John 3 and Water Baptism in the Ministry of Jesus Christ

[Wansvic]

This is important for people to understand and get ------

Know what Water Baptism does for us today -------do not let people tell you that Water Baptism is needed to gain your Salvation =====Water Baptism has a purpose today for sure ---it is done as a profession of our Faith in Christ -----that is it -----

AI

Water baptism is a widely recognized practice in Christianity,

serving as a public declaration and outward expression of an individual's faith in Jesus Christ and their commitment to following him.

Apostle Paul's explanation reveals a burial with Jesus takes place wherein the body of sin is destroyed/remitted upon belief and obedience to water baptism in the name of Jesus. As such, none will enter the kingdom of God without being obedient to the command. The following confirm this truth Acts 2:4-41, 8:12-18, 9:17-18, 10:43-48, 19:1-7, 22:16.

"Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
Therefore 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.
For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin." Romans 6:3-6



"And ye are complete in him, which is the head of all principality and power:
In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:
Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead." Colossians 2:10-12

 

[Wansvic]

Peter didn't preach about baptism. He preached Christ and Him crucified. Where the gospel was effectual the question was asked...what shall we do? It is at this point that baptism is brought out.

Preaching should always be Christ and Him crucified.

Although many refuse to accept it, It Is Written that sins are destroyed/remitted upon obedience to the command. (Luke 24:47-Acts 2:38, Romans 6:3-6, Colossians 2:12)

Consider God's response to obedience and how it applies to the NT command of water baptism in the name of Jesus:

God commanded the nation of Israel to march around the city of Jericho so that the walls would fall down and they could take the city.
1. Did their marching knock the walls down? No, therefore the marching was not the cause of the walls falling.
2. Did they march after the walls fell? No, therefore the marching was not a result of the walls falling.
3. Would the walls have fallen if they had not marched? No, therefore the marching was a condition of God that had to be met before HE knocked down the walls.

Similarly, God commanded Naaman to dip seven times in Jordan in order for his leprosy to be healed.
1. Did the water of Jordan cleanse his leprosy? No, therefore neither the dipping nor the water was the cause of his healing.
2. Did he dip after he was cleansed? No, therefore the dipping was not a result of his being cleansed.
3. Would he have been cleansed if he had not dipped the seventh time? No, therefore the dipping was a condition of God that had to be met before HE removed the leprosy.

Another example is the bronze serpent on the pole that Moses was commanded to raise when Israel was being bitten by serpents because of their sin. If anyone looked at the serpent they would be healed of the poison. But if they did not look, they would not be healed. This is an act of faith. There is nothing in the looking that has the power to heal the poison. And there is nothing in the bronze, or the staff, or any of the rest of it that could heal the poison. But because God commanded it so, and the people did it, the effect was that they were healed.

You see? Conditions are not acts of earning, nor are they acts of either cause or effect. Post by Doug Brents-Christian Forums

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

Although many refuse to accept it, It Is Written that sins are destroyed/remitted upon obedience to the command. (Luke 24:47-Acts 2:38, Romans 6:3-6, Colossians 2:12)

Consider God's response to obedience and how it applies to the NT command of water baptism in the name of Jesus:

God commanded the nation of Israel to march around the city of Jericho so that the walls would fall down and they could take the city.
1. Did their marching knock the walls down? No, therefore the marching was not the cause of the walls falling.
2. Did they march after the walls fell? No, therefore the marching was not a result of the walls falling.
3. Would the walls have fallen if they had not marched? No, therefore the marching was a condition of God that had to be met before HE knocked down the walls.

Similarly, God commanded Naaman to dip seven times in Jordan in order for his leprosy to be healed.
1. Did the water of Jordan cleanse his leprosy? No, therefore neither the dipping nor the water was the cause of his healing.
2. Did he dip after he was cleansed? No, therefore the dipping was not a result of his being cleansed.
3. Would he have been cleansed if he had not dipped the seventh time? No, therefore the dipping was a condition of God that had to be met before HE removed the leprosy.

Another example is the bronze serpent on the pole that Moses was commanded to raise when Israel was being bitten by serpents because of their sin. If anyone looked at the serpent they would be healed of the poison. But if they did not look, they would not be healed. This is an act of faith. There is nothing in the looking that has the power to heal the poison. And there is nothing in the bronze, or the staff, or any of the rest of it that could heal the poison. But because God commanded it so, and the people did it, the effect was that they were healed.

