Saved by Water
- Thread starter Wansvic
- Start date
-
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.
The problem with the KJV is not just that Greek and Hebrew are better understood these days. It is that some words have changed meaning. For example, "conversation" to 17th century Englishmen meant way of life, not just words. These days, a lot of people are barely literate, let alone skilled in Elizabethan English.
I was saved in the early 1970's. The KJV was in wide use still. Virtually every sermon I heard involved an explanation of what the KJV said against what the text meant. My logic was simple. Ditch the KJV (I was never a Shakespeare fan) and get a more modern translation. I ended up with the NASB and the Amplified mostly. I now use Bible Hub and compare versions when I need to.
I don't like paraphrases. I teach the Bible, although I'm on a break now. So you can be sure that I take it very seriously. I really wanted to be an Evangelist, but God has other plans.
I was saved in the early 1970's. The KJV was in wide use still. Virtually every sermon I heard involved an explanation of what the KJV said against what the text meant. My logic was simple. Ditch the KJV (I was never a Shakespeare fan) and get a more modern translation. I ended up with the NASB and the Amplified mostly. I now use Bible Hub and compare versions when I need to.
I don't like paraphrases. I teach the Bible, although I'm on a break now. So you can be sure that I take it very seriously. I really wanted to be an Evangelist, but God has other plans.
-
1
- Show all
We are living in the days of the new covenant, that means that the Lord speaks to us in a new and better way. God spoke to us in stone, in literal actions that were symbols of the spiritual. Water was a powerful, wonderful symbol of cleanliness from sin. Under the new covenant we are to see and live with the spirit. Read in Jeremiah where God explains this to us. The laws of the Lord are given to us in our hearts, now. Water is no longer a symbol of that cleansing, we are spiritually and truly cleansed.
-
1
- Show all
This is a simple fix . . . use ALL Translations. They're all saying essentially the same things. In fact . . . we should stretch our minds and read the Jewish Tanakh, which is their Translation for the Old Testament. It is unbelievable as it supports the Doctrine of Spiritual Circumcision more than the "christian" Bibles. Do yourself a favor and buy this Bible.
It seems like there's a very basic misunderstanding of what Peter is saying when comparing baptism with Noah's flood.
The people baptized (submersed) in water were the people that died in God's judgement. Noah and his family were saved FROM baptism (the water), NOT by baptism (the water), which is the direct opposite of the OP's conclusion.
To think that this passage says "baptism saves you" is a reference to water baptism saving you is the direct opposite of the point in Peter's explanation: The baptism Noah and his family entered into was the answer to God in good conscience, which is directly opposite to the ones who were baptized in water and perished.
There are so many proof texts of salvation by faith, I suppose it's good to talk about the few that seem confusing to that point.
The people baptized (submersed) in water were the people that died in God's judgement. Noah and his family were saved FROM baptism (the water), NOT by baptism (the water), which is the direct opposite of the OP's conclusion.
To think that this passage says "baptism saves you" is a reference to water baptism saving you is the direct opposite of the point in Peter's explanation: The baptism Noah and his family entered into was the answer to God in good conscience, which is directly opposite to the ones who were baptized in water and perished.
There are so many proof texts of salvation by faith, I suppose it's good to talk about the few that seem confusing to that point.
-
3
- Show all
Did you say Greek and Hebrew are better to understand these day? So the languages evolved? Like fake evolution. I think Greek would have been better understood back then..lmbo And Paleo Hebrew was lost. They speak Aramaic language from Babylon. Not real Hebrew. The Greek lexicon and Concordances are corrupted. The new age Bibles are corrupted. So those 40 kjv scholars that were fluent in all those languages didn't have real Greek? Lmbo Greek is better now? It's got the new and improved words that those 40 scholars didnt have? ...wow Typical
-
1
- Show all
Consider the NT spiritual reality foreshadowed by the flood. God used literal water to destroy sin on the Earth and at the same time saved Noah and his family.
According to scripture, one's personal sins can be washed away in obedience to the command to be baptized in water. (Acts 2:38, 22:16) This is only possible for those who believe that Jesus paid the penalty for sin through his sacrifice.
Believing God's entire message and being obedient to the associated aspects is what prompts the NT spiritual reality of being born again.
According to scripture, one's personal sins can be washed away in obedience to the command to be baptized in water. (Acts 2:38, 22:16) This is only possible for those who believe that Jesus paid the penalty for sin through his sacrifice.
