Is Baptism necessary for Salvation?
- Thread starter MOC
- 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.
And in the process what she doesn't realize is she's criticizing herself when criticizing others for projecting upon the baptismal status of the thief on his cross.
That's adding by inference or allusion to scripture.
We know what we need to know about the thief. Those who insist baptism is mandatory or else someone is not saved take that liberty. They're wrong.
That's adding by inference or allusion to scripture.
We know what we need to know about the thief. Those who insist baptism is mandatory or else someone is not saved take that liberty. They're wrong.
Her position is that we do not know the baptismal status of the fellow on the cross.
He may or may not be.
I fail to understand why it is that when someone says something assumptions are made immediately.
For example I said baptism saves. I never said not even once that salvation can not happen outside of baptism. I simply repeated what Peter said, "baptism now saves you". The made a case for baptismal regeneration. And a case that if a person has saving faith why would they disobey the directive given by Jesus? Then people immediately began accusing me of saying that the unbaptised are damned. Which I never said,
He may or may not be.
I fail to understand why it is that when someone says something assumptions are made immediately.
For example I said baptism saves. I never said not even once that salvation can not happen outside of baptism. I simply repeated what Peter said, "baptism now saves you". The made a case for baptismal regeneration. And a case that if a person has saving faith why would they disobey the directive given by Jesus? Then people immediately began accusing me of saying that the unbaptised are damned. Which I never said,
-
1
- Show all
You really need to go back and read her posts.
She says, 'it's an assumption to say he was not baptized. And that's done alot.'
You'll find that post easily enough. And her other ones as well.
Anyone interjecting the thief's baptismal state at all is extra biblical.
But it's done to keep the, baptism is mandatory, argument going.
Which is done alot here I've noticed. People expounding on a scripture or teaching with their own ideas of what was meant to be said there. As if God needs their help to clarify his message to the world to then make for better understanding.
He's God, what's he know? We gotta clarify on some things and fill in what's missing.🤔😶🤫
Like the idea baptism is absolutely mandatory or else a person is not saved.
Absolute and total hogwash.
Jesus baptized no one. Paul said he was not sent to baptize, though he did baptize a few. And in one instance said he was grateful he didn't baptize some.
If baptism were mandatory otherwise a person is not actually saved, those parts of the Bible are devastating. Especially as pertains to Jesus himself.
The Bible does not record Jesus baptizing anyone.
He came to die on the cross and take the sins of the world in himself there. But he didn't baptize anyone first, though his disciples did before and after he ascended. Big lapse of memory on Jesus part, huh?
Drats! I died to seal the covenant of salvation but to fully teach it as I was doing before the cross I plum forgot to baptize anyone and teach that must be done for my good news to actually save people!
And then there's the argument, again not at all the biblical gospel but that doesn't matter to such proponents of, be baptized or else stay damned in your sins, those who try to insist baptism became requisite at Pentecost. After Jesus as ended.
He lived teaching th we good news Gospel, then after he went back to heaven he sent the day of Pentecost as a P.S.
P.S You have to be baptized in liquid water or else you do not attain salvation.
Jesus was the water of eternal life.
Anyone who insists only liquid water baptism affords Salvation is wrong.
Even John the Baptizer knew that before seeing the Lamb that saves the world walking toward him so that John would baptize him.
To save Jesus from his sins and bring him into salvation after he died on the cross?
No.
To wash him, cleanse him, the Mikvah unique to Jews. Because it was after that when Jesus began his ministry.
“I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I. . . . He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matthew 3:11)
Think about it.
Those who wrongly insist baptism brings Salvation are telling you anyone who accepted Christ from their deathbed, or when dying on the battlefield, or anywhere else having not also being immersed in liquid water died condemned in their sins.
And were not brought into salvation. They died thinking they were saved when they actually were not. Nor could they or anyone ever be unless they're immersed in liquid water.
Which would imply Jesus taught a gospel missing that crucial piece. Liquid water is absolutely crucial in baptism or else someone is not saved by grace through faith.
John 3 says otherwise. As does Jesus' entire ministry of the good news Gospel.
Jesus is the water of life.
Liquid water is a good act of man. Not a conditional mandate for the salvation of man or woman. Jesus never taught such a thing as that.
“He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.”
1 John 5:12
Many here obviously oppose Sola Fide ,faith alone, and Sola Gratia, grace alone.
