The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to be Saved! (HOF thread)

[deut3019]

folks, as a Baptist, I feel obligated to add my part to this discussion.

Water Baptism is a CONFESSION of SALVATION, not a RECEPTION of SALVATION. If that Baptism brought salvation, then every member of every Baptist church would be saved and everyone else wouldn't be. That is, if we are talking about the Baptism of John the Baptist, Philip and the Ethiopian, and my favorite, JESUS.
As we know, this is NOT the case. Water Baptism is a SYMBOLIC DECLARATION of faith in Jesus Christ. IT IS NOT REQUIRED TO ATTAIN THAT FAITH.

 

[Melody]

Originally posted by deut3019
folks, as a Baptist, I feel obligated to add my part to this discussion.

Water Baptism is a CONFESSION of SALVATION, not a RECEPTION of SALVATION. If that Baptism brought salvation, then every member of every Baptist church would be saved and everyone else wouldn't be. That is, if we are talking about the Baptism of John the Baptist, Philip and the Ethiopian, and my favorite, JESUS.
As we know, this is NOT the case. Water Baptism is a SYMBOLIC DECLARATION of faith in Jesus Christ. IT IS NOT REQUIRED TO ATTAIN THAT FAITH.

Do you honestly believe that the Baptist Church is the only one that baptizes by immersion?

And when you were baptized was it in the name of Jesus?

 

[deut3019]

Originally posted by Melody


Do you honestly believe that the Baptist Church is the only one that baptizes by immersion?

And when you were baptized was it in the name of Jesus?

NO!!!! I believe my exact words were:

As we know, this is NOT the case.

I was merely stating that to make a point.
Thanks,
Joe

P.S.--and yes, I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

 

[c.moore]

Hello deut 3019
As we know, this is NOT the case. Water Baptism is a SYMBOLIC DECLARATION of faith in Jesus Christ. IT IS NOT REQUIRED TO ATTAIN THAT FAITH.

That is very true ,I like that praise God

peace

 

[Evangelion]

Correction.

Correction.

The Baptist wrote:

folks, as a Baptist, I feel obligated to add my part to this discussion.

Which, being interpreted, means "Folks, as a Baptist, I feel obligated to repudiate baptism as part of the salvic process."

LOL...

Water Baptism is a CONFESSION of SALVATION

No it's not. It is the means by which we enter a covenant relationship with God.

not a RECEPTION of SALVATION.

I agree that it's not a reception of salvation. It is a reception of the promise of salvation - which promise is conditional on repentence and obedience.

If that Baptism brought salvation, then every member of every Baptist church would be saved and everyone else wouldn't be.

A trifle overstated, I think. People were practicing adult baptism for the remission of sins long before the Baptist community was invented. Think "16th Century." Think "The Brethren in Christ." Think "The Unitarians." Think "The Anabaptists." Think "Switzerland and Transylvania."

And of course, my list would not be complete without a few names...

• Balthasar Hubmaier. (Switzerland, 1527.)
  
• Conrad Grebel (Switzerland, 1530’s) who wrote: “Baptism means a dying of the old man, and a putting on of the new. Christ commanded to baptise those who had been taught, and the apostles baptised no-one except those who had been taught.”
  
• Ludwig Hatzer (Switzerland, 1536) who wrote: “The Father alone is the true God; Christ is inferior to the Father and of a different essence; there are not three persons in the Godhead.”
  
• Rudolph Martin. (Poland, 1546.)
  
• John Assheton. (Germany, 1548.)
  
• The Brethren. (Venice, 1550.)
  
• Ferenc David. (Transylvania, 1579.)
  
• Joachim Stegman (Poland, 1633) who wrote: “The argument of Christ (Luke 20:34) wherein he proves the future resurrection of the dead, would be fallacious if before the resurrection they felt heavenly joy …
  …How could it be said of the godly of the old covenant that they ‘received not the promise’ (Hebrews 11:40) if the soul of every one presently after death, even without body, felt celestial happiness?”
  
• John Biddle. (England, 1655.)

That is, if we are talking about the Baptism of John the Baptist, Philip and the Ethiopian, and my favorite, JESUS.

What's so bad about them? Are you telling me that their baptism wasn't legitimate?

As we know, this is NOT the case.

Agreed! But not for the reasons that you have proposed!

Water Baptism is a SYMBOLIC DECLARATION of faith in Jesus Christ.

Agreed!

IT IS NOT REQUIRED TO ATTAIN THAT FAITH.

Agreed! Faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the Word of God.

But salvation comes by grace, and grace is only offered to those who have been justified, and the only way that a man might be justified...

...is by faith and works!

