Saved by Water

[HisKid]

That's why I said it is only "something similar" to the quoted text, and not identical. It is more akin to what Peter said about a swine (sow, female pig) in 2 Peter 2:22 KJV:

"But it is happened unto them according to the true proverb, The dog is turned to his own vomit again; and the sow that was washed to her wallowing in the mire."​

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

It's not similar enough, as you cannot save an unrepentant sinner by throwing some water on them. If that were true, we (those called by God) could simply baptize the whole world and all would be saved. We know that is absurd.

.

 

[JBTN]

The account in Acts 10 is the only place we see individuals receiving the Holy Ghost immediately after being told of Jesus' death, burial and resurrection. Why? One can conclude that Peter would have hesitated to allow Gentiles to be water baptized for the remission of sin without assurance that God had accepted them to receive repentance unto life. (Acts 11:17-18) This truth is actually expressed in Acts 10, verse 47 where Peter makes this statement, "Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized in water."

“The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭15:6-9‬ ‭ESV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/59/act.15.6-9.ESV

Read through this carefully, doesn’t it say that the Apostles, the elders present, and those of the house of Cornelius received the Holy Spirit in the same way. The Greek word no in “no distinction” is a compound word, not a simple no. It means not one. So he made not one distinction between us and them. If some had received the Holy Spirit before water baptism and some after wouldn’t that have been a distinction. Also, the word translated ”just as” indicates that the manner in which they received the Holy Spirit was the same. If you go back to Acts 10:47 and 11:15-18 and read through them carefully you will see that Peter said something similar of those who accompanied him to see Cornelius and also those of the house of the circumcision.

 

[JBTN]

What do think verse 47 is referring to if not Peter's message that everyone must repent, and be baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus for the remission of sin? This message began in Jerusalem and continued into all nations even until today. (Acts 2:38-41, 8:12-18, 10:44-48, 19:1-6, 22:16)

47And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

“Then he said to them, “These are my words that I spoke to you while I was still with you, that everything written about me in the Law of Moses and the Prophets and the Psalms must be fulfilled.” Then he opened their minds to understand the Scriptures, and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead, and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem. You are witnesses of these things. And behold, I am sending the promise of my Father upon you. But stay in the city until you are clothed with power from on high.””
‭‭Luke‬ ‭24:44-49‬ ‭ESV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/59/luk.24.47-49.ESV

The passage here in Luke 24 is where Jesus opened the minds of the apostles to understand what was written in the Prophets and Psalms. Later Peter reflects back on this and says:

“To him all the prophets bear witness that everyone who believes in him receives forgiveness of sins through his name.””
‭‭Acts‬ ‭10:43‬ ‭ESV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/59/act.10.43.ESV

 

[eternally-gratefull]

John. So.. was he doing it of his own will (the will of man) or at the command of God (God's will and leading)?

That is not the point

Did John Baptise or Did God?

Does any man have the power to baptise you into Christ? And if so. How does he do this?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

If water baptism was instituted by man, it is just a ritual that can and should be completely disregarded.
If water baptism was instituted at the mouth of God, then it becomes important to understand what it is meant to accomplish.
If water baptism was instituted by God AND is for remission of sins as Acts 2:38, Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3 and others suggest, then it is truly a matter of salvation.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

Even more important is if baptism is completed by God himself. To try to replace that with the baptism completed by ma would be blasphemous.

 

[Gardenias]

Ok my take on water baptism.
Yes I have been baptized with water but the greater baptism by far was being baptized by the Holy Spirit as in the time of Acts.

I believe John did what God called him to do to bridge the gap of the old testament law with the new covenant that was to begin.
I also believe Jesus allowed John to baptize him for that same reason that it would be a completed circle. God even spoke and said this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased.

Jesus shed blood is the only THING that can cover a person's sins in his righteousness not water period!

 

[Gardenias]

Remission of sin was not available until after Jesus' resurrection and the giving of the Holy Ghost at Pentecost.