They are in obvious opposition when they insist someone is not brought to salvation by grace through faith. But only when that person is baptized in liquid water.
Typically those are of the Catholic church.
In 1543 the Catholic church Council of Trent declared those 2 Solas and 3 others to be anathema.
Anathema is a Greek word meaning to separate, suspend or set aside.
https://www.gotquestions.org/Council-of-Trent.html
''Salvation by grace alone through faith alone, one of the Reformers’ rallying cries, was rejected in favor of sacramental grace and a righteousness based on an admixture of grace and works.''
This is a lengthy post.
This subject is running at length too. And not for the first time I'm sure. As is the case in most Christ forums.
It's important I think to know where the proponents of the human act,rite, of committing to liquid water baptism brings Salvation are coming from when their position obviously denies the scriptures that tell us we are saved by grace through faith.
Even if they deny being Catholic, they're denouncing faith and grace scripture and insisting those alone do not bring salvation.
That is absolutely contrary to the protestant reformation.
Be aware of that which calls Jesus message false. And insists you are not in Salvation, saved, by grace through faith.
You are saved by the water of life, Christ Jesus. Don't let anyone work the scriptures so to try and convince you unless you are baptized you are still dead in your sins.
Jesus never said that. And he sure didn't die so that you could be saved by liquid water because grace and faith are not enough.
Which is exactly what the 'baptism in liquid water is mandatory or you are not saved, proponents are telling you.
By grace you have been saved through faith. Not of yourselves being immersed in liquid water.
Believe God. God saves. Not false liquid water salvation saves advocates.
You can be baptized of course. But if you are not it doesn't mean you are not saved.
Know the truth of Jesus.
Your eternity depends on getting it right.
Baptism or else you're not saved advocates are dead wrong.
Don't follow them.
Follow Jesus whose Gospel tells you, they are not telling you the truth.
She says, 'it's an assumption to say he was not baptized. And that's done alot.'
You'll find that post easily enough. And her other ones as well.
Anyone interjecting the thief's baptismal state at all is extra biblical.
But it's done to keep the, baptism is mandatory, argument going.
Which is done alot here I've noticed. People expounding on a scripture or teaching with their own ideas of what was meant to be said there. As if God needs their help to clarify his message to the world to then make for better understanding.
He's God, what's he know? We gotta clarify on some things and fill in what's missing.🤔😶🤫
Like the idea baptism is absolutely mandatory or else a person is not saved.
Absolute and total hogwash.
Jesus baptized no one. Paul said he was not sent to baptize, though he did baptize a few. And in one instance said he was grateful he didn't baptize some.
If baptism were mandatory otherwise a person is not actually saved, those parts of the Bible are devastating. Especially as pertains to Jesus himself.
The Bible does not record Jesus baptizing anyone.
He came to die on the cross and take the sins of the world in himself there. But he didn't baptize anyone first, though his disciples did before and after he ascended. Big lapse of memory on Jesus part, huh?
Drats! I died to seal the covenant of salvation but to fully teach it as I was doing before the cross I plum forgot to baptize anyone and teach that must be done for my good news to actually save people!
And then there's the argument, again not at all the biblical gospel but that doesn't matter to such proponents of, be baptized or else stay damned in your sins, those who try to insist baptism became requisite at Pentecost. After Jesus as ended.
He lived teaching th we good news Gospel, then after he went back to heaven he sent the day of Pentecost as a P.S.
P.S You have to be baptized in liquid water or else you do not attain salvation.
Jesus was the water of eternal life.
Anyone who insists only liquid water baptism affords Salvation is wrong.
Even John the Baptizer knew that before seeing the Lamb that saves the world walking toward him so that John would baptize him.
To save Jesus from his sins and bring him into salvation after he died on the cross?
No.
To wash him, cleanse him, the Mikvah unique to Jews. Because it was after that when Jesus began his ministry.
“I baptize you with water for repentance. But after me comes one who is more powerful than I. . . . He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire” (Matthew 3:11)
Think about it.
Those who wrongly insist baptism brings Salvation are telling you anyone who accepted Christ from their deathbed, or when dying on the battlefield, or anywhere else having not also being immersed in liquid water died condemned in their sins.
And were not brought into salvation. They died thinking they were saved when they actually were not. Nor could they or anyone ever be unless they're immersed in liquid water.
Which would imply Jesus taught a gospel missing that crucial piece. Liquid water is absolutely crucial in baptism or else someone is not saved by grace through faith.
