Water Baptism-What Does God's Word Say?

[Wansvic]

Thanks. I am patiently waiting for that. Especially interested in the question of "is talking in tongues also required evidence for getting the gift of the Holy Spirit"?

I ask that because its also mentioned in the book of Acts almst every time someone gets saved.

The reason I asked the trinity thing is just to see if you are oneness or not, not asking with bad intentions or to slam you. You seem like a polite fellow and I just wanna know what you believe.

The following information pertains to the trinity. When you mentioned I had posted something I could not remember posting anything on the topic. However, the content below was posted by another member and I copied it to my computer to study it at a later time. Sadly, I cannot remember what member to credit with its posting.

The trinity is problematic:

Long time ago, some believers noted that using anthropomorphism when referring to God is wrong. God is a particular Being different from us.

So they came with a term to refer to the manifestations of His presence that we experience in this physical realm: greek: hypostasis.

Hypostasis is a greek term meaning: substantive reality, that is a reality that can be perceived as it affects our senses.

Definitively we could not say it was human, because although it is similar, by Being God - then is different. The Angel of Yahweh (which is used interchangeably with God Himself), is a hypostasis: substantive reality.

The problem started when the greek term hypostasis had to be translated to Latin: Someone came up with the term Latin: personae. Personae in Latin means the mask that an actor at a play, back then, used in a performance to denote the participation of a particular character in the play.

Tertullian was not very convinced, but since the Bible says that Jesus is the image of the invisible God (like a mask), then they went with it.

What baffles me, is that the Latin term personae (a mask), became a modern term for person (a totally different thing)?

I do not agree with the term person in the trinity definition because God is above and beyond the person concept. Not only me, but many serious researchers, have come to the conclusion that using the term person with relation to God is disrespectful, because He is way above that.

Notice that Ireneaus mentioned something more in line with the original (old) version of trinity: "Jesus and the Holy Spirit are like the hands of God that He uses to bring believers close to His heart". Notice that hands (arms, etc.) are not different persons, but inherent parts of 1 divine Being". [very rough paraphrase].

They are Divine hypostasis of God, perceived as persons by us, but being way beyond that.

Your questions are very important ones, the problem is that we all should be researching and getting deep in, and giving all diligence to, study as the Bible expects of us: Check all, retain what is good, search the Scriptures to see if things are so... etc.

We all have an undeniable responsibility to dig deep because this is about our eternal destiny.

I am currently working on an in depth excavation of the nuggets pertaining to speaking in tongues. I will do my best to finish it soon and post pertinent scriptures.

May the Lord continue to draw you into His presence. Have a great day!

 

[Hevosmies]

I am currently working on an in depth excavation of the nuggets pertaining to speaking in tongues. I will do my best to finish it soon and post pertinent scriptures.

May the Lord continue to draw you into His presence. Have a great day!

Thanks for your reply, my understanding of the trinity would be similar to what you quoted Ireneaus saying.

I will stay tuned to see the "if speaking in tongues is evidence of getting the Holy Spirit" answer. I followed you on here so I can see when you post it.

It never specifically says anywhere in the bible that if you dont speak in tongues you arent saved, or that you MUST speak in tongues. But it does mention that in connection with getting the Holy Spirit MANY times in the book of Acts.
But because there is no imperative COMMAND for anyone to ever speak in tongues, I believe you cannot make teh argument that its required.

Baptism is a different deal alltogether, its mentioned all over the place and its a COMMAND.

Thanks, may the Lord bless you too and have a great day bro.

 

[Ignorun]

I have often heard Campbellites use the healing of Naaman when he dipped in the Jordan river 7 times as an example of receiving remission of sins in the waters of baptism. Yet in the first place, if being healed from leprosy is an illustration of salvation, we have another case that reveals one can be saved without any water. Read it in (Luke 5:12-15). No water is found here.

Secondly, Naaman was not even a believer until after dipping in Jordan. He said "NOW" (after being healed) I know that there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel," (2 Kings 5:15) and vowed to worship only Him (vs. 17). If we follow this "example," we will have to baptize unbelievers! Naaman received cleansing from leprosy (not eternal life) after he dipped in the Jordan 7 times, but no sins were literally remitted for Naaman in Jordan. Likewise, water baptism does not literally remit sins.

The Bible uses the experience of Naaman as illustrative of the SOVEREIGNTY OF GOD, not of salvation by water baptism. Naaman was a heathen, not a believer, and did not know God until the miracle occurred. The purpose of the miracle had nothing to do with salvation by water baptism, but was to demonstrate "there is a prophet in Israel" (2 Kings 5:8) and that "there is no God in all the earth, but in Israel," as Naaman found out (2 Kings 5:15).

