My take on water baptism...

[Benadam]

So you are saying water baptism is necessary for salvation?

Well, God can save whoever He wills to save. OTOH Baptism guarantees God's going to do His part. That being the removal of sin and the restoration of friendship with Him. With all obstacles removed one can receive the Holy Spirit.

 

[Guojing]

wow, if i thought that way, wouldn't i prevent myself from doing any good thing?

but i don't think that being foolish rescinds salvation. if it did, no one could be saved - or remain saved - could they?

I used to think water baptism was an innocent work to do, after all, as you said, it hardly cost one anything to do so, so might as well do it "to be safe".

Until I met people on their deathbeds whom when I ask them whether they know that they are saved, one of them actually told me "Because I have been water baptized!"

It was then that I realized water baptism is not as innocent as it looks.

 

[Benadam]

yes -- my point was to garee, who had remarked about this person from Judah baptizing, what does it mean?
because it wasn't Christ who was immersing anyone in water.

i think garee's point was that to the Jews, immersion in water was associated with ritual cleaning, so, associated with the priesthood, by extension Levi -- so to have someone doing this who was not of Levi may have been a strange thing to the Jews, even offensive.
i'm not sure whether it's only Levites who immersed people -- or only Levites who were immersed. would have to look that up..? but as you point out, that the disciples were baptizing, would equally well serve garee's remark, because they were not Levite either.

there is certainly a thread of the new covenant & new priesthood running through this topic, to be followed. i didn't mean to discount completely garee's observation, just to point out Christ wasn't doing the baptizing with H2O -- His kingdom, and His priesthood, is a spiritual one, and He baptizes with spirit & fire

John the Baptist was a Levite. Once Jesus united His mission to John's Baptism the divisions of the Old Covenant are dissolved. The universal priesthood of Christ begins. The disciples were Baptizing with water for repentance of sin. The Baptism of John ends the priestly duties of the Levites. At that time in Christ's mission the disciples were Baptizing for the same reason John was, to prepare hearts to receive the Word so they would have ears to hear and believe so they could receive the Holy Spirit at Pentecost..

Pentecost unites John's Baptism of water to Christ's Baptism of fire into one Baptism.

Acts 2: 38
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.

 

[posthuman]

I used to think water baptism was an innocent work to do, after all, as you said, it hardly cost one anything to do so, so might as well do it "to be safe".

Until I met people on their deathbeds whom when I ask them whether they know that they are saved, one of them actually told me "Because I have been water baptized!"

It was then that I realized water baptism is not as innocent as it looks.

yes in the situations you describe, it has become like circumcision to them, per Galatians.
the same occurs with things like attending a church, keeping sabbaths, taking communion, and many others.

in the early centuries of the church, people put off baptism because they thought this was how sins were forgiven - they were afraid that sins committed after being baptized were either impossible or much more difficult to be forgiven. from this idea, coupled with hardship, plague & general high infant mortality, people began baptizing infants - in so doing supposing they would be saved if they were to die in childhood as so many did. the much more modern covenant-theology that approves infant baptism points to the practice being prevalent since the earliest records of Christianity ((tho we know this mainly because we have several extant letters of church leaders arguing against it)), but the modern justification for it ((covenantism)) is far different from the justification people used for it in 1st millineum ((a physical rite which removes sin, securing salvation)).

 

[Peterlag]

That's a fact. Historically if someone claims their spiritual experience is from God but refuses to be Baptized then their spiritual experience is considered to not be from God. The desire for Baptism as you said confirms that person's spiritual experience is from God.

Being baptized in water in the name of the father, son and holy spirit is not Christian but rather Catholic and many scholars say the verses on that were added by men hundreds of years after the death of the Apostles.

 

[Peterlag]

That's a fact. Historically if someone claims their spiritual experience is from God but refuses to be Baptized then their spiritual experience is considered to not be from God. The desire for Baptism as you said confirms that person's spiritual experience is from God.

Not Christian but Catholic.

 

[Locoponydirtman]

There's no gaslighting here. You don't just say I disagree or I believe different. You say I'm a false teacher. Others on here and maybe you too say I have a devil and attack me personally. Some say I'm a heretic. The only thing I have not yet been called here is a bastard child. Yeah that's Pharisees style stuff.

You come here spouting your own erroneous interpretation of scripture, then call me a pharisee for calling you a false teacher. That is definitely gaslighting. You create your own doctrine by abusing scripture which is what pharisees did, and then when you rebuked you call the one rebuking the pharisee. That's the definition of gaslighting.

