Baptism: is it required to be baptized in water?

[eternally-gratefull]

1. "He who takes his medication" and "washes it down with water" are two separate clauses that mean the same. Unlike "whoever believes and is baptized will be saved" which is one clause.
2. There is a tacit understanding that to take medication there is a necessary proper action, "will remain sick" implies that action was not taken.

You are simply grasping at straws.

"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved but whoever does not believe will be condemned".

And you believe the above sixteen word sentence means whoever just believes will be saved?

No one writes this way.

One does not have to wash medicine down with water, so those clauses are not true. One can take medicine without washing it down with water, thus they are not the same thing,

Also, If this is true. You would be required to show that whoever has faith, but is NOT baptised, is condemned. He did not say this, He just said lack of faith (unbelief)

and again, No place did mark demand this baptism is water. There is not just water baptism. Jesus and John the Baptist and Peter all spoke of the baptism of God.

 

[notuptome]

Interesting that those rely upon Mark 16:16 as a proof scripture use it out of context with the rest of scripture. The long ending of Mark 16 must be taken with special care so as to avoid the creation of errant doctrine.

If you have trusted Christ as your Savior you should receive water baptism. You are entitled to receive water baptism. You are entitled to receive communion as well but in either case your salvation is not contingent upon them.

You are born again by grace not by water baptism or any other rite performed in the church. How far will you go? Will you also insist that foot washing is essential for salvation? Do not add anything to salvation by grace. Just don't do it.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[mailmandan]

1. "He who takes his medication" and "washes it down with water" are two separate clauses that mean the same.

False. Again, it logically follows that we wash the medication down with water, but if no water is available and you take the medication dry, you will still be made well *BECAUSE OF THE MEDICATION.*

It's the same with water baptism. It logically follows that we get water baptized after we BELIEVE and are saved, but if no water is available (particularly due to a death bed conversion) you will still be saved because you BELIEVE which is in harmony with Mark 16:16(b); John 3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43-47; 13:39; 16:31; etc..

Unlike "whoever believes and is baptized will be saved" which is one clause.

Which Jesus clarifies the first clause with "but he who does not believe will be condemned." *Now show me where Jesus said, "whoever is not baptized will be condemned." Hmm...

2. There is a tacit understanding that to take medication there is a necessary proper action, "will remain sick" implies that action was not taken.

It's the medication (and not the water) that results in "made well."

You are simply grasping at straws.

The master of IRONY strikes again.

"Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved but whoever does not believe will be condemned".

And you believe the above sixteen word sentence means whoever believes will be saved?

No one writes this way.

Again, general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized but "he who does not believe will be condemned."

*The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief, not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. *NOWHERE does the Bible say "baptized or condemned." When are you going to wake up and smell the coffee?

John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics. *Show me where Jesus explains that baptism is required for salvation in John 3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26. Hmm...

 

[Prov910]

John never said anything to contradict Mark, Jesus said through Mark you must believe AND be baptized, both required, if you have a false on either side of the and, the whole is false, for one to not believe that baptism is not a requirement after reading Mark 16:16, then they do not "believe" in Him

Is there salvation for people, not baptized, who have faith and have received the Holy Spirit? Or are they lost because they haven't gone through the water baptism ceremony?

 

[hornetguy]

Is there salvation for people, not baptized, who have faith and have received the Holy Spirit? Or are they lost because they haven't gone through the water baptism ceremony?

You would have to ask Jesus that question.... I have no say in that decision. And, neither do you.

But I have a question for you..... If Jesus told us to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit, why would a believer NOT be baptized?

 

[DJ2]

Is there salvation for people, not baptized, who have faith and have received the Holy Spirit? Or are they lost because they haven't gone through the water baptism ceremony?

Salvation is based upon the forgiveness of sins, period. No theology or human reasoning can escape this reality. Acts 2:38 and others state that baptism is the point of forgiveness of sins. To come to faith in Jesus Christ is not the point of forgiveness of sins, it is the obedience to His word in baptism that is ordained as that point. Your attempts at reasoning this away will not work.

Acts 2:38 also addresses the issue of when we receive the gift of the Holy Spirit, at baptism. Many can and do proclaim that they have received a "baptism of the Holy Ghost" but claims do not equal reality. Claiming to have undergone a "baptism" other than Acts 2:38 is not scriptural.