Believing God's entire message and being obedient to the associated aspects is what prompts the NT spiritual reality of being born again.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
What you would be proclaiming here the Bible does not teach, though it is taught in some denominations.
let's examine your original post.
"1.The water was the means God used to carry Noah and his family to safety. The sin of the world was washed away in the flood waters. The like figure or antitype is the NT water baptism. (Acts 2:38, 22:16)"
The waters did not carry Noah and the others to safety, the ARK did. The waters were God's act of condemnation upon the world. The whole world was flooded and the ARK road safely above those waters until God's Judgement was complete. The water could be said to have born up the ark upon itself. Note also, the ark was "closed up" by God Himself and not man.
"2. Notice verse 21 makes specific mention of the process having nothing to do with the removal of filth from the flesh. (This is a reference to bath water) Thus, the comment points to a spiritual transaction taking place."
Peter is not making a distinction between "Baptism" and "bath water". What he is saying here is that the ordinance of Baptism cannot cleanse one of inward filth and sin (the sin nature that resides in us all), because only the application of Christ's shed blood can do that. Comparing the flood to Baptism is utilizing the idea that just as the ARK was supported by the waters of the flood, so to are our consciences supported by this act.
"3. The scripture mentions that baptism is the answer of a good conscience toward God. Our own behavior, and in this particular case getting baptized, is what prompts a good conscience. The result is to be free of guilt. God is the giver of the Holy Ghost and we have no control over that other than asking for Him to give it."
The act of being Baptized does not, as you say, "... prompt a good conscience.", as if some how you are changed by it but rather is carried out "by a good conscience", as the first act of obedience to Christ. Baptism does not make one free of guilt, the one carrying it out believes that the shed blood of Jesus Christ is sufficient to cover all his/her sins and therefore is blameless. Out of a good conscience that person follows his/her Lord's example in Baptism. Baptism is not required for salvation. The thief on the cross with Jesus, was never Baptized into Christ's Baptism nor was there any mention of him ever being baptized at all.
Indeed one does need to be "Born Again" to be saved and this is the sovereign act of the Holy Spirit. We have know part in being born anew. We are the "passive " recipients of this new life and have no more part in it than we had in our physical births.
let's examine your original post.
"1.The water was the means God used to carry Noah and his family to safety. The sin of the world was washed away in the flood waters. The like figure or antitype is the NT water baptism. (Acts 2:38, 22:16)"
The waters did not carry Noah and the others to safety, the ARK did. The waters were God's act of condemnation upon the world. The whole world was flooded and the ARK road safely above those waters until God's Judgement was complete. The water could be said to have born up the ark upon itself. Note also, the ark was "closed up" by God Himself and not man.
"2. Notice verse 21 makes specific mention of the process having nothing to do with the removal of filth from the flesh. (This is a reference to bath water) Thus, the comment points to a spiritual transaction taking place."
Peter is not making a distinction between "Baptism" and "bath water". What he is saying here is that the ordinance of Baptism cannot cleanse one of inward filth and sin (the sin nature that resides in us all), because only the application of Christ's shed blood can do that. Comparing the flood to Baptism is utilizing the idea that just as the ARK was supported by the waters of the flood, so to are our consciences supported by this act.
"3. The scripture mentions that baptism is the answer of a good conscience toward God. Our own behavior, and in this particular case getting baptized, is what prompts a good conscience. The result is to be free of guilt. God is the giver of the Holy Ghost and we have no control over that other than asking for Him to give it."
The act of being Baptized does not, as you say, "... prompt a good conscience.", as if some how you are changed by it but rather is carried out "by a good conscience", as the first act of obedience to Christ. Baptism does not make one free of guilt, the one carrying it out believes that the shed blood of Jesus Christ is sufficient to cover all his/her sins and therefore is blameless. Out of a good conscience that person follows his/her Lord's example in Baptism. Baptism is not required for salvation. The thief on the cross with Jesus, was never Baptized into Christ's Baptism nor was there any mention of him ever being baptized at all.
Indeed one does need to be "Born Again" to be saved and this is the sovereign act of the Holy Spirit. We have know part in being born anew. We are the "passive " recipients of this new life and have no more part in it than we had in our physical births.
-
3
- Show all
Genesis 7:11 In the six hundredth year of Noah's life, in the second month, the seventeenth day of the month, the same day were all the fountains of the great deep broken up, and the windows of heaven were opened.
