuality.

or Acts 8:36-37

36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?

37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God

All that proves is that the Eunich was immmersed in water, nothing more, nothing

less.

How about this one Acts 8:16-17

16(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

KJV

They had been baptised in the name of the Lord but had not recieved the Holy Ghost this one scripture destroys your arguement shiloh.

Strange, 1ptr29citzn has argue that water immersion is how one recieves the Holy Spirit, yet we have here people who had been water immersed and yet were without the Holy Spirit. In this passage does not destroy my argument at all. This is not talking about unbelievers, but upon believers who had not recieved the baptism of the Holy Spirit, a subsequent gift of grace that occurs after salvation. This does not address your issue at all.

Acts 10:46-48

46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

KJV

Hey this one does too.

Actually, no it doesnt. "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" (verse 47) Peter said that this group of people had received the Holy Spirit "just as we have." He acknowledged that these people were already saved. Just as truly as Peter and the Christians with him had received the Holy Spirit, so Cornelius and his friends had received the Holy Spirit. Having received the Holy Spirit was proof that they were already saved, as Romans 8:9-16 shows.

Those who have received the Holy Spirit are the children of God. They are "born of the Spirit." They are "born again." They are guaranteed their inheritance (Romans 8:1 1; II Corinthians 1:22, 5:5; Ephesians 1:14). They are, in fact, saved. Cornelius and his friends were saved before Peter commanded them to be baptized.

Acts 10:46-48, therefore, does not prove that water immersion is necessary for salvation.

So does this one

Acts 19:4-6

4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

All you are doing is trying to plug your ideas into a narrative. This does not prove that water immersion is necessary for salvation, because no such statement to that effect is made in the text. The significant part of the story only occurs after hands were layed upon them.

[1ptr29citizen]

Actually, the Greek can be rendered "because of the remission of sins." So it is not necessarily indicating that one is baptized for remission of sins, but rather on account of their remission. It is out of obedient gratitude we are immersed in water, not out of need to be saved.

Shiloh, I'm guessing someone has told you this, or you've seen it off of a web-site or something. Often people say that the "for" in Acts 2:38 means "because of," and mistake it for the Greek word "eis," using improper definitions. However, if you look at the Greek without someone telling you what the Greek is, you can see that the definition of "for" in Acts 2:38 is "in order to." So sorry, your argument is incorrect. The verse should read:

Peter replied, "Repent and be baptized, everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ, in order to be forgiven of sins. And you shall receive the Holy Spirit.

Hmmm... I'm seeing Peter make a little bit of a connection between baptism and remission of sins through Christ, no? What's baptism? Immersion in water, and if applied to the uses in the NT, it means immersion in water in Christ. I'm sorry if you want to look around for other defintions, but they're just not right..

Ephesians says there's one baptism, correct? Correct. So tell me shiloh, why were people in Acts baptized IN WATER in Christ? Explain me that one...

Strange, 1ptr29citzn has argue that water immersion is how one recieves the Holy Spirit, yet we have here people who had been water immersed and yet were without the Holy Spirit. In this passage does not destroy my argument at all. This is not talking about unbelievers, but upon believers who had not recieved the baptism of the Holy Spirit, a subsequent gift of grace that occurs after salvation. This does not address your issue at all.

Ummm... are the apostles alive today? These people with Simon the Sorceror received the Spirit by the laying on of hands by the apostles, which would nullify the ability for anyone today to have the Spirit, since it was given by the apostles. So why was it given through hands? Miraculous powers, showed others God's authority and the reality of the Church. We don't need it today, we can know God is real, we have the Bible today. You cannot nullify Acts 2:38 with this verse. Also, I'd like to point out that all the people who received the Spirit were later on baptized, meaning immersed in water, in Christ. Same effect for Acts 10, except they received it from hearing the sermon, because Peter wouldn't have laid hands on them, he didn't think it was for the Gentiles to have.

Again I state, there is one baptism. If so, then why were people in the Bible baptized in water?

[Guest tiggr]

Actually, the Greek can be rendered "because of the remission of sins."

You did not say or show where it is rendered this way but that t it "can be rendered" that is not very strong ground to stand on that means that there is a possibilty that where ever you got your info from is wrong.

All that proves is that the Eunich was immmersed in water, nothing more, nothing

less.

Well isnt that what you argued, that water was not used did you not make a statement earlier to that degree?

Also Phillip preached unto him Jesus, he read the same scripture in Isaiah that the eunich was reading so for the eunich to ask about baptizm it was mentioned by pkillip because it is not anywhere in the scripture that was read.

Even the English does not say, "be baptized washing away your sins," or "wash away your sins being baptized," but rather "be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord." This shows that washing away the sins and being baptized were separate acts, and that the washing away of the sins was done by calling on the name of the Lord.

