Baptism

[NightTwister]

Well it does refer to people “coming up out of the water.” That does not necessarily mean immersion.

 

[Wansvic]

... Baptism is the NT sign that points to our being placed into Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection.

You err in thinking that physical activity on our part produces spiritual reality. The opposite is true. Spiritual activity on God's part produces physical activity on our part.

You, when you share Acts 2:38 you neglect to pair it with the previous verse. In verse 37 and prior, God sends a preacher, His word is preached, hearing is given, hearts are pricked, and wills are affected. It is to those so affected that the commands in verse 38 are given.

I did not exclude verse 37 intentionally. My comment was relative to the instructions Peter gave in order for NT believers to be born again.

Again what scripture does and does not say:

"...let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?" (Acts 2:36-37)

Peter DID NOT say:
Repent and be baptized as a sign your sins have been forgiven.

Peter DID say:
Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. (Acts 2:38)

I believe God's word. And it says upon belief of, and obedience to God's command to repent, and be baptized in the name of Jesus an individual's sins are forgiven. (Acts 2:38, 22:16; John 3:3-5) This is only possible for those who believe in Jesus and His sacrifice. (verse 36-37) Because of Jesus' sacrifice this can become a reality for everyone but not all will receive what He died to provide.

 

[Cameron143]

There were dire consequences for those who disobeyed the OT command to circumcise:

"He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.
And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant." Gen 17:13-14


"And it came to pass by the way in the inn, that the Lord met him, (Moses) and sought to kill him.
Then Zipporah took a sharp stone, and cut off the foreskin of her son, and cast it at his feet, and said, Surely a bloody husband art thou to me.
So he let him go: then she said, A bloody husband thou art, because of the circumcision." Ex 4:24-26

There are always consequences for disobedience. But OT Jews were in a covenant of works. Any disobedience brought death. We are under no such covenant. The new covenant is not between man and God, but God the Father and God the Son. And it has already been fulfilled in Christ. It is administered through grace and once we are made a part of it, we are no longer under condemnation, for we have passed from death unto life already.

 

[Cameron143]

I did not exclude verse 37 intentionally. My comment was relative to the instructions Peter gave in order for NT believers to be born again.

Again what scripture does and does not say:

"...let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.
Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?" (Acts 2:36-37)

Peter DID NOT say:
Repent and be baptized as a sign your sins have been forgiven.

Peter DID say:
Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins. (Acts 2:38)

I believe God's word. And it says upon belief of, and obedience to God's command to repent, and be baptized in the name of Jesus an individual's sins are forgiven. (Acts 2:38, 22:16; John 3:3-5) This is only possible for those who believe in Jesus and His sacrifice. (verse 36-37) Because of Jesus' sacrifice this can become a reality for everyone but not all will receive what He died to provide.

This is works salvation. You add an act on our part as a condition of salvation rather than as a result of salvation.

 

[homwardbound]

The best way to baptized. Any teaching on this please

Ephesians 4:5
one Lord, one faith, one baptism,

Yet there are two, John the Baptist and Jesus

John 3:30
He must increase, but I must decrease.

Which one saves, water or spirit of God. What was John the Baptist's purpose?

To be the witness of Jesus the messiah and all those there when John Baptized Jesus, that saw it too and heard the voice of God in the Thunder that happened then without a cloud in the sky, it was clear and no sign of rain. The People saw it and some believed and some did not and then he went forward to do what is done for us the people. to be saved ins resurrected by God his Father that does that to us those that will not stop belief, no matter what troubles happen to us.

The Spirit baptism saves, as the water is the wanting to be saved as is going on now today, in controversies that go: you better be water baptized or else, really?
seeing Acts with Peter going to the Gentile house of Cornelius and God speaking through Peter to them, Peter saw them get saved and then said who can refuse water now? And then reported this to the other disciples what he saw
Amazing Grace this is for us all, Hope and trust God to show you God's truth over man's interpretations of what is truth to them and not others too.

 

[Thunderrr-mental]

There are always consequences for disobedience. But OT Jews were in a covenant of works. Any disobedience brought death. We are under no such covenant. The new covenant is not between man and God, but God the Father and God the Son. And it has already been fulfilled in Christ. It is administered through grace and once we are made a part of it, we are no longer under condemnation, for we have passed from death unto life already.

The Jews are under a covenant of his life living in them.

That's why his life has to be baptised in his name.

It's simply his life living in all Jews who have yet to welcome his life living in them.

Jesus is the fountain of youth.

But he springs that fountain in every person when they obey his life in every person.

Jesus holds the power of death in his life, so therefore there is still life in all the unsaved. And it's his life that accepts the new seed in all the unsaved, because it's his life in all the unsaved.

Something to posture but being spiritualy dead to the lord doesn't exist.