 

[Locoponydirtman]

Now I know how Jesus felt. Talking to you is like talking to a Pharisees.

You know how Pharisees felt when rebuked by Jesus. You teach false doctrine, like the Pharisees of old. They also felt as though they were right, much like you do. Even though the text of scripture is right there testifying against you. Just like the Pharisees.

 

[Blain]

Peter are you here just to stir the pot? I have seen in your threads that you post things that seem to be about the bible and God but every time it is not accurate or scriptural and then you will argue with people un but neveer lsiten to anything they say

The way I see it either you are trolling or you are babe trying to seem like a meat eater, either way you need to start listening and learning not speaking and teaching

 

[49]

Being baptized in water in the name of the father, son and holy spirit is not Christian but rather Catholic and many scholars say the verses on that were added by men hundreds of years after the death of the Apostles.

???????????

 

[Locoponydirtman]

We have writing of the generations of pastors and apologists who followed the Apostles all the way back to men named in the Bible. So get off the gas with the made up doctrine of devil's.

 

[Peterlag]

You know how Pharisees felt when rebuked by Jesus. You teach false doctrine, like the Pharisees of old. They also felt as though they were right, much like you do. Even though the text of scripture is right there testifying against you. Just like the Pharisees.

I say I disagree or I believe different. That is not like a Pharisees. The Pharisees attack the other personally referring to them as false teachers, devils, and heretics. This is not how I act.

 

[Peterlag]

You come here spouting your own erroneous interpretation of scripture, then call me a pharisee for calling you a false teacher. That is definitely gaslighting. You create your own doctrine by abusing scripture which is what pharisees did, and then when you rebuked you call the one rebuking the pharisee. That's the definition of gaslighting.

It's how you rebuke that I'm referring to.

 

[Guojing]

I say I disagree or I believe different. That is not like a Pharisees. The Pharisees attack the other personally referring to them as false teachers, devils, and heretics. This is not how I act.

Yep in this forum, you have to be used to such name calling.

 

[Peterlag]

Yep in this forum, you have to be used to such name calling.

Thanks for sharing.

 

[peldom10]

Galatians 5:1-4
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

We will fall from the understanding of the grace that is in Christ, and succumb to the doctrines and theories that are dictated by human conception if we seek justification by our own works. The concision was from those who taught circumcision was necessary for salvation. Circumcision is a work of the flesh required by the Old Testament Law, and by the way so is water baptism, which is a carryover from part of the Levitical Law.

There are many examples of people in the Old Testament who would wash themselves with water as a final step to being clean. Water baptism was an outward sign of washing, and then you would be clean to God. Baptism in water, and the need to be circumcised passed away with the coming of Pentecost, as did the other Levitical Laws. To be led by the spirit is to not be under the yoke of bondage with the extreme of legalism, seeking the works of the flesh from the old covenant concerning the past Law administration that was written to Israel.

It's clear from the gospels that water baptism had to do with the kingdom, which was ministered by John who was known as the Baptizer, and not a minister for the Church of God. John who was a prophet functioning under the old covenant was appointed by God to prepare and confirm the promises made to Israel. His message was to tell those who lived under the old covenant that the king had come and “the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

He used water as a sign to baptize those who believed the promised Messiah would be coming in just a matter of months and to illustrate that he would be the Christ, who would baptize them not with material water, but with holy spirit, which is “power from on high.” From the habit of tradition, and only for a short period of time, a small handful of people were baptized with water into the New Testament, but never again afterwards.

In the epistles written just a little bit past the beginning of the New Testament is where we read the only time water baptism is mentioned is to note there is no more need for it, and that we are now to be baptized with holy spirit. And this is why in Acts 2:38, Peter commands “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ.” In Acts 8:16, Peter and John “baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” In Acts 10:48, Peter “commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.” In Romans 6:3, it declares “that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ.”

There is not one exception to this practice where we see water baptism, which belonged to the time period when Christ walked the earth, being used once the Church of God had become established. To suggest water baptism has anything to do with the only begotten resurrected Son of God, who is functioning within the New Testament as the head of the body of Christ, has led to nothing but confusion and has provided a bomb that has blown the local churches into pieces.

Are you kin to Andy Stanley? LOl
He now says...recently...that we are not required to follow God's commandments because of Christ's sacrifice on the cross?