You see? Conditions are not acts of earning, nor are they acts of either cause or effect. Post by Doug Brents-Christian Forums

Thanks for this post! It was the perfect way to explain water baptism and any other obedience to what the Lord commands.


🚃

 

[Lamar]

Where the gospel was effectual the question was asked

Where the gospel was "effectual" baptism was already done.

Mark 16:16
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever doesn’t believe will be condemned."

 

[homwardbound]

And, to add to that, if you read any of the apostolic fathers' writings on this subject, they all understood it to mean water baptism... this is from the very people that this teaching was given to. People of the first century... and THEY understood it as water baptism.... as it was meant.

It took a couple thousand years for us to get "smart" enough to decide that it meant something entirely different.

John baptized with water
Acts 1:5
“John baptized you with water,” he reminded them, “but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit in just a few days.”
Acts 11:16
Then I thought of the Lord’s words when he said, ‘Yes, John baptized with water, but you shall be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’

Baptized with water, revealed to Peter

1. 1 Peter 3:16
   having a good conscience; that, whereas they speak evil of you, as of evildoers, they may be ashamed that falsely accuse your good conversation in Christ.
   In Context | Full Chapter | Other Translations
2. 1 Peter 3:21
   The like figure 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:

therefore I respond in thanksgiving and praise, to God above everything else, thank you

 

[Cameron143]

Although many refuse to accept it, It Is Written that sins are destroyed/remitted upon obedience to the command. (Luke 24:47-Acts 2:38, Romans 6:3-6, Colossians 2:12)

Consider God's response to obedience and how it applies to the NT command of water baptism in the name of Jesus:

God commanded the nation of Israel to march around the city of Jericho so that the walls would fall down and they could take the city.
1. Did their marching knock the walls down? No, therefore the marching was not the cause of the walls falling.
2. Did they march after the walls fell? No, therefore the marching was not a result of the walls falling.
3. Would the walls have fallen if they had not marched? No, therefore the marching was a condition of God that had to be met before HE knocked down the walls.

Similarly, God commanded Naaman to dip seven times in Jordan in order for his leprosy to be healed.
1. Did the water of Jordan cleanse his leprosy? No, therefore neither the dipping nor the water was the cause of his healing.
2. Did he dip after he was cleansed? No, therefore the dipping was not a result of his being cleansed.
3. Would he have been cleansed if he had not dipped the seventh time? No, therefore the dipping was a condition of God that had to be met before HE removed the leprosy.

Another example is the bronze serpent on the pole that Moses was commanded to raise when Israel was being bitten by serpents because of their sin. If anyone looked at the serpent they would be healed of the poison. But if they did not look, they would not be healed. This is an act of faith. There is nothing in the looking that has the power to heal the poison. And there is nothing in the bronze, or the staff, or any of the rest of it that could heal the poison. But because God commanded it so, and the people did it, the effect was that they were healed.

You see? Conditions are not acts of earning, nor are they acts of either cause or effect. Post by Doug Brents-Christian Forums

In your examples, did the people looking at the serpent and walking around the city in response to God's word exemplify faith? Was it their obedience or their faith that led to the result. I can find where the Bible says we are saved through faith and that without faith it is impossible to please God. I can also find Jesus not performing miracles for lack of faith.

Can you show me in the scripture where it says anyone is saved through obedience? Or where people pleased God through obedience? Or where Jesus didn't perform miracles for lack of obedience?

The fact is, those who believed God would heal them by looking upon the serpent, looked upon it. It was their response due to their belief or faith that resulted in the healing. Likewise, those who believed that God would give victory through the instruction God gave were rewarded with victory by responding in faith to the word of God.

What if God had given different instructions in these examples? What if God had said to dig a hole in the sand to be cured of the snake bites? Would they not have been saved from death by doing so? Yes they would have. Why? Because they would have responded to the word of God in faith. The activity is not what saves. The belief that God will do as He says is.

This is what Ephesians 2:8-9 teaches. Salvation is by grace through faith. You conflate the outward activity to be cause of salvation, but God accounts the belief to be the means of salvation.

 

[Cameron143]

Where the gospel was "effectual" baptism was already done.