Thankyou Au revoir

 

[NightTwister]

Well it does refer to people “coming up out of the water.”

If I wade into a river to fly fish, when I'm done am I "coming up out of the water?" Yes, I am. This phrase does not necessitate "full immersion." People who insist that it does are reading into the text what is not there.

 

[Wansvic]

This one went ever which way. Based on just what you asked there is no best way only way true way. Some will say ya have to be dunked others say you don't. Go to your Church tell them you want to be baptized. Or in some lake, river have at it.

"And Peter said to them, “Repent [change your old way of thinking, turn from your sinful ways, accept and follow Jesus as the Messiah] and be baptized, each of you, in the name of Jesus Christ because of the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

Acts 2:38 does not say everyone is to be baptized "because of the forgiveness of your sins." It actually says "for the remission of your sins."

The truth concerning any topic in the word is always confirmed by at least 2 or 3 scriptures. And a number of scriptures addresses when sins are remitted. One such scripture is the account of the Apostle Paul's water baptism, it leaves no room for doubt. Ananias told Paul to be baptized and wash away his sins calling upon the name of the Lord. This account confirms what Peter said at Pentecost. Obedience to God's command of water baptism in the name of Jesus is when a believer's sins are actually washed away. It is only because of Jesus' sacrifice that this is even possible.

 

[Wansvic]

I dont have time to respond to all these verses at this moment, however, I dont think your argument makes sense. Why would Paul tell them to repent and be baptized for forgiveness of sins and receiving the Holy Spirit if it wasn’t something that would happen at that moment? Are you suggesting they weren’t forgiven either? How long do you suppose they needed to wait for God to get around to forgiving them? Weeks? Months? Years? Clearly the implication here is if they respond in this way, God will immediately respond by forgiving them and granting the Spirit. In fact, the text goes on to say,



The text in Acts 15 you quote is referring to The account in Acts 10. In Acts 11, Peter explains why they baptized the Gentiles. He makes it clear that they were unwilling to baptize them until they saw the miraculous sign of the Spirit falling on them which convinced they they should not “withhold” baptism. So, this was the first time Gentiles were being welcomed into the church and God gave them the sign of the miraculous gift of the Spirit because the Jewish believers were unwilling to baptize them.

Also, I think you are confusing the miraculous gifts given by the Apostles to believers by the laying on of hands. Nothing indicates these believers didn’t receive the indwelling Spirit at baptism.…especially when multiple Scriptures indicate this is the case. They were given the unique and sometimes miraculous gifts at the laying on of the Apostles hands…which is why Simon wanted the Apostles to lay their hands on him to give him those supernatural gifts. We shouldn’t conflate that with conversion.

I dont know what 1 Cor 1 has to do with this. The point Paul is making is that people were misappropriating baptism to mean that they were more important based on who baptized them. Paul is not saying he is glad they weren’t baptized…he’s saying hes glad he didnt perform it so they would claim special standing based on his name. If anything, this text shows that early believers put a great amount of weight on the meaning of their baptism. Unfortunatly, these Corinthians were putting their confidence in the person who baptized them rather than in Jesus.

Anyway, I’m out of time. Thanks for the response.

I did read this post. I will respond asap.

 

[Wansvic]

Your post #141 misrepresents what Chaps actually said in a prior post. You should click "Post reply" and then type your comment afterward.

it read: "Well it does refer to people “coming up out of the water.” Also the word itself actually means “immerse.” The word baptizo is an onomatopoeia, which means that the word sounds out the act. bap-tiz-o is the sound water makes when you slap someone down it and submerge them. So, I’d argue there’s more evidence in Scripture that not only does Scriptrue describe immersion, but the word itself implies it. Furthermore, early church history shows us this is how ALL baptisms took place. It wasn’t until around the 3rd century that alternate forms of Christian ”baptism” started to be introduced (i.e. sprinkling). "

 

[Wansvic]

There are always consequences for disobedience. But OT Jews were in a covenant of works. Any disobedience brought death. We are under no such covenant. The new covenant is not between man and God, but God the Father and God the Son. And it has already been fulfilled in Christ. It is administered through grace and once we are made a part of it, we are no longer under condemnation, for we have passed from death unto life already.

Circumcision was instituted prior to the OT law. Obedience to the command was an act of faith on Abraham's part . The word is clear those who were not circumcised were cut off from God; the covenant was broken.


"And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations.

This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised.

And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.

And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed.

He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

And the uncircumcised man child whose flesh of his foreskin is not circumcised, that soul shall be cut off from his people; he hath broken my covenant." Gen 17:9-14

 

[Wansvic]

This is works salvation. You add an act on our part as a condition of salvation rather than as a result of salvation.

It is not a works but a faith salvation. It is those who have placed their trust in Jesus that repent and submit to water baptism in His name. And believe it accomplishes what His word states.