Many times in his encounters with people Jesus said ' your sins are forgiven ...go and sin no more" was this not forgiveness of sin by the soon to be redeemer or was it just words?

 

[peldom10]

I do respect the Bible. Thats why I not only received Christ, I also did what he asked.

And I am trying to get you to see the fallacy in your argument and where your faith is misplaced

That's your problem...seen often...you attack the messenger rather than respond to God's word.
Just do that and we can all learn.

 

[peldom10]

Ok my take on water baptism.
Yes I have been baptized with water but the greater baptism by far was being baptized by the Holy Spirit as in the time of Acts.

I believe John did what God called him to do to bridge the gap of the old testament law with the new covenant that was to begin.
I also believe Jesus allowed John to baptize him for that same reason that it would be a completed circle. God even spoke and said this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased.

Jesus shed blood is the only THING that can cover a person's sins in his righteousness not water period!

we are talking about the water baptism. why some want to confound the principal element of a debate by adding another element is not readily understood.

You should re-visit the old covenant and new covenant transition.
The Bible says while baptism under the old covenant was for bodily cleansing purposes it was re-constituted under the new covenant as part of sin cleansing. That is not to suggest that Christ had sin to cleanse when He was baptiized....,He did not....because He never sinned while on this earth.

 

[peldom10]

My point is that the ark saved Noah and family FROM the water. iow, they didn't even get wet. Just as the Israelites who walked on dry ground in the midst of the Red Sea and didn't get wet either, yet Paul described them as having been baptized "in the sea" in 1 Cor 10:1-5. It was the entire Egyptian army that were immersed IN the water and were killed by the water.

Water is dangerous. It kills people and animals. Why some believers get the notion that water baptism saves is sad.

It is the baptism with the Holy Spirit that saves us. That baptism occurs the moment one believes in the Lord Jesus for salvation.

And 1 Pet 3:21 makes that point.

There was no sin baptism with water in Noah's time. He was under the old covenant...not the new covenant.

 

[peldom10]

I'm afraid you have a one-track mind toward arguing on this topic.
I have said nothing against baptism being commanded at all.

What I said was that we need to consider why it's ridiculous to dump water on people who do not believe: because it is not H2O that saves people or cleanses them from sin. There is something else.

You are wrong.
Water saves us...read the clear language of the Bible on baptism.

 

[peldom10]

Its not true

It is replacing the work of God with the work of Man.

It places water baptism done by the work of man with spirit baptism done by the work of God.

In laymens terms, its called blasphemy.

That is just wrong.
The Bible requires baptism...it replaces nothing.

 

[peldom10]

I know what you believe

I believe what the Bible states also. does not state water baptism saves

does say that water baptism follows salvation as a sign that you are a follower of Christ and you signify your death in His by going under the water and new life by coming out

don't drown. not sure what that would signify

That's not true. This has been posted in this thread;......Baptism is Required...read it;


Peter 3: 21.... whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:


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.


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 ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Acts 22;16... And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Roman 6;3.... Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

Galations 3:26...... For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Mark16;16.... He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.....


There is 100+ verses in the Bible regarding baptism. The new age religion teaching that baptism is not required is new...since the 1960's. Research has not found reference to that interpretation anywhere prior to the 1960's...why?

Either one accepts clear biblical language or write your own bible.....and tickle your years and tell yourself what you want to hear...as you wish.(A end time prophesy.)
God's word tells us we must be baptized to complete the sin cleansing process.

 

[Gardenias]

Oh, I see. Sorry, I have her on ignore.

.

Maybe et likely I am on your ignore list too🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

 

[KelbyofGod]

That is not the point

That's kind of funny. They wouldn't answer Jesus either, when he asked "The baptism of John...was it from heaven, or of men". I knew you were acting like the religious leaders of that day, but I really didn't think you would likewise be incapable of answering! That's kind of AMAZING how accurate and how consistently true (throughout time) God's account is.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[KelbyofGod]

I'll reply, but you will decide whether or not to be open to looking beyond what you already think is complete truth.