Mark 16:16
"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever doesn’t believe will be condemned."

Sure, but what baptism? Water baptism or the baptism of the Spirit which places an individual into the body of Christ?

 

[mailmandan]

So what? That was what was preached. When I was born again, it was not preached. I was born again anyway. For months I had neither the knowledge or the opportunity. I was surrounded by water, being on a warship and all.

When I discovered the truth, I was baptised. I've baptised someone myself. We encourage believers to be baptised. But we also know that baptism does not save anyone.

I was born again several years ago on a Saturday night when I received Christ through faith (Romans 5:1; 1 Peter 1:23) but was unable to receive water baptism until Sunday morning. I could not wait to get water baptized on Sunday morning and I even gave a five minute testimony on how I finally came to receive Christ through faith after being taught wrong about the plan of salvation for years by the Roman Catholic church.

 

[Lamar]

Sure, but what baptism? Water baptism or the baptism of the Spirit which places an individual into the body of Christ?

Oh please tell me you are not serious.

 

[Magenta]

Oh please tell me you are not serious.

Ephesians 4 verses 5-6 ~ There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called to one hope when you were called; 5one Lord, one faith, one baptism; one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all.

 

[Lamar]

I was born again several years ago on a Saturday night when I received Christ through faith

What happened on that Saturday night has no bearing on this discussion. Personal feelings of salvation does not negate scripture.

I personally believe that I received the remission of sins when I was baptized. I would never use this personal event as evidence of my beliefs.

Your assertion is unimpugnable and hence of no value here. I do suggest learning hermeneutics, if you do you will see the bogus nature of your statement.

 

[2ndTimeIsTheCharm]

What happened on that Saturday night has no bearing on this discussion. Personal feelings of salvation does not negate scripture.

I personally believe that I received the remission of sins when I was baptized. I would never use this personal event as evidence of my beliefs.

Your assertion is unimpugnable and hence of no value here. I do suggest learning hermeneutics, if you do you will see the bogus nature of your statement.

Aw, it's still a nice testimony! I'm glad that he was excited to be water baptized. I remember being excited about it too!


🚃

 

[hornetguy]

Sure, but what baptism? Water baptism or the baptism of the Spirit which places an individual into the body of Christ?

You can argue about that scripture, and even discount it as possibly having been added at a later date..... but, if you look at every example given in the NT about people being saved and baptized, it is ALWAYS water baptism. Always. That is what baptism MEANT to the ones that heard the word.
The idea of being "baptized" with the Spirit was a totally new concept, and the logical conclusion to be drawn is based on what Peter told the crowd at Pentecost. Repent and be immersed in water for the forgiveness of your sins..... and (something new) you WILL receive the gift of the Holy Spirit... you are also being baptized in the Spirit. It's all one baptism.... which matches scriptures, one Lord, one faith, one baptism. If that is not true, then Peter was teaching non-scripturally, and I do not believe that he was. Otherwise, ALL scripture is suspect...

 

[GWH]

Thanks for this post! It was the perfect way to explain water baptism and any other obedience to what the Lord commands.


🚃

With the difference that salvation/Spirit baptism is conditional upon repentance/faith,
and water baptism is an outward optional symbol of that inner conversion and indwelling.

 

[mailmandan]

What happened on that Saturday night has no bearing on this discussion. Personal feelings of salvation does not negate scripture.

I personally believe that I received the remission of sins when I was baptized. I would never use this personal event as evidence of my beliefs.

Your assertion is unimpugnable and hence of no value here. I do suggest learning hermeneutics, if you do you will see the bogus nature of your statement.

I was responding to Gideon300 and this thread is on the subject of water baptism. What happened to me on that Saturday night went beyond personal feelings. (Romans 8:16; 1 John 5:11-13) I am actually a big fan of hermeneutics and we need to properly harmonize scripture with scripture before reaching our conclusion on doctrine.

 

[Cameron143]

You can argue about that scripture, and even discount it as possibly having been added at a later date..... but, if you look at every example given in the NT about people being saved and baptized, it is ALWAYS water baptism. Always. That is what baptism MEANT to the ones that heard the word.
The idea of being "baptized" with the Spirit was a totally new concept, and the logical conclusion to be drawn is based on what Peter told the crowd at Pentecost. Repent and be immersed in water for the forgiveness of your sins..... and (something new) you WILL receive the gift of the Holy Spirit... you are also being baptized in the Spirit. It's all one baptism.... which matches scriptures, one Lord, one faith, one baptism. If that is not true, then Peter was teaching non-scripturally, and I do not believe that he was. Otherwise, ALL scripture is suspect...