 

[Cameron143]

It is not a works but a faith salvation. It is those who have placed their trust in Jesus that repent and submit to water baptism in His name. And believe it accomplishes what His word states.

Anything necessary for salvation other than faith is works. For an OT Jew it was required to be circumcised. But they were under the law. New covenant saints are not under a failed covenant of works. We are under a covenant we enter by faith. It is not between us and God as the old covenant was, but between God the Father and God the Son. Since the Son has fulfilled the covenant, there is nothing left for us to do.
Because you do not understand the difference between the two covenants, you confuse what each calls for. So long as you do, you will put forth a false salvation.

 

[NightTwister]

Your post #141 misrepresents what Chaps actually said in a prior post. You should click "Post reply" and then type your comment afterward.

it read: "Well it does refer to people “coming up out of the water.” Also the word itself actually means “immerse.” The word baptizo is an onomatopoeia, which means that the word sounds out the act. bap-tiz-o is the sound water makes when you slap someone down it and submerge them. So, I’d argue there’s more evidence in Scripture that not only does Scriptrue describe immersion, but the word itself implies it. Furthermore, early church history shows us this is how ALL baptisms took place. It wasn’t until around the 3rd century that alternate forms of Christian ”baptism” started to be introduced (i.e. sprinkling). "

There is no evidence of immersion. If it was that important, the instruction would've been explicit.

 

[Chaps]

I'm making an argument from the obvious.

How is it obvious that there are infants in the household? Does every household have infants?

 

[Chaps]

There is no evidence of immersion. If it was that important, the instruction would've been explicit.

That is like saying that if someone today were to say, “Go immerse Joe” that someone would reply, “do you mean sprinkle him with water or dunk him, because you’re not being clear?” The word ITSELF means immerse. It’s the same as if I tell you to immerse someone. It cannot mean sprinkle because the word itself doesn’t mean and has never meant as much. So why would it need to be explained what the word itself describes? This argument makes no sense. Baptizo is the Greek word “immerse.”

 

[Chaps]

Anything necessary for salvation other than faith is works. For an OT Jew it was required to be circumcised. But they were under the law. New covenant saints are not under a failed covenant of works. We are under a covenant we enter by faith. It is not between us and God as the old covenant was, but between God the Father and God the Son. Since the Son has fulfilled the covenant, there is nothing left for us to do.
Because you do not understand the difference between the two covenants, you confuse what each calls for. So long as you do, you will put forth a false salvation.

So would you say repentance is a work? Does a person need to pray to be saved? Would that make prayer a work? How about hearing the Gospel? If someone hears the message, they are doing something…does that make them ”working” for their salvation? Jesus told his disciples to teach and baptize…so you are suggesting Jesus was instructing them to perform works? And if it’s not necessary or important, why command it?

Your problem is you see anything other than internal accent to an idea as a ”work.” That is not how the Bible describes ”works.” Baptism is not a work anymore than repentance or praying for mercy is a work. Baptism is a response to Christ’s work…as repentance is.

 

[Chaps]

I'm making an argument from the obvious.

One more thought on this…. The only thing that is “obvious” is what the Bible says about baptism and discipleship. Baptism is ALWAYS taught in the NT that it happens at conversion. Conversion is ALWAYS taught in the Bible as something that occurs as a result of faith. So, what is OBVIOUS is that conversion happens by faith and faith comes by hearing the Word. We are also taught that baptism represents a dying to sin and resurrection to new life. We are taught that baptism is a plea to God for a clean conscience.

So, what is OBVIOUS is that baptism is ALWAYS related to faith. Never do we see someone without faith or understanding of the Gospel baptized. You are taking the word “household” and using that to omit clear and obvious teaching about what is always seen and commanded by Jesus in relation to baptism. So no, children being baptized is NOT obvious since we see it nowhere in Scripture but we DO see only people who understand and believe the message baptized as a result of their desire to be washed of their sins. Babies cannot do that, and I would argue, do not even have personal sins to repent of! No, nothing about that is obvious

 

[NightTwister]

How is it obvious that there are infants in the household? Does every household have infants?

Did I say only infants? Children of differing ages are part of households. Art that time, so were servants. They were mentioned for a reason.

 

[NightTwister]

That is like saying that if someone today were to say, “Go immerse Joe” that someone would reply, “do you mean sprinkle him with water or dunk him, because you’re not being clear?” The word ITSELF means immerse. It’s the same as if I tell you to immerse someone. It cannot mean sprinkle because the word itself doesn’t mean and has never meant as much. So why would it need to be explained what the word itself describes? This argument makes no sense. Baptizo is the Greek word “immerse.”

There's more than one meaning of that word. You simply choose the one most convenient for your argument.