Of course water alone can't save. That goes back to Naaman. How was he healed? You've misrepresented my questions. Intentional? I hope not. Moses obeyed God by holding out the staff. Water was parted. How? By a staff? We understand the parting of the water could not have been accomplished by Moses. Naaman's healing is the same. It was God.
We don't attribute the power in the staff or in the water, it's all God. Likewise, water doesn't have any innate ability to cleanse us of our sin.
You can prejudice your readers by subtly aligning me with Campbellites all you want, as if what I believe agrees with that popular doctrine would then align me in their camp. My friend, I AM A CHRISTIAN SEEKING THE TRUTH.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

In water probably not but with water without a doubt. Remember that Christ spoke in parables and with that in mind what does water have to do spiritually. I believe you know that it has to deal with the word of God and without the word of God not one person can become saved / baptized.

So as we are told “washing of water by the word” or spiritual water?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Not if God says otherwise.

Well he does not (unless we twist his words or misinterpret the words) So there ya go.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Of course water alone can't save. That goes back to Naaman. How was he healed? You've misrepresented my questions. Intentional? I hope not. Moses obeyed God by holding out the staff. Water was parted. How? By a staff? We understand the parting of the water could not have been accomplished by Moses. Naaman's healing is the same. It was God.
We don't attribute the power in the staff or in the water, it's all God. Likewise, water doesn't have any innate ability to cleanse us of our sin.
You can prejudice your readers by subtly aligning me with Campbellites all you want, as if what I believe agrees with that popular doctrine would then align me in their camp. My friend, I AM A CHRISTIAN SEEKING THE TRUTH.

If you were seeking truth, You would stop giving man and physical water the credit for your sins being washed, and Give glory and credit to God for washing you with spiritual water.

As paul says it titus, it is NOT by works of righteousness which we have done (water baptism WOULD by a work of righteousness) but by HIS MERCY HE SAVED US, but the WASHING and renewal OF ThE HOLY SPIRIT.

It is the washing of God which saved, not the washing of some pastor dunking you in water

 

[Ignorun]

In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

So the only logical conclusion *when properly harmonizing Scripture with Scripture* is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

Those who gladly received his word (upon repentance/faith) were "afterwards" baptized. So they were added to the Lord upon repentance/faith prior to receiving water baptism, just as we see in Acts 10:43;47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9.

Acts 4:4 - However, many of those who heard the word believed; and the number of the men came to be about five thousand. *What happened to baptism?

Acts 5:14 - And believers were increasingly added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics.

NOWHERE does the Bible say that we have been saved through faith and baptism or that whoever is not baptized will be condemned, regardless of what Roman Catholics, Mormons and other "works-salvationists" believe. The Bible makes clear that men are saved prior to receiving water baptism. These Gentiles in Acts 10 received the gift of the Holy Spirit and were manifesting the spiritual gift of tongues (which is only for the body of Christ - 1 Corinthians 12) after believing the gospel but before being baptized (Acts 10:44-47). This observation must be balanced, however, by the fact that baptism was not considered an "optional extra" for these Gentiles. It was a command (Acts 10:48) that they were expected to obey. However, it was not obedience to this command that saved them, but their believing in Christ (Acts 10:43).

Baptism is the expected initial outward response to the gospel, but it is not a part of the gospel itself (1 Corinthians 1:17; 15:1-4). There are a handful of "alleged" proof texts which are often cited to prove that the Bible makes baptism mandatory for salvation. A careful examination of each of these texts in context will show that none of them prove that baptism is absolutely required for salvation, though they do prove that baptism was an assumed initiatory response to the gospel of salvation. In other words, these texts only prove that baptism is regularly associated with conversion and salvation, rather than absolutely required for salvation.

As Greek scholar AT Robertson explains, "A symbol is not the reality, but the picture of the reality."

https://www.biblestudytools.com/commentaries/robertsons-word-pictures/romans/romans-6-4.html

So when were the Jews saved in Acts 2? They believed. They believed the gospel, the very gospel preached by the inspired apostle. They believed Peter's word that Jesus is both Lord and Christ. According to your above statements, they were saved at that point. If that's true, they did not need to repent "unto the remission of sins. What happened to repentance in Acts 4.4? You asked about baptism there, why would you not ask about repentance? It's not there. Repentance is necessary. Indeed it is. Greek scholars are not as impressive as you may think. My friend. The bible is clear enough with a little bit of study.

If you were seeking truth, You would stop giving man and physical water the credit for your sins being washed, and Give glory and credit to God for washing you with spiritual water.

As paul says it titus, it is NOT by works of righteousness which we have done (water baptism WOULD by a work of righteousness) but by HIS MERCY HE SAVED US, but the WASHING and renewal OF ThE HOLY SPIRIT.