I don't argue that water baptism should be performed on those who believe on the Lord Jesus Christ. What I disagree with is what each baptism does. Being placed into the body of Christ is a spiritual reality, and not a physical reality. It does not occur when a physical act is performed. It happens when a spiritual action has taken place. If you explore Acts 2, one can conclude spiritual activity took place in verse 37 which lead to the question...what shall we do? There is hearing which includes understanding...the mind, pricking which involves...the heart, which act upon the will...what shall we do? They came to faith. They believed the word that Peter preached. Had they not believed, why bother with the question?

Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Word of God > hearing > faith.
Peter preaches the word of God, it is heard, faith is present in them. So what happens in verse 37 of Acts 2 is exactly what Romans 10:17 says.
Further, Ephesians 2:8 teaches that we are saved by grace through faith. That being the case, if they have faith, they are already saved by the end of Acts 2:37. What Peter tells them to do in verse 38 and their obedience to it certainly demonstrates their faith, but is not its cause. They already possess that faith that produces their obedience.

Look back to post #26. You will find the same is true for the examples @Wansvic used. Faith always proceeds actions. We do what we believe.

 

[Lamar]

I was responding to Gideon300 and this thread is on the subject of water baptism. What happened to me on that Saturday night went beyond personal feelings. (Romans 8:16; 1 John 5:11-13) I am actually a big fan of hermeneutics and we need to properly harmonize scripture with scripture before reaching our conclusion on doctrine.

Regardless of who you were addressing, you were attempting to use your experience on that Saturday night as evidence of your theology.

In other words, since I was saved before baptism than baptism must not be needed.

No one who follows proper hermeneutics would ever present or even interject what you wrote.

Lets stick to scripture and keep our feelings to ourselves.

BTW, I noticed Gideon300 made the same bogus assertion on post# 9.

Birds of a feather.

 

[mailmandan]

Regardless of who you were addressing, you were attempting to use your experience on that Saturday night as evidence of your theology.

In other words, since I was saved before baptism than baptism must not be needed.

No one who follows proper hermeneutics would ever present or even interject what you wrote.

Lets stick to scripture and keep our feelings to ourselves.

BTW, I noticed Gideon300 made the same bogus assertion on post# 9.

Birds of a feather.

Sure, let's stick with scripture and follow proper hermeneutics. Faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 13:39; 15:7-9; 16:31; 20:21; 26:18) *Perfect Harmony*

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

Regardless of what we may personally
believe about the purpose of water baptism (sign or essential) Jesus certainly was a proponent.
Can we at least agree on this?

Precious friend, certainly we can agree. Where the Disagreement / Confusion is...

Because you believe that you were
saved without baptism is not evidence that it is not needed.

Scripture is evidence.

...is it necessary In God's Dispensation Of Grace, where we live and operate Today?
Those who state that it is necessary Today Certainly have Mass Confusion to overcome, yes?

On the other hand, With God's Word Of Truth, Rightly Divided, those who say it is Not necessary for Today,
Under God's All-Sufficient Grace, have no Such Confusion to overcome, believing God, When He States:

There Is ONE, And Only ONE [ Spiritual ] Baptism, For His Dispensation of PURE Grace, For The Body Of Christ,
Today!

Amen.

LORD JESUS, please open our hearts to ALL Of Thy Truth. And, Amen.

 

[hornetguy]

If you explore Acts 2, one can conclude spiritual activity took place in verse 37 which lead to the question...what shall we do?

It is your belief that the people at Pentecost were baptized in the Spirit when they heard and believed, "coming to faith"?

If that is your belief, why would Peter tell them to repent (turn away from their sins) and be baptized, whereupon they would receive the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit?

I don't see any of the conversion stories that indicate that all that was needed was hearing, belief, and accepting the gift of salvation. They always included baptism. Since there is, scripturally, only one baptism, and we are commanded to be water baptized (per Peter and others) we HAVE to conclude that the "new" baptism that Jesus brought us was a water baptism combined with the spiritual baptism into the body of believers.