 

[deut3019]

Evangelion said...
What's so bad about them? Are you telling me that their baptism wasn't legitimate?

NO. I used them as examples of the Baptism I'm referring to, that of being "dunked."

 

[Evangelion]

So... you agree that being dunked is the approved Biblical method, and yet...

...you don't believe that it's actually necessary?

 

[Apollos]

Baptism is not a symbol of anything...

Baptism is not a symbol of anything...

deut3019 –

Welcome to the discussion.

It has been said before in the thread but I will say it again…
There is not one scripture that says water baptism is a “confession” of anything. It is not an “outward sign of an inward grace”. It is NOT a symbol of anything and there are no scriptures to support this idea. If you can offer scripture to back-up these ideas, you will be the first!

Water baptism is not required to obtain faith. This comes from the word of God. After hearing the word, one must believe it, choose to repent of their sins, confess Christ as the Son of God, and then be immersed in water for the forgiveness of his sins. It is at this point one becomes saved. God chose this means, not man.

The steps above are what separate those who become saved from the ones who just get wet.

I listed some differences between John’s baptism and Christ’s baptism. If you think there is no difference, you may want to check that post out. In was within the last 2-3 days.

(Thanks for displaying a sense of humor.)

 

[deut3019]

Originally posted by Evangelion
So... you agree that being dunked is the approved Biblical method, and yet...

...you don't believe that it's actually necessary?

yes Baptism by dunking is the approved method used by John the Baptist, Philip, and many others, however, it is never recorded that it is necessary. if it is, let me know

 

[deut3019]

thanks apollos
i will read your post
oh and btw, my confession statement, I believe I used the wrong wording there, DECLARATION is more of what I'm looking for. thanks
Joe

 

[deut3019]

Re: Baptism is not a symbol of anything...

Re: Baptism is not a symbol of anything...

Originally posted by Apollos
deut3019 –

Welcome to the discussion.

It has been said before in the thread but I will say it again…
There is not one scripture that says water baptism is a “confession” of anything. It is not an “outward sign of an inward grace”. It is NOT a symbol of anything and there are no scriptures to support this idea. If you can offer scripture to back-up these ideas, you will be the first!

Water baptism is not required to obtain faith. This comes from the word of God. After hearing the word, one must believe it, choose to repent of their sins, confess Christ as the Son of God, and then be immersed in water for the forgiveness of his sins. It is at this point one becomes saved. God chose this means, not man.

The steps above are what separate those who become saved from the ones who just get wet.

I listed some differences between John’s baptism and Christ’s baptism. If you think there is no difference, you may want to check that post out. In was within the last 2-3 days.

(Thanks for displaying a sense of humor.)

so...an "outward sign of an inward grace" but not a symbol
hmmm...sounds like pretty much the same thing to me.
oh and btw, Baptism IS symbolic of the death of the old life, being put in the water, and rebirth, coming back up.

 

[Melody]

Originally posted by deut3019

I was merely stating that to make a point.
Thanks,
Joe

P.S.--and yes, I was baptized in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Jesus is That name. Father, son and Holy Ghost are not names they are relation discriptions of the different ways that God shows himself to man.

Jesus is the name that we are given for salvation.

Act 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.

Luk 24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.


ALL things include baptism.

Col 3:17 And whatsoever ye do in word or deed, [do] all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God and the Father by him.

Baptism in the name of Jesus was preached by Peter and the Apostles and Paul.

Act 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.

Act 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Act 8:16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

Act 19:5 When they heard [this], they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

Jesus is the name of the Lord!

Act 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ.

Act 10:48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
Act 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

When a child is adopted he takes on his new father's name!

If you believe that the father, the son and the Holy Ghost is Jesus why have you not been baptized in the name of Jesus?

Nowhere does the scripture record anyone being baptized in the titles father, son, Holy Ghost.

 

[deut3019]

when did I say I had not been baptized in the name of Jesus? I know Jesus is that name! That's my whole point.

 

[deut3019]

I was baptised in the name of Jesus of Nazareth
I was baptised under the holy Trinity (Father, Son, Holy Spirit)

 

[c.moore]

Good job Deut3019

Here comes the airforce for back up.

praise God

 

[Apollos]

Reading isimportant - Reading is our friend...

Reading isimportant - Reading is our friend...

Hey deut3019 -

Please read what I posted.

I said no scripture teaches that baptism is "an outward sign of an inward grace". The Bible does NOT teach this !

Baptism is NOT - repeat - is is NOT a symbol of anything!

And unfortunately, I still haven't seen you offer even ONE passage to back up your beliefs on this!


Sigh................