...
Genesis 8:2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained
The water (from the rain and the fountains of the deep) were used by God in judgment.
Noah was safe within the ark ... Noah became heir of the righteousness which is by faith:
Hebrews 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.
The things not seen as yet ... rain and the fountains of the deep being broken up ... were the means by which God condemned the world.
The ark, which Noah prepared by faith was what carried Noah through the judgment by which God condemned with world.
...
Genesis 8:2 The fountains also of the deep and the windows of heaven were stopped, and the rain from heaven was restrained
The water (from the rain and the fountains of the deep) were used by God in judgment.
Noah was safe within the ark ... Noah became heir of the righteousness which is by faith:
Hebrews 11:7 By faith Noah, being warned of God of things not seen as yet, moved with fear, prepared an ark to the saving of his house; by the which he condemned the world, and became heir of the righteousness which is by faith.
The things not seen as yet ... rain and the fountains of the deep being broken up ... were the means by which God condemned the world.
The ark, which Noah prepared by faith was what carried Noah through the judgment by which God condemned with world.
-
2
- Show all
And what do they say about Paul, when he said that he was glad that he didn't baptize "many"?
1 Corinthians 1:14 NIV - 14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius . . .
What a weird thing to say, huh? I mean, if water baptism saves a person, then this is equivalent to Paul saying that he's glad that "you" did not receive Holy Salvation. That's insane.
1 Corinthians 1:14 NIV - 14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius . . .
What a weird thing to say, huh? I mean, if water baptism saves a person, then this is equivalent to Paul saying that he's glad that "you" did not receive Holy Salvation. That's insane.
-
1
- Show all
.
I have to agree with 2ndTD because if ritual baptism were so all-fired
essential in the plan of salvation, then I really think that Paul-- duly
authorized to speak for Christ and act for Christ --would've given it a very
high priority in his ministry.
• 1Cor 1:17 . .Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel
_
I have to agree with 2ndTD because if ritual baptism were so all-fired
essential in the plan of salvation, then I really think that Paul-- duly
authorized to speak for Christ and act for Christ --would've given it a very
high priority in his ministry.
• 1Cor 1:17 . .Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel
_
-
2
- Show all
I disagree with your descriptions.
As for the thief on the cross, he was under the OT mandate. The NT spiritual rebirth was not available to anyone until after Jesus' death, burial and resurrection.
Also, being passive recipients contradicts the word. The definition of passive is as follows: "accepting or allowing what happens or what others do, without active response or resistance"
The word conveys a fact. Individuals are to respond to Jesus' death, burial and resurrection through belief, repentance, and obedience to the command to be water baptized in His name.
As for the thief on the cross, he was under the OT mandate. The NT spiritual rebirth was not available to anyone until after Jesus' death, burial and resurrection.
Also, being passive recipients contradicts the word. The definition of passive is as follows: "accepting or allowing what happens or what others do, without active response or resistance"
The word conveys a fact. Individuals are to respond to Jesus' death, burial and resurrection through belief, repentance, and obedience to the command to be water baptized in His name.
-
1
-
1
- Show all
They are being disobedient to the very command of God. Everyone will be judged by the word, not what their denomination teaches:
Heb 5:9
And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
John 12:48
He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
Heb 5:9
And being made perfect, he became the author of eternal salvation unto all them that obey him;
John 12:48
He that rejecteth me, and receiveth not my words, hath one that judgeth him: the word that I have spoken, the same shall judge him in the last day.
Your comment is so off base.
Paul's specific comment of being glad that he did not baptize many in that congregation was because they were esteeming the minister and not Jesus Christ who was crucified for them. He did not want anyone looking at him as someone special. Their focus should have been on the one that deserved it; Jesus!
Keep in mind that the person performing one's baptism is of no consequence. It is God that brings about the spiritual reality associated with it.
Also, Paul's ministry was primarily to preach the word that included water baptism. Performing water baptisms was the ministry of others.
Paul's specific comment of being glad that he did not baptize many in that congregation was because they were esteeming the minister and not Jesus Christ who was crucified for them. He did not want anyone looking at him as someone special. Their focus should have been on the one that deserved it; Jesus!
Keep in mind that the person performing one's baptism is of no consequence. It is God that brings about the spiritual reality associated with it.
Also, Paul's ministry was primarily to preach the word that included water baptism. Performing water baptisms was the ministry of others.