My take on water baptism...

  • Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.

    If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!

    To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Jun 15, 2020
622
79
28
#61
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.
I don't think there were too many prophets in the new or old testament that had a lot of people standing with them. It does not mean I or they were wrong.
 
Jun 15, 2020
622
79
28
#62
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?
According to the Catholic Encyclopedia 11, page 263 “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son and Holy Spirit…”. This is confirmed by the Catholic University of America in Washington D.C in 1923 in its New Testament studies number 5.

The Tyndale New Testament Commentary 1 on page 275 in regards to Matthew 28: 19 reads: “It is often affirmed that the words of Jesus in the name of the Father, and the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the Ipisissima Verba (exact words) of Jesus, but a later liturgical addition”.
 

Blain

The Word Weaver
Aug 28, 2012
19,504
2,711
113
#63
According to the Catholic Encyclopedia 11, page 263 “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son and Holy Spirit…”. This is confirmed by the Catholic University of America in Washington D.C in 1923 in its New Testament studies number 5.

The Tyndale New Testament Commentary 1 on page 275 in regards to Matthew 28: 19 reads: “It is often affirmed that the words of Jesus in the name of the Father, and the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the Ipisissima Verba (exact words) of Jesus, but a later liturgical addition”.
You cannot trust what the Catholic church says they have proven to have had many unerhanded dealings and are known for turning scripture into their own kind of doctrine.

That may be what they say happened but that doesn't change what the scriptures teach
 
Jun 15, 2020
622
79
28
#64
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.
Acts 2:38 “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 you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


Acts 8:12 “But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.


Acts 8:16 “For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.


Acts 10:48 “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.


Acts 19:5 “When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.


Acts 22:16 “And now why tarriest you? arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.


Romans 6:3 “Know you not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?


1 Corinthians 1:13 “Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” [Implied]


Galatians 3:27 “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
 
Jun 15, 2020
622
79
28
#65
You cannot trust what the Catholic church says they have proven to have had many unerhanded dealings and are known for turning scripture into their own kind of doctrine.

That may be what they say happened but that doesn't change what the scriptures teach
No Water...

Acts 2:38 “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 you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


Acts 8:12 “But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.


Acts 8:16 “For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.


Acts 10:48 “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.


Acts 19:5 “When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.


Acts 22:16 “And now why tarriest you? arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.


Romans 6:3 “Know you not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?


1 Corinthians 1:13 “Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” [Implied]


Galatians 3:27 “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
 

soggykitten

Well-known member
Jul 3, 2020
2,322
1,369
113
#66
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.

Thank you for sharing your take on water baptism.
If it is true you do not accept the old testament and will not read it, you are lost to understanding the new in its entirety. The old testament is filled with Jesus and is the foundation of the new covenant.

It is my sincere prayer that God lead you from the error of your thoughts with regard to your error concerning water baptism, and if it be true about the old testament, that too. May God find you and lead you to the truth of his eternal word.
 
Aug 14, 2019
1,374
307
83
#67
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.
That'd a claim often made when the position argued lacks substance. You are in company with Muslims and others who don't believe Jesus is God. It's just ad hominem. You would never have heard of Jesus without the Catholic Church. You're like a kid sitting on your dad's shoulders thinking you are taller than him.😉
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#68
I don't think there were too many prophets in the new or old testament that had a lot of people standing with them. It does not mean I or they were wrong.
Yes, but you're not a prophet, you just are a guy with bad hermeneutics.
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#69
Acts 2:38 “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 you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


Acts 8:12 “But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.


Acts 8:16 “For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.


Acts 10:48 “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.


Acts 19:5 “When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.


Acts 22:16 “And now why tarriest you? arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.


Romans 6:3 “Know you not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?


1 Corinthians 1:13 “Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” [Implied]


Galatians 3:27 “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Did you NOT think these involved water baptism as the outward sign of the inward reality?
And I suppose you have invented a method to explain away the ordinance of the communion of the Lord's Supper the partaking of the blood and body in symbolism with the wine(grape juice) and bread?
 