 

[Apollos]

The plan/message was a "done deal" before the creation of the world...

The plan/message was a "done deal" before the creation of the world...

HoG –

Some of the items in your posts of March 3 need to be examined. You put those thoughts and scriptures forth to support your theological views, but most do not support what you claim they do.

Matthew 26:28 does not say that His shed blood is the NT, it says His blood is the “blood of the covenant”. I am not sure what you are trying to say by this, but I do know that His blood made the NT possible. It is His blood that “dedicates” or ratifies the new covenant – Heb. 9:18. Is this what you mean?
<
You say the “training” of Paul was ”progressive”. Which scripture(s) do you use to support this? I believe that the HS was giving Paul what he said and what he wrote. ALL that Paul came to know, speak, and write was already in the “mind” of the HS. Paul was just one “channel” through which “ALL” became known.

This is perhaps the biggest problem with the thinking of some dispensationalists. They appear to think that Deity made everything up as They went along. This is not the case. Revelation progressed, coming through man by his speaking and writing, but the plan was in the mind of God before the foundation of the world! Couple this with the next point…

You say there was a “progressive change in message” from Paul. I see NO change in his message. At what POINT do you think Paul became FULLY informed?? I say the HS had Paul fully informed from the beginning of his ministry because it was the HS and not Paul that truly did speaking and writing! There was a progression in getting the message out to man, but there was NO CHANGE in the message !! The "message" was preached first in Jerusalem and went out into the entire world. It did not change from that time !
<
You use FEAR in an attempt to illustrate the “change” in Paul’s teaching. Let us examine that very closely…

Fear as used in Acts 10:35 – “but in every nation, he that fears God, and works righteousness is acceptable to Him.” – Fear is the Greek word phobeos which can be defined as “reverence or reverential obedience”. So anyone that has reverence and works righteousness (is obedient) is indeed acceptable to God !

Fear as used in 2 Timothy 1:7 – “For God gave us not a spirit of fearfulness…” The word used here is deilia which is defined as timidity or cowardice. Thus Paul is quite correct in saying that God did not give Christians a spirit of cowardice !! If God be for us, who can be against us!

So HoG, you have mixed apples with oranges by saying this was a “progression of change” in Paul’s teaching and have made your conclusion in error, not understanding what Paul was actually saying. Have you any other “examples” of change ??
<
2 Cor. 12:14 – “(Paul) was caught into heaven”. I checked this passage and there is not a word about such in it.
<
2 Cor. 12:17 – There is nothing here about “progressive revelations” as you said.
<
1 Cor. 1:17 – You focused on the “sent me not to baptize”. But, Paul DID in fact baptize MANY people at Corinth – see 1 Cor 1 & Acts 18. HOW do you reconcile your discrepancy of thought ??
<
Ananias was a devout man according to the law, an expression used to describe his devotion to God, not his doctrine. But curiously, Ananias told Saul to arise and be “baptized and wash away your sins, calling upon the name of the Lord.” Neither this baptism nor “calling” upon the name of the Lord are OLD testament teachings. So how do you reconcile your belief that Ananias was following the OT when the facts he was telling Saul to follow was NT teaching ??!! Hmmm???

(It is of interest here to remind you that the OT had been removed, abolished, nailed to the cross – Eph. 2:15-17, Col. 2:14. The OT was already at this time null & void. And since the Lord appeared to him I can only believe Ananias was correct in his teaching and practice in what he told Saul to do!)
<
John 5:36 – Jesus did have a greater witness then John. And Jesus told the apostles to go, teach, & baptize – Mt 28:18f. Jesus sent the HS to guide them into all truth – Jn. 14:26, 16:13, Acts 1:2. That which the apostles taught was correct and true! This teaching and baptism was for ALL nations, not just the Jews – Luke 24:47, Acts 1:8, 2:39.
<
So WHERE is the shed blood you ask? I marvel that you say so much about Matthew 26:28, and you do not realize that it was the disciples He was speaking to about HIS BLOOD! Then you claim they knew nothing about His blood! Indeed!

What did John mean in John 1:29 when he told the Jews there, “Behold, the Lamb of God that takes away the sins of the world.” What did this mean to them?

Do you think the Jews had any religious association with “blood” and sin? They had only been offering animal sacrifices for 1500 years, nevertheless the use of blood in other ceremonies under the law. Read Hebrews 9 and chapter 10 and see if you think the Jews understood the connection between blood and remission of sin.
<
No doubt many Jews as relates to Acts 21 were “jealous” for the law, but that does not mean that they were supposed to be following the OT versus the NT. They had come to be under the authority of the NT after the cross as all men had, whether or not they chose to follow it or not, whether they chose to “mix” the components of the two covenants for their religious practice like many today do.
<
Although we have “forcefully” exchanged points and nick-names for each other, it is my hope and desire that you come to a knowledge of the truth!