You are simply looking for loopholes.

 

[DJ2]

Interesting that those rely upon Mark 16:16 as a proof scripture use it out of context with the rest of scripture. The long ending of Mark 16 must be taken with special care so as to avoid the creation of errant doctrine.

If you have trusted Christ as your Savior you should receive water baptism. You are entitled to receive water baptism. You are entitled to receive communion as well but in either case your salvation is not contingent upon them.

You are born again by grace not by water baptism or any other rite performed in the church. How far will you go? Will you also insist that foot washing is essential for salvation? Do not add anything to salvation by grace. Just don't do it.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

Interesting that those rely upon Mark 16:16 as a proof scripture use it out of context with the rest of scripture.

The long ending of Mark 16 must be taken with special care so as to avoid the creation of errant doctrine.

In other words, if it does not fit your personal theology it must be either out of context or an error in the Bible.

 

[Prov910]

You would have to ask Jesus that question.... I have no say in that decision. And, neither do you.

But I have a question for you..... If Jesus told us to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit, why would a believer NOT be baptized?

I think baptism is a great idea! In fact, I chose to be baptized as a symbol of my faith. But I believe my salvation comes from the grace of God whom I have faith in. As much as I like my minister, I just don't think my salvation comes from him because he dunked me in a tub of water. /jmho

 

[eternally-gratefull]

You would have to ask Jesus that question.... I have no say in that decision. And, neither do you.

But I have a question for you..... If Jesus told us to make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, Son, and Spirit, why would a believer NOT be baptized?

Thats not the question. Jesus made many commands. (Communion, Serving in the poor. Loving the lost, etc etc) the question is, why would God make one command required for salvation. And not all the others.

and again, NO ONE here is promoting no one should be baptized. Or it is ok not to. This strawman really gets old.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

In other words, if it does not fit your personal theology it must be either out of context or an error in the Bible.

Read this’d to yourself. And take heart. You basically are doingfthis yourself. I would stop judging others for doing the very thing you are doing.

 

[notuptome]

In other words, if it does not fit your personal theology it must be either out of context or an error in the Bible.

So your personal theology does not depend on the grace of God? Your theology depends on water?

If your theology makes water baptism the foundation of your personal salvation you have a faulty foundation.

It is not wise for you to infer that I have forced an error on the bible. That could be easily seen as slander and certainly not Christ-like.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[DJ2]

So your personal theology does not depend on the grace of God? Your theology depends on water?

If your theology makes water baptism the foundation of your personal salvation you have a faulty foundation.

It is not wise for you to infer that I have forced an error on the bible. That could be easily seen as slander and certainly not Christ-like.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

My theology depends on whatever the Bible proclaims it to be. If the Bible states that is baptism, so be it. And no human sensibilities can change that. If the Bible states that the point of salvation is to be dunked in butterscotch pudding, I will not argue but obey. Walking around the wall of a city may have sounded strange but it was commanded. Walking to the center of a camp to gaze upon a brass snake may have sounded strange but it was commanded.

Your theology is based on your sensibilities not the Word of God.

Stop being so touchy, to imply slander against me is rather slanderous.

 

[DJ2]

Read this’d to yourself. And take heart. You basically are doingfthis yourself. I would stop judging others for doing the very thing you are doing.

Please stop judging me about judging others.

 

[hornetguy]

Thats not the question. Jesus made many commands. (Communion, Serving in the poor. Loving the lost, etc etc) the question is, why would God make one command required for salvation. And not all the others.

and again, NO ONE here is promoting no one should be baptized. Or it is ok not to. This strawman really gets old.

Nobody, to my knowledge, has come out and stated "You definitely don't have to be baptized"....

But, read the post immediately prior to this one.... #228. The implication is that baptism is strictly up to the individual... maybe I will, maybe I won't.... THAT is the same thing as saying that you don't have to be baptized. There are many people on this forum alone that believe that way. And it is totally unscriptural.

 

[JaumeJ]

After all Jesus, Yeshua, has taught us about the futility of ritualistic acts, do you believe anyone will be turned away from the Gate who truly loves Jesus Christ but has not been baptized in water? Of course it is good to beobedient but it is not disobedient when someone is not convinced or not aware.