You contradict yourself here you said that baptizm and calling on the Lord are two seperate acts ( calling on the Lord would require you to speak which uses energy which would be considered a work) then you turn right around and say that sins are washed away by calling on the name of the Lord which makes it one act not two because the act of calling on the Lord produces the effect of your sins being washed away so actually what we have here is an act that has a cleansing effect.

You are closer than you realize my friend. " By the profession of your faith I now baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins"

Point is Jesus told the disciples to do it, Peter commanded the people that he preached to to do it "And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days."

What more do you need the scriptures are here you can not try to explain them away with " it could be rendered" it could be alot of things but it means one thing and one thing only, some of the problems are in the fact that so many times we take what one person says about something and say that its truth not knowing that we have been decieved. THe devil will not tell you that there is no God becuase he believes in God also but he will try to deicieve you into believing in something that contradicts God's word just as he did Eve.

[1ptr29citizen]

tiggr, excellent post.

You did not say or show where it is rendered this way but that t it "can be rendered" that is not very strong ground to stand on that means that there is a possibilty that where ever you got your info from is wrong.

And it is wrong. That's wrong Greek. Correct Greek in Acts 2:38 shows that repentance and baptism are done in order to be forgiven. I've looked at it. Check out heavenword Greek master, or some lexicon. And don't look for the Greek term for "because of," because "because of" isn't the word in Acts 2:38.

Also, I like how you said that we can't take what someone teaches us for true. All my life I accepted what parents told me, what friends told me, what youth ministers, preachers, and other peolple told me. Then I woke up. How we've been raised and what beliefs we were taught don't matter. What matters is the word. If we look purely at the word, it's gonna tell us in a straight-forward way that baptism saves. Baptism meaning immersion in water in Christ, because we can't think of how the word might be interpreted today, we have to think of how God interpreted it.

Again I state, there is one baptism. If so, then why were people in the Bible baptized in water?

[stevehut]

Greetings, all...

This is an excerpt from a book that I am writing. Might give some perspective to the conversation...

[Guest shiloh357]

You did not say or show where it is rendered this way but that t it "can be rendered" that is not very strong ground to stand on that means that there is a possibilty that where ever you got your info from is wrong.

Not really. Your interpretation of Acts 2:38 is inconsistent with the gospel, so my rendering is correct. I do not merely look at verse by itself, but I check to see if it is consistent with the rest of Scripture. Since the gospel is salvation by grace through faith alone, in Christ alone, your interpretation of Acts 2:38 doesn't fit. Neither do any of your other interpretations out of Acts. There is more to hermenuetics than just looking up words in Greek.

Well isnt that what you argued, that water was not used did you not make a statement earlier to that degree?

No, I didn't. I do not deny that the eunich was immersed in water. What I am saying is that the TRUE baptism occured in his heart when he believed the gospel and was saved.

You contradict yourself here you said that baptizm and calling on the Lord are two seperate acts ( calling on the Lord would require you to speak which uses energy which would be considered a work) then you turn right around and say that sins are washed away by calling on the name of the Lord which makes it one act not two because the act of calling on the Lord produces the effect of your sins being washed away so actually what we have here is an act that has a cleansing effect.

There is no contradiciton. I said that washing away sins and water immersion are two separate acts. You are misquoting me there. Calling on the name of the Lord does not necessarily mean vocalizing anything. It means believing the gospel. The Scrpture says that "with the heart man believeth unto righteousness." It with the heart, and not the mouth that righteousness is found. Any vocal confession or profession cleanses your conciense, not your heart.

[1ptr29citizen]

Right everyone, and obviously belief is all we need. I mean, we're all brothers in Christ with the demon Legion who possessed a man and then ran into a herd of pigs. Legion CERTAINLY believed that Jesus was the real Son of God, and so can't wait to see ol' Legion in heaven right? I mean James 2:19 would agree, demons believe in God. And that's all faith is, right? Belief? That's it? Yepp, I'ma see them demons in heaven...

No.

1 John 2:3

We know that we have come to know him if we obey his commands.

Yeah, so obedience isn't necessary to be in a relationship with the Lord, right? Isn't that what that verse says?

No.

Hebrews 3:16-19

Who were they who heard and rebelled? Were they not all those Moses led out of Egypt? And with whom was he angry for forty years? Was it not with those who sinned, whose bodies fell in the desert? And to whom did God swear that they would never enter his rest if not to those who disobeyed? So we see that they were unable to enter, because of their unbelief.

Right, so this verse tells us that the Israelites were frowned upon only because of their unbelief. I mean.. it also says obedience... but it says belief too! So which is it? They are both said to have not let the Israelites enter? Was it because of disobedience or because of unbelief?

Both. They are equally tied together in faith. Faith is believing in God, but faith is known because of obedience to God's commands. Not obeying the word of God deadens faith, nullifying salvation.

One more time:

Again I state, there is one baptism. If so, then why were people in the Bible baptized in water?