 

[JustAChristian]

Have You Added Anything?

Have You Added Anything?

Originally posted by deut3019
folks, as a Baptist, I feel obligated to add my part to this discussion.

Water Baptism is a CONFESSION of SALVATION, not a RECEPTION of SALVATION. If that Baptism brought salvation, then every member of every Baptist church would be saved and everyone else wouldn't be. That is, if we are talking about the Baptism of John the Baptist, Philip and the Ethiopian, and my favorite, JESUS.
As we know, this is NOT the case. Water Baptism is a SYMBOLIC DECLARATION of faith in Jesus Christ. IT IS NOT REQUIRED TO ATTAIN THAT FAITH.

I see nothing but assertions without scriptural backup. If you want to make a statement, that's fine! If you want to prove what you say, put some scripture in it.

Merely say that "water baptism is a confession of salvation", means what? Did Cornelius admit he was saved before he was baptized? When the people were baptized on Pentecost, did anyone of them feel that they were saved before they were baptized? The context in both cases relate people wanting to be obedient to the command of the apostle. Peter never optioned baptism. He never told anyone that they were saved before they were baptized. Find one case of salvation in the New Testament without the act of baptism and you have a firm case for Faith Alone! The world is waiting for one example, only one, not two or three, only one example where the candidate for salvation was not instructed to be baptized or showed by their action that they were being obedient to the command of baptism. What the Bible says to one, in matters of salvation, it says to all. No one is saved seperate and apart from a pattern. The pattern is to hear and do the gospel (Matthew 7:24). The pattern is also to repent of sins (Luke 13:3,5). The pattern is also to confess Christ as Lord publically (Matthew 10:32-33). The pattern is also to be baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38). By hearing and doing the pattern, we follow in the footsteps of countless thousands of Christians throughout the ages and to come. All that I have said, I have prefaced with scripture. There is no assertion, speculaction, or hear-say. Doing the pattern is obeying the truth, and when we obey the truth what happens? Again, lets let the Bible answer: " Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." Being born again requires obey the truth.

Obey truth produce regeneration into spiritual life
Disobeying truth, well..........(2Thes. 1:8 & 1 Peter 4:17). Baptism for the remission is TRUTH!

JustAChristian

 

[Jaltus]

(It is of interest here to remind you that the OT had been removed, abolished, nailed to the cross – Eph. 2:15-17, Col. 2:14. The OT was already at this time null & void. And since the Lord appeared to him I can only believe Ananias was correct in his teaching and practice in what he told Saul to do!)

Well, Col. 2:14 does not back you up, since the "written code" (xeirographon, meaning written certificate of debt) does not refer to the OT.

Ephesians 2:15-17 also clearly negates your point. It does say:
15 by abolishing in his flesh the law with its commandments and regulations. His purpose was to create in himself one new man out of the two, thus making peace,

but it also says:
16 and in this one body to reconcile both of them to God through the cross, by which he put to death their hostility.

Remember, Jesus came to fulfill the law, not abolish it.

 

[HopeofGlory]

The annoying "Dog" continues to bark!

The annoying "Dog" continues to bark!

Waterdog,

You said:
Your old tricks of insulting and then ignoring logical debate won’t work.

My response:
You're the master of insults on this forum as witnessed time and time again and you have offered nothing logical to ignore.

Quit "whining" and debate!!!!!

You said:
-Baptism “in the name of Christ” IS the ONLY baptism authorized by Jesus for man to perform and receive today. Where did Jesus authorize (you know, grant permission) for HS baptism for man today?

My response:
Well Doggone, you got me on that one! Don't think so!
Ya know ya just can't teach a "mutt" nothin!!!!!!!

Baptism by the Spirit is life giving and it is the power of God to forgive sins. This power was manifested at the cross when Christ Jesus shed His "blood for remission of sins". By faith when we believe these words of Christ (Matt 26:28) we are baptized into His body and we died with Him. This "baptism" is accomplished by teaching the word thus baptizing those who believe. Now listen up Dog this just might deliver you from you're darkness!

My sheep HEAR MY VOICE, and I know them, and they follow me: John 10:27 (KJV)
And I give unto them eternal life; and they shall never perish, neither shall any man pluck them out of my hand. John 10:28 (KJV)

What we must seek is eternal life! What is it that we must believe to receive eternal life? HIS WORDS!!!!!!