It is the washing of God which saved, not the washing of some pastor dunking you in water

If you were seeking truth, You would stop giving man and physical water the credit for your sins being washed, and Give glory and credit to God for washing you with spiritual water.

As paul says it titus, it is NOT by works of righteousness which we have done (water baptism WOULD by a work of righteousness) but by HIS MERCY HE SAVED US, but the WASHING and renewal OF ThE HOLY SPIRIT.

It is the washing of God which saved, not the washing of some pastor dunking you in water

Selective reading and false accusations on your part are most obvious in your reply. Thank you!

 

[posthuman]

In water probably not but with water without a doubt. Remember that Christ spoke in parables and with that in mind what does water have to do spiritually. I believe you know that it has to deal with the word of God and without the word of God not one person can become saved / baptized.

we should probably adopt the habit of saying H2O instead of water when that's what we mean specifically, at least for baptism threads, so we don't confuse the meaning of our statements.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

So when were the Jews saved in Acts 2? They believed. They believed the gospel, the very gospel preached by the inspired apostle. They believed Peter's word that Jesus is both Lord and Christ. According to your above statements, they were saved at that point. If that's true, they did not need to repent "unto the remission of sins. What happened to repentance in Acts 4.4? You asked about baptism there, why would you not ask about repentance? It's not there. Repentance is necessary. Indeed it is. Greek scholars are not as impressive as you may think. My friend. The bible is clear enough with a little bit of study.

One must repent before they believe, If one has not yet come to the point of faith, they have not yet repented.

So if one has come to faith, they have ALREADY repented unto the remission of sin.

And they were savwed BEFORE they were baptised in water. By repenting and believing

Selective reading and false accusations on your part are most obvious in your reply. Thank you!

1. I did nto selectively read
2. I can only interpret by what you say, if I was wrong, you could show me, The fact you did not has to make one wonder.

 

[FlyingDove]

Both baptisms are from God and necessary. Please read the scriptures provided as well as Peter's comments on the Day of Pentecost. Whether an individual chooses to acknowledge and obey what is recorded in the Word-no one can deny Peter's words are there in black and white.
My prayer is that God reveal what is clearly in His Word.

Hello Wansvic,

I have a couple of questions.

In post #1 you talked about John water baptizing in the wilderness.

And in this post you site Pentecost.

My questions are:

1) Are there any gentiles being water baptized in the wilderness?

2) During Pentecost, are there any gentiles on the Temple Mt that get baptized in the Holy Spirit? Thx in advance, FD

 

[GraceAndTruth]

the word baptize, from the Greek baptizo, means to totally immerse

Baptizing for salvation proponents often use 1 Peter 3:21 as their scripture proof.
Looking at that it actually says that the baptism that saves is NOT the washing of dirt from the flesh (immersing in water to remove the stain of sin)but an appeal to God for a good conscience ......thru CHRIST, who gives LIVING WATER.

Immersion in that living water will wash your heart.

 

[mailmandan]

Of course water alone can't save. That goes back to Naaman. How was he healed? You've misrepresented my questions. Intentional? I hope not. Moses obeyed God by holding out the staff. Water was parted. How? By a staff? We understand the parting of the water could not have been accomplished by Moses. Naaman's healing is the same. It was God.
We don't attribute the power in the staff or in the water, it's all God. Likewise, water doesn't have any innate ability to cleanse us of our sin. You can prejudice your readers by subtly aligning me with Campbellites all you want, as if what I believe agrees with that popular doctrine would then align me in their camp. My friend, I AM A CHRISTIAN SEEKING THE TRUTH.

If you believe that water baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation (immersed or condemned) then you align with Campbellites if not, then you don't. So you are a Christian seeking the truth? Then come let us reason together.

 

[dcontroversal]

Not if God says otherwise.

God does not say otherwise nor does he contradict his word!!

Faith saves

Immersion is the picture of that salvation and results if being dead, buried and risen with Christ as a new creation...nothing more nothing less....

wrap your head around that truth!

 

[Hevosmies]

If you believe that water baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation (immersed or condemned) then you align with Campbellites

Oneness pentecostals also believe that, and add speaking in tongues too.

 

[mailmandan]

So when were the Jews saved in Acts 2? They believed. They believed the gospel, the very gospel preached by the inspired apostle. They believed Peter's word that Jesus is both Lord and Christ. According to your above statements, they were saved at that point.

In Acts 2:37, their "belief" at this point was "mental assent" that "Jesus was the Messiah and they were guilty of crucifying Him." That is not saving belief yet. They still lacked trust and reliance in Christ alone for salvation and that's why they still needed to repent and place their faith (belief, trust, reliance) in Jesus Christ alone for salvation.

If that's true, they did not need to repent "unto the remission of sins."