S

Scribe

Guest
#70
No Water...

Acts 2:38 “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 you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


Acts 8:12 “But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.


Acts 8:16 “For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.


Acts 10:48 “And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.


Acts 19:5 “When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.


Acts 22:16 “And now why tarriest you? arise, and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.


Romans 6:3 “Know you not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?


1 Corinthians 1:13 “Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul?” [Implied]


Galatians 3:27 “For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
It is very difficult for me to believe that YOU sincerely believe in your heart that these scriptures did not refer to the act of water baptism. I find it doubtful that anyone could believe that. I am highly suspicious that there is a willful act of intellectual dishonesty going on here.
 
Aug 14, 2019
1,374
307
83
#71
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.
Severe case of either or thinking. Quite Gnostic of you. Everything God made is good.
 
Jun 15, 2020
622
79
28
#72
It is very difficult for me to believe that YOU sincerely believe in your heart that these scriptures did not refer to the act of water baptism. I find it doubtful that anyone could believe that. I am highly suspicious that there is a willful act of intellectual dishonesty going on here.
I feel sad for you that you think the new testament is about water.
 
Jun 15, 2020
622
79
28
#73
Did you NOT think these involved water baptism as the outward sign of the inward reality?
And I suppose you have invented a method to explain away the ordinance of the communion of the Lord's Supper the partaking of the blood and body in symbolism with the wine(grape juice) and bread?
I don't do any wine or grape juice. But I do eat and drink in remembrance of the Lord.
 
Jun 15, 2020
622
79
28
#75
That'd a claim often made when the position argued lacks substance. You are in company with Muslims and others who don't believe Jesus is God. It's just ad hominem. You would never have heard of Jesus without the Catholic Church. You're like a kid sitting on your dad's shoulders thinking you are taller than him.😉
According to the Catholic Encyclopedia 11, page 263 “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son and Holy Spirit…”. This is confirmed by the Catholic University of America in Washington D.C in 1923 in its New Testament studies number 5.

The Tyndale New Testament Commentary 1 on page 275 in regards to Matthew 28: 19 reads: “It is often affirmed that the words of Jesus in the name of the Father, and the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the Ipisissima Verba (exact words) of Jesus, but a later liturgical addition”.
 
Jun 15, 2020
622
79
28
#76
Thank you for sharing your take on water baptism.
If it is true you do not accept the old testament and will not read it, you are lost to understanding the new in its entirety. The old testament is filled with Jesus and is the foundation of the new covenant.

It is my sincere prayer that God lead you from the error of your thoughts with regard to your error concerning water baptism, and if it be true about the old testament, that too. May God find you and lead you to the truth of his eternal word.
Oh but I have read the old testament. Twice all the way through. I just don't teach it because we have the new now.
 
Jun 15, 2020
622
79
28
#78
because a real prophet would be able to discern authorial intent on all those baptism scriptures. :)
You did not believe the simple truth that I posted. I will post it again and there really is no more data on it.

Water baptism 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.
 
Aug 14, 2019
1,374
307
83
#79
According to the Catholic Encyclopedia 11, page 263 “The baptismal formula was changed from the name of Jesus Christ to the words Father, Son and Holy Spirit…”. This is confirmed by the Catholic University of America in Washington D.C in 1923 in its New Testament studies number 5.

The Tyndale New Testament Commentary 1 on page 275 in regards to Matthew 28: 19 reads: “It is often affirmed that the words of Jesus in the name of the Father, and the Son, and of the Holy Ghost are not the Ipisissima Verba (exact words) of Jesus, but a later liturgical addition”.
Ever read the Didache? It was written no later than 150 AD. It has Instructions for Baptisms. Just as it is done today it was done then.
 

Nehemiah6

Senior Member
Jul 18, 2017
26,074
13,778
113
#80
Water baptism is a carryover from part of the Levitical Law.
That is completely false. Christian baptism has nothing to do with levitical law. And in any event, your attempt to prove that Christian baptism is no longer necessary has absolutely no merit. That is an attempt to mislead and misdirect people, and there are serious consequences for leading people astray.