John 3 says otherwise. As does Jesus' entire ministry of the good news Gospel.
Jesus is the water of life.
Liquid water is a good act of man. Not a conditional mandate for the salvation of man or woman. Jesus never taught such a thing as that.
“He who has the Son has life; he who does not have the Son of God does not have life.”
1 John 5:12
Many here obviously oppose Sola Fide ,faith alone, and Sola Gratia, grace alone.
They are in obvious opposition when they insist someone is not brought to salvation by grace through faith. But only when that person is baptized in liquid water.
Typically those are of the Catholic church.
In 1543 the Catholic church Council of Trent declared those 2 Solas and 3 others to be anathema.
Anathema is a Greek word meaning to separate, suspend or set aside.
https://www.gotquestions.org/Council-of-Trent.html
''Salvation by grace alone through faith alone, one of the Reformers’ rallying cries, was rejected in favor of sacramental grace and a righteousness based on an admixture of grace and works.''
This is a lengthy post.
This subject is running at length too. And not for the first time I'm sure. As is the case in most Christ forums.
It's important I think to know where the proponents of the human act,rite, of committing to liquid water baptism brings Salvation are coming from when their position obviously denies the scriptures that tell us we are saved by grace through faith.
Even if they deny being Catholic, they're denouncing faith and grace scripture and insisting those alone do not bring salvation.
That is absolutely contrary to the protestant reformation.
Be aware of that which calls Jesus message false. And insists you are not in Salvation, saved, by grace through faith.
You are saved by the water of life, Christ Jesus. Don't let anyone work the scriptures so to try and convince you unless you are baptized you are still dead in your sins.
Jesus never said that. And he sure didn't die so that you could be saved by liquid water because grace and faith are not enough.
Which is exactly what the 'baptism in liquid water is mandatory or you are not saved, proponents are telling you.
By grace you have been saved through faith. Not of yourselves being immersed in liquid water.
Believe God. God saves. Not false liquid water salvation saves advocates.
You can be baptized of course. But if you are not it doesn't mean you are not saved.
Know the truth of Jesus.
Your eternity depends on getting it right.
Baptism or else you're not saved advocates are dead wrong.
Don't follow them.
Follow Jesus whose Gospel tells you, they are not telling you the truth.
-
1
- Show all
Then you are saying God is wrong...WOW:
Baptism is Required
Peter 3: 21.... whereunto even baptism doth also now save us...
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.
Luke 3;33 KJV .... “And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;”
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.
KJV Marrk 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
KJV Mrark 1;4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.
Matthew 3:14... But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15. Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now, for thus it becometh us to fulfil all rightesousness. Then He suffered Him.
KJV Matthew 28:19..... Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:.
Acts 8:12-18: But when they believed Philip as he preached the things concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, both men and women were baptized.
John 3; 22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.
Quote from Billy Graham that is note worthy;
....Also, to clarify I did not say remission of sin takes place at repentance. Scripture makes it clear that it occurs upon obedience to water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus. Each is a step of faith, along with receiving the Holy Ghost, in the process of one's spiritual rebirth
.."Paul explains the doctrinal significance of what occurs when one is baptized.His explanation is found in his letter to those who had already been obedient to the command.
Paul tells the Roman Christians what actually occurred when they were/are baptized; they were baptized into His death. Being buried with Jesus into His death resulted in their sin being destroyed.
Even though Paul explains this concept, the NEW AGE RELIGION TEACHING is......... that water baptism is nothing other than a mere public display.......... And that is so far removed from the truth.
Keep in mind that Satan knows if he can continue to perpetuate that lie ...... he can keep people from entering the kingdom of God. Thus He has proven scripture which says ...in the end times there will be ...great delusions.....they are here.
Conclusion....teaching that baptism is not necessary is violation of Rev. 22;19.... And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book. 20 He which testifieth these things saith, Surely I come quickly. Amen. Even so, come, Lord Jesus. (Also two other books of the Bible).
Actually, it is you who is saying Jesus is wrong.
Jesus is the water of life. We who drink of him shall NEVER thirst.
You can take a giant gulp of the liquid water you believe will save you as you are immersed beneath it. And if you're thirsty in that moment your thirst may be quenched.
But when you rise out of that water you're not in Salvation.
You're just wet.
Your Catholic church is wrong and corrupt in denying grace and faith alone save.
We are saved by grace through faith. And those are gifts from God.