They did need to repent "unto the remission of sins" (Acts 2:38; 3:19) which proves they did not yet believe the gospel. Repentance "precedes" saving belief in Christ.

Matthew 21:32 - For John came to you to show you the way of righteousness, and you did not believe him, but the tax collectors and the prostitutes did. And even after you saw this, you did not repent and believe him. *Notice the order.

Mark 1:15 - Repent and believe the gospel. *Notice the order.

Acts 20:21 - testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ. *Notice the order.

What happened to repentance in Acts 4.4? You asked about baptism there, why would you not ask about repentance? It's not there.

Repentance does not need to be specifically spelled out in Acts 4:4 because those who believe have already repented in the process of changing their mind and choosing to believe. Those who have truly repented believe and those who truly believe have already repented. Repent and believe the gospel are two sides to the same coin. Not so with baptism. You can repent and believe the gospel, but NOT YET BE WATER BAPTIZED.

Repentance is necessary. Indeed it is. Greek scholars are not as impressive as you may think. My friend. The bible is clear enough with a little bit of study.

I never said that repentance was not necessary for salvation. If we don't repent then we won't believe the gospel and become saved. Did I say that I was impressed by all Greek scholars? The Bible is clear enough when we study and properly harmonize Scripture with Scripture in order to reach the proper conclusion on doctrine.

 

[carl11]

So as we are told “washing of water by the word” or spiritual water?

They are one in the same spiritual water is the word of God.

 

[tourist]

with the Spirit and with fire

((Matthew 3:11, Luke 3:16, Acts 1:5, Acts 11:16))

This is correct, not with water but with fire and the Holy Spirit.

 

[tourist]

Oh but he did baptize people.

Yes, with fire and the Holy Spirit but not the traditional water baptism.

 

[oldethennew]

ACTS 10:47.
Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

JOB 14:9.
Yet through the scent of water it will bud, and bring forth boughs like a plant.

MATT. 3:11.
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:

MATT. 3:16.
And Jesus, when He was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto Him,
and He saw The Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon Him:

JOHN 1:31.
And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.

JOHN 1:33.
And I knew Him not: but He that sent me to baptize with water, the Same said unto me, Upon Whom thou shalt see
The Spirit descending, and remaining on Him, the Same is he which baptizeth with The Holy Ghost.

JOHN 2:7.
Jesus saith unto them, Fill the waterpots with water. And they filled them up to the brim.

JOHN 3:5.
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.

JOHN 3:23.
And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came,
and were baptized.

JOHN 4:14.
But whosoever drinks of the Water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but The Water that I shall give him
shall be in him a Well of water springing up into Everlasting life.

JOHN 5:3-4.
In these lay a great multitude of impotent folk, of blind, halt, withered, waiting for the moving of The Water.

For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first
after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.

ACTS 8:36.
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?

38-39.
And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch;
and he baptized Him.

And when they were come up out of the water, The Spirit of The Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more:
and he went on his way rejoicing.

(ACTS 10:47.)
Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received The Holy Ghost as well as we?

JUDE 1:12.
These are spots in your feasts of charity, when they feast with you, feeding themselves without fear:
clouds they are without water, carried about of winds; trees whose fruit withereth, without fruit, twice dead,
plucked up by the roots;

REV. 22:17.
And The Spirit and the bride say, Come. And let him that heareth say, Come. And let him that is athirst come.
And whosoever will, let him take The Water of life freely.

any act of Love that we do for our Holy Saviour shows that we are abiding/obeying according to His will,
and the fruits of our loving obedience will always be made manifest to ourselves first, and to those who can
receive it by the gift of God...

 

[mailmandan]

the word baptize, from the Greek baptizo, means to totally immerse

Baptizing for salvation proponents often use 1 Peter 3:21 as their scripture proof.
Looking at that it actually says that the baptism that saves is NOT the washing of dirt from the flesh (immersing in water to remove the stain of sin)but an appeal to God for a good conscience ......thru CHRIST, who gives LIVING WATER.

Immersion in that living water will wash your heart.

Yes, in 1 Peter 3:21, Peter tells us that baptism now saves you, yet when Peter uses this phrase he continues in the same sentence to explain exactly what he means by it. He said that baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh (that is, not as an outward, physical act which washes dirt from the body--that is not what saves you), "but an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (that is, as an inward, spiritual transaction between God and the individual, a transaction that is symbolized by the outward ceremony of water baptism).

*Just as the eight people in the ark were "saved THROUGH water" as they were IN THE ARK. They were not literally saved "by" the water. Hebrews 11:7 is clear on this point (..built an ARK for the SAVING of his household). *NOTE: The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE. In contrast, ONLY THE WICKED IN NOAH'S DAY CAME IN CONTACT WITH THE WATER AND THEY ALL PERISHED.