What is wrong with following God's word? That hasn't let me down ...yet.

Baptism is required for the completion of the sin cleansing process.

 

[Guojing]

Are you kin to Andy Stanley? LOl
He now says...recently...that we are not required to follow God's commandments because of Christ's sacrifice on the cross?

What is wrong with following God's word? That hasn't let me down ...yet.

Baptism is required for the completion of the sin cleansing process.

Do you build an ark or sacrifice an animal whenever you sin now? It is commanded in God's word correct?

 

[Peterlag]

Are you kin to Andy Stanley? LOl
He now says...recently...that we are not required to follow God's commandments because of Christ's sacrifice on the cross?

What is wrong with following God's word? That hasn't let me down ...yet.

Baptism is required for the completion of the sin cleansing process.

Water Baptism is the work of the flesh and has nothing to do with Christ. We are either walking by our flesh or walking by the spirit.

 

[Blain]

Water Baptism is the work of the flesh and has nothing to do with Christ. We are either walking by our flesh or walking by the spirit.

Work of the flesh? nothing to do with Christ? Jon the baptist baptized Jesus himself was baptized and that is when the holy spirit came upon him and he began his ministry, also I have no idea where you got the idea it is a Catholic origin it is in the bible we are even commanded to be baptized in the name of the father the son and the holy spirit have you not read all of that?

 

[Scribe]

Galatians 5:1-4
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.

Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.

For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.

Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.

We will fall from the understanding of the grace that is in Christ, and succumb to the doctrines and theories that are dictated by human conception if we seek justification by our own works. The concision was from those who taught circumcision was necessary for salvation. Circumcision is a work of the flesh required by the Old Testament Law, and by the way so is water baptism, which is a carryover from part of the Levitical Law.

There are many examples of people in the Old Testament who would wash themselves with water as a final step to being clean. Water baptism was an outward sign of washing, and then you would be clean to God. Baptism in water, and the need to be circumcised passed away with the coming of Pentecost, as did the other Levitical Laws. To be led by the spirit is to not be under the yoke of bondage with the extreme of legalism, seeking the works of the flesh from the old covenant concerning the past Law administration that was written to Israel.

It's clear from the gospels that water baptism had to do with the kingdom, which was ministered by John who was known as the Baptizer, and not a minister for the Church of God. John who was a prophet functioning under the old covenant was appointed by God to prepare and confirm the promises made to Israel. His message was to tell those who lived under the old covenant that the king had come and “the kingdom of heaven is at hand.”

He used water as a sign to baptize those who believed the promised Messiah would be coming in just a matter of months and to illustrate that he would be the Christ, who would baptize them not with material water, but with holy spirit, which is “power from on high.” From the habit of tradition, and only for a short period of time, a small handful of people were baptized with water into the New Testament, but never again afterwards.

In the epistles written just a little bit past the beginning of the New Testament is where we read the only time water baptism is mentioned is to note there is no more need for it, and that we are now to be baptized with holy spirit. And this is why in Acts 2:38, Peter commands “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ.” In Acts 8:16, Peter and John “baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” In Acts 10:48, Peter “commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord.” In Romans 6:3, it declares “that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ.”

There is not one exception to this practice where we see water baptism, which belonged to the time period when Christ walked the earth, being used once the Church of God had become established. To suggest water baptism has anything to do with the only begotten resurrected Son of God, who is functioning within the New Testament as the head of the body of Christ, has led to nothing but confusion and has provided a bomb that has blown the local churches into pieces.

I am going to suggest that you study the scriptures on baptism more than you have so far. There is no question that Paul is talking about water baptism in these verses that he assumed all his readers had obeyed...

1What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 2God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? 3Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? 4Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. 5For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: 6Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin. 7For he that is dead is freed from sin.

Now I know that you are trying to say that Paul was talking about some kind of mystical baptism ordinance that they followed that did not include water baptism, but you have not a shred of evidence that they ever spoke about such a concept that did not include the physical ordinance of baptism. What Paul is describing is that spiritual reason why they underwent the act of faith of water baptism and you seem to be focusing on that spiritual reality which is good, but to exclude it from the act of faith of water baptism is an erroneous theory that will not hold up to exegesis on all of the New Testament scriptures on Baptism.

I am afraid you will find yourself alone on this theory and you will probably be coined a heretic if you teach that Baptism in water is not part of the Great Commission.