Works do not save. Thinking you have to add liquid water immersion to God's free irrevocable gift of salvation by grace and faith is a work of man, to secure the grace of God to be saved.
And that's a lie! That calls the Gospel false.
All those verses you pasted don't prove works save.
They prove you don't understand.
Acts 10:44-48
All in that passage were saved already.
We can be baptized after we have come into faith by God's grace. We're then symbolically burying the old "I am'' who was without Christ and his indwelling holy spirit. And when we arise from that water ''I am'' reborn in Christ. It's a symbolic rite that imitates Jesus death and resurrection.
He was laid in the tomb having taken the sins of the world upon himself on the cross. And he resurrected in a glorified body.
Jesus was and is the water of life. Perfect and sinless.
What you and those like you can't seem to understand is everyone who is baptized has accepted Christ as savior first! They believe! By grace they are saved! First!
Baptism comes, if it comes, afterward.
Baptism does not save.
We are saved the moment we believe.
God ordained that an eternal irrevocable fact.
And your works doctrine will never change that.
That you don't realize faith comes before Baptism and people are saved by faith is quite frankly mind boggling. It's basic gospel 101.
Yet you insist you don't know that with every post where you argue baptism is mandatory to save us.
You don't know. And we see that, post after post by you and all who are like you.
Those who insist without liquid water immersion salvation does not exist in that person who has faith in Christ.
That's not just wrong. It's dead wrong.
Jesus is the water of life. We who drink of him shall NEVER thirst.
You can take a giant gulp of the liquid water you believe will save you as you are immersed beneath it. And if you're thirsty in that moment your thirst may be quenched.
But when you rise out of that water you're not in Salvation.
You're just wet.
Your Catholic church is wrong and corrupt in denying grace and faith alone save.
We are saved by grace through faith. And those are gifts from God.
Works do not save. Thinking you have to add liquid water immersion to God's free irrevocable gift of salvation by grace and faith is a work of man, to secure the grace of God to be saved.
And that's a lie! That calls the Gospel false.
All those verses you pasted don't prove works save.
They prove you don't understand.
Acts 10:44-48
All in that passage were saved already.
We can be baptized after we have come into faith by God's grace. We're then symbolically burying the old "I am'' who was without Christ and his indwelling holy spirit. And when we arise from that water ''I am'' reborn in Christ. It's a symbolic rite that imitates Jesus death and resurrection.
He was laid in the tomb having taken the sins of the world upon himself on the cross. And he resurrected in a glorified body.
Jesus was and is the water of life. Perfect and sinless.
What you and those like you can't seem to understand is everyone who is baptized has accepted Christ as savior first! They believe! By grace they are saved! First!
Baptism comes, if it comes, afterward.
Baptism does not save.
We are saved the moment we believe.
God ordained that an eternal irrevocable fact.
And your works doctrine will never change that.
That you don't realize faith comes before Baptism and people are saved by faith is quite frankly mind boggling. It's basic gospel 101.
Yet you insist you don't know that with every post where you argue baptism is mandatory to save us.
You don't know. And we see that, post after post by you and all who are like you.
Those who insist without liquid water immersion salvation does not exist in that person who has faith in Christ.
That's not just wrong. It's dead wrong.
-
1
-
1
-
1
- Show all
The truth is here, but as you can see any time it’s talked about a rush of people come and try to muddy the waters. It’s like this in almost every thread I’ve seen. The Bible discussion forum isn’t for outreach ministry, though outreach is possible. It’s actually more like a debate forum.
I also believe there are many cultists here and a diversity of denominations. In a sense I understand why; it’s because it keeps discussions going. This is a business. I think it requires a wide spectrum of perspectives to keep it interactive.
I also believe there are many cultists here and a diversity of denominations. In a sense I understand why; it’s because it keeps discussions going. This is a business. I think it requires a wide spectrum of perspectives to keep it interactive.
R
I learned long, long ago that those trusting in water to save them will never see the truth.
A waste of time to try and show them the truth.
They cannot trust in Jesus alone, they must do their part, and then bring in a third person to dunk them under the water.
My salvation is between me and Jesus, not me, Jesus and who ever I can find to dunk me.
A waste of time to try and show them the truth.
They cannot trust in Jesus alone, they must do their part, and then bring in a third person to dunk them under the water.
My salvation is between me and Jesus, not me, Jesus and who ever I can find to dunk me.
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
- Show all