Jesus said...Whoso eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, hath eternal life; and I will raise him up at the last day. John 6:54 (KJV) This was not to be taken naturally but was to be received spiritually by faith. Jesus explained it with these WORDS...It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life John 6:63 (KJV).

There is no profit in anything that the flesh can accomplish and anything that man can perform is a work of the flesh. The words Jesus spoke of the “new” testament (Matt. 26:28) in His blood are spirit and it is by believing in these words that we profit eternal life. Salvation is the work of God that many deny when they say you must obey in water baptism. They do not comprehend "the flesh profiteth nothing". Dead sinners can hear the words of the new testament (Matt. 26:28) but remain dead until they believe the words of the Son of God. It is the personal word of Christ that commands life and that life is eternal. It is the Holy Spirit who reveals the spoken words of Christ, and imparts spiritual life when those words are believed.

The apostles were commanded to baptize with the WORD!

For Christ sent me not to (water) baptize, but to preach the gospel.... 1 Cor. 1:17 (KJV)

Why would Christ send Paul NOT to water baptize if the GREAT COMMISSION was... You apostles go water baptize? There is no rhyme to this type of reasoning. Man’s doctrine teaches water baptism was commanded by Jesus in “the great commission” but this is not biblical terminology.

#1
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Matt. 28:19 (KJV)

It is clear the apostles are being instructed to teach and the teaching of the word will baptize them. The word is spirit and it is by this word we are baptized...It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life John 6:63 (KJV). The quickening of the spirit (baptism) is immediate when the words of the new testament are believed. The new testament is a new testimony with a greater witness (John 5:33-36) for remission of sins (Matt. 26:28) as opposed to the old testimony for remission (Mark 1:4).

The new testament is not a series of books starting with the four gospels but is a greater witness given by Christ and was not in force until after the death of Christ (Heb. 9:17). The apostles never baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost because this Spirit baptism is performed by Christ when we believe His words.
The contrast of the baptism in water and the baptism in the word is revealed by Jesus with these words...For John truly baptized with water; but (on the contrary) ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. Acts 1:5 (KJV)

#2
Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. Mark 16:15 (KJV)
He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mark 16:16 (KJV)

Again, the teaching but also when one believes the word they are baptized by that word. This baptism (quickening) is received the moment one believes the word. This word of the gospel is spirit and life eternal in the new testament.

For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins. Matt. 26:28 (KJV)
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. John 6:63 (KJV)

#3
Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: Luke 24:46 (KJV)
And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. Luke 24:47 (KJV)

Christ said that remission of sins would be received through His death. He did not say remission would be in water baptism. The word of the "new" testament for remission of sins must be believed. Christ is clearly explaining how remission of sins would be received and referring to Isaiah 53 where “it is written” He was to suffer. These scriptures not once mention water baptism for remission.

#4
For John truly baptized with water; but (on the contrary) ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. Acts 1:5 (KJV)

Christ speaks of the contrast of the two baptisms and confirms it will not be in water BUT Spirit! The contrast was further revealed in that the death of Christ for remission of sins superceded water baptism....But I receive not testimony from (The Baptist and Peter were men!) man: but these things I say, that ye might be saved. John 5:34 (KJV)
He was a burning and a shining light: and ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light. John 5:35 (KJV)
But I have greater witness than that of John: for the works which the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me, that the Father hath sent me. John 5:36 (KJV)

This greater witness is when Christ Jesus "finished" the work at the cross not a "new" water baptism!

By comparing scripture with scripture it is evident the commission was to preach the new testimony for sin remission and when one believes the words of this gospel of Christ they would be baptized by the Spirit. The confusion is had when men go against the warning of God and “ADD” the word “WATER” to the final words of Christ.

You said:
-Baptism “in the name of Christ” came AFTER the cross –it was a NEW baptism – never before seen. You disagree so prove otherwise!

My response:
"Baptism in the name of Christ" was in recognition that Jesus was the Messiah. His manifestation as such began with the Baptist as he "prepared the way for the Lord". This preparation was the recognition as God the Father witnessed.....And lo a voice from heaven, saying, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased. Matt. 3:17 (KJV)

Shortly after this it is said "We have found the Messias, which is, being interpreted, the Christ". Choosing to believe no one was baptized in His name after this, since it was the Father's purpose beginning with the Baptist, is beyond any logical reasoning. Couple this with the fact the Mosaic law was still in force at that time leaves you without excuse as to "in the name of Jesus" being a "new" water baptism without the law. Furthermore as Ananias, a devout man according to the LAW said.... be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord (Acts 22:16). Waterdog, stop chasing your "tale", you're completely dizzy headed!!!!!


To be continued.......

In Christ
Craig