The Apostle Paul who wrote most of the NT, said that "Christ sent me not to water baptize".

The Apostle Paul also said:

"And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other." - 1 Corinthians 1:16​

Don't forget this verse so quickly. Either Paul baptized with effect and because it was necessary, or else you're saying he performed those baptisms flippantly and against the commandment of God.

Jesus never water baptized anyone.

Whether you understand it or not, Both Jesus and John the Baptist knew how to do only the part God had established for them, individually, and knew that God would do the other piece through the other individual(s).

Mark 1:8 KJV​

"I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost." - John the Baptist​

John 4:1-2 KJV​

"When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John, [2] (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)" <-- meaning that Jesus had his disciples do the water baptizing.​

Jesus himself didn't baptize people in water but he truly made sure it was part of his ministry.

John 3:22-23 KJV​

After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judæa; and there he tarried with them, and baptized. [23] And John also was baptizing in Ænon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.​

It doesn't matter how many others, prophets or priests didn't baptize. That has no impact on the necessity placed on those who ARE sent to water baptize, like John or Jesus' immediate disciples.

​

BTW, Jesus would NOT have implemented water baptism into his ministry if it was just an unnecessary ritual.

The dying Thief on the Cross, is in Heaven now, and He was never water baptized.

He also didn't believe the Gospel that includes that God raised Jesus from the dead (because that hadn't happened yet). And he also didn't receive the Holy Ghost (because it hadn't been poured out yet, because Jesus hadn't gone to the Father yet.) The Thief on the cross was still under the OLD covenant, not the new.

So, here is the thing......Water can't save you, unless water died on the Cross shedding its blood and dying for your sin.

Gee, why didn't anyone just say "Believing can't save you unless believing died on the Cross shedding its blood and dying for your sin" ? <-- There's a failing in the very nature of your wording. You couldn't see it with "Water" but I'm guessing you can see it with "Believing".

Then, that settles that water cult heresy.

I won't directly answer this one because it makes me chuckle when people use unnecessary inflammatory wording. Notice Jesus didn't do that. But if you want to see an impressive example of that type of wording, read Acts 24:2-8, especially verse 5. "Pestilent... mover of sedition... ringleader" LOL
This type of wording is geared toward provoking the flesh, not conveying truth. People do it because it can be persuasive to an audience of men, but I think you to be better than that.

Also, lets say you lead someone to Christ in Israel, and you know of no Messianic Church, and they truly believed and are born again.
If they say....>"can we go down to the Mediterranean sea so that i can be water baptized"...... you say......""Of course.""
You take them down there and you do it according to Matthew 28.

I guess I don't understand what point you're trying to make with this last part.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[KelbyofGod]

Even more important is if baptism is completed by God himself. To try to replace that with the baptism completed by ma would be blasphemous.

The baptism of the Holy Ghost accomplishes one thing. The baptism in water accomplishes a different thing. These things work together, not against each other, as it is written:

"And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, and the water, and the blood: and these three agree in one." - 1 John 5:8 KJV​

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

 

[HisKid]

Maybe et likely I am on your ignore list too🤣🤣🤣🤣🤣

Should you be?

 

[HisKid]

That's kind of funny. They wouldn't answer Jesus either, when he asked "The baptism of John...was it from heaven, or of men". I knew you were acting like the religious leaders of that day, but I really didn't think you would likewise be incapable of answering! That's kind of AMAZING how accurate and how consistently true (throughout time) God's account is.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

Ohhhhh, comparing yourself to Jesus, are you? AMAZING.

 

[HisKid]

You are wrong.
Water saves us...read the clear language of the Bible on baptism.

Of course water saves you. Let's dunk the whole world and we can save everyone!.. Whether they like it or not!