I believe all who love Jesus should be baptized in water to complete all righteousness, as did He, but do not ask me to think badly about someone who is devoted to Him and for one cause or another has not been. Praise God for it is He Who truly washes us, not we, and any in whom He has begun a work, will neer be turned away, never. Blessed be our Holy Savior, amen.

 

[hornetguy]

I think baptism is a great idea! In fact, I chose to be baptized as a symbol of my faith. But I believe my salvation comes from the grace of God whom I have faith in. As much as I like my minister, I just don't think my salvation comes from him because he dunked me in a tub of water. /jmho

So, you think it is a great idea....? How gracious of you to think that Jesus' command is a great idea... and you CHOSE to be baptized. What a sacrifice you have made....

And, how denigrating of you to call the process that our Lord and Savior commanded, being "dunked in a tub of water".

I assume you call taking communion "chowing down on some crackers and grape juice".

This cavalier attitude toward something Jesus thought was important enough to make a part of his last words to his disciples on earth is just disgusting to me.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

Nobody, to my knowledge, has come out and stated "You definitely don't have to be baptized"....

But, read the post immediately prior to this one.... #228. The implication is that baptism is strictly up to the individual... maybe I will, maybe I won't.... THAT is the same thing as saying that you don't have to be baptized. There are many people on this forum alone that believe that way. And it is totally unscriptural.

What if someone says that to communion. OPr being part of the church. Or giving to the poor. Or making disciples? Or studying to show oneself aproved. Or loving our enemy.

Why is baptism held to a higher standard than all of those things God demands of all of us?

That was my point.

As for post 228..

I think baptism is a great idea! In fact, I chose to be baptized as a symbol of my faith. But I believe my salvation comes from the grace of God whom I have faith in. As much as I like my minister, I just don't think my salvation comes from him because he dunked me in a tub of water. /jmho

All I see is him saying he does not think his salvation comes from his baptism. I do not see him say maybe he will or maybe he wont. Can you point that out to me please

 

[hornetguy]

What if someone says that to communion. OPr being part of the church. Or giving to the poor. Or making disciples? Or studying to show oneself aproved. Or loving our enemy.

Why is baptism held to a higher standard than all of those things God demands of all of us?

That was my point.

As for post 228..



All I see is him saying he does not think his salvation comes from his baptism. I do not see him say maybe he will or maybe he wont. Can you point that out to me please

Saying that he "chose" to implies that it was simply a choice... maybe I will, maybe I won't. He just "happened" to choose to do so, but if he had "chosen" not to, no big deal.

Baptism is more important than that. Just ask Jesus. Or Paul. Or Peter. Or Philip. Or any of the millions of believers that have entered the kingdom since Pentecost, up until the 1800's, when some "enlightened" folks decided it was simply an optional nicety....

 

[notuptome]

Saying that he "chose" to implies that it was simply a choice... maybe I will, maybe I won't. He just "happened" to choose to do so, but if he had "chosen" not to, no big deal.

Baptism is more important than that. Just ask Jesus. Or Paul. Or Peter. Or Philip. Or any of the millions of believers that have entered the kingdom since Pentecost, up until the 1800's, when some "enlightened" folks decided it was simply an optional nicety....

Acts 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
37 And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Thou mayest is not you must be baptized to be saved. I think Acts 8 is quite clear. I think you have made baptism far more necessary than scripture.

It is still by grace we are saved and not by works but through faith. Fully embrace baptism in water just don't go beyond what the scripture teaches.

For the cause of Christ
Roger

 

[notuptome]

My theology depends on whatever the Bible proclaims it to be. If the Bible states that is baptism, so be it. And no human sensibilities can change that. If the Bible states that the point of salvation is to be dunked in butterscotch pudding, I will not argue but obey. Walking around the wall of a city may have sounded strange but it was commanded. Walking to the center of a camp to gaze upon a brass snake may have sounded strange but it was commanded.

Your theology is based on your sensibilities not the Word of God.

Stop being so touchy, to imply slander against me is rather slanderous.

The Pharisees claimed their theology was dependent on the word of God. Problem was they served God with their lips but not with their hearts.

Grace is the means of salvation. Grace is not dependent on water baptism.

For the cause of Christ
Roger