Has anyone changed their mind...?

[Enoch111]

I not only talk to myself, but I answer myself. Further, I argue with what I said to myself... and sometimes I lose the argument.

You can't win for losin';)

 

[marks]

I not only talk to myself, but I answer myself. Further, I argue with what I said to myself... and sometimes I lose the argument.

I sometimes talk to myself, and yes, it sometimes turns into and argument, and then I get lost in all the back and forth!

:

 

[farouk]

Love this thread. :)
Personally it has not changed what I believe. It has helped me learn things as a young Christian, it has made me study more. It basically makes me hungrier, to do/know our Father's will. Be content knowing we do try.

There are some here with no humility. Smart people, full of knowledge but always have to finish with a remark that makes what they say seem trivial; no matter how informative, correct or otherwise the post is/was. We are human, it happens. If I have offended anyone, please forgive me. It is never my intent.

Thank you @"ByGrace" you are always kind to me. Great thread!!! :)

Praying "Thy will be done" and sticking close to Scripture is always a good way forward, in faith! :)

 

[farouk]

Tell them to email you the directions! ;)

The young generation now seems to be far better at email and its ramifications than some of us are...

 

[Marymog]

You could have learned this from the Bible yourself. Peter said that water is only good for washing away the filth that accumulates on the human body. The Bible also says (to keep it simple) "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved" (Acts 16:31).

Thank you Enoch.

Since you really didn't answer my question if you learned this from someone else or you are self taught I have to ASSUME that you came up with the interpretation yourself; self taught.

You summarize your interpretation of that passage, and water baptism in general, by saying that when a person is baptized they are "telling the world that they have been saved by grace" and not by water further saying "water is only good for bathing, not salvation." It seems to me you are saying that water baptism is a public ceremony to show others that they have been saved by grace and water baptism is symbolic.

So my question to you: Is water necessary to have a valid baptism? Or can a person just announce, in a public ceremony, that they have been saved? Would a public announcement be valid also?

Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

There is frequently a great misunderstanding of that passage in 1 Peter 3:19-21. So we need to look at it very closely:

By which also he [Christ] went and preached unto the spirits in prison; Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water. 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:

We need to spiritually discern what is being taught in this passage. Therefore we need to ask ourselves several questions:

1. According to the Gospel are souls saved by water or any other means, or are souls saved by repenting and believing on the Lord Jesus Christ? And the answer is obvious.

2. If that is true, in what sense does baptism "now save us"?

3. Can "eight were souls saved by water" be stated as "eight souls were saved through water"? And that is exactly what "dia" means, and should have been translated thus.

Strong's Concordance
dia: through, on account of, because of
Original Word: διά
Part of Speech: Preposition
Transliteration: dia
Phonetic Spelling: (dee-ah')
Definition: through, on account of, because of
Usage: (a) gen: through, throughout, by the instrumentality of, (b) acc: through, on account of, by reason of, for the sake of, because of.

Therefore eight souls were saved THROUGH water when the Ark went through the Deluge. There was intense rain, which means that the Ark and its occupants were figuratively "baptized" in water. And the Ark floated on the water for one year, so that too was eight souls being saved through water. Thus "the like figure (Gk antitupon = antitype)" of Christian baptism by immersion.

So now we need to determine how Christian baptism "saves us"? Is that a figure of speech or can water save anyone?

The key to the answer is in the resurrection of Jesus Christ. And that is what Peter is saying. The Bible says that Christ was raised from the dead for our justification. In other words, had Christ simply died for our sins and remained dead, it would have availed nothing. His resurrection was imperative to establish that Christ had destroyed the power of, and the penalty for sins -- destroyed the power of sin, Hades, Hell, death, and Satan. Thus He was declared "Lord" after His resurrection.

Those who believe with their hearts that Christ died for their sins and was raised for their justification are saved by grace through faith, justified by God, and forgiven of all their sins. That produces a "good conscience". Therefore when they are baptized as believers, they are telling the world that they have been saved by grace (not by the water of baptism).

Peter also makes it clear that water can only "put away" or cleanse "the flesh" (the body). So water is only good for bathing, not salvation.

Hi Encoh.

Your very first sentence says, "There is frequently a great misunderstanding of that passage...". Since your interpretation of that passage (baptism in general) is different than the Apostolic Father Clement of Rome and Ignatius of Antioch (both 1st century Bishops of their respective churches) along with other 1st century historical Christian writings is it possible that YOU are misunderstanding that passage?

Or do you sincerely think Clement and Ignatius misunderstood baptism?

I guess if you change words in Scripture (from by to through) then YES, that passage can kind of fit your theory.....I personally don't feel comfortable changing Scripture to fit my belief.

Mary

 

[Taken]

So my question to you: Is water necessary to have a valid baptism? Or can a person just announce, in a public ceremony, that they have been saved? Would a public announcement be valid also?

Curious Mary

While not a question to me. I am taking advantage of the open forum.

Is water necessary to have a valid baptism?

A water Baptism necessary?
No.

A water Baptism necessary to Become a Member of Christ's spiritual Church?
No.

A water Baptism necessary to Become a Member of a man-made Church?
Yes.

Or can a person just announce, in a public ceremony, that they have been saved?

Any SAVED person can announce at ANY time, they ARE Saved. Ceremony not required.

Would a public announcement be valid also?

The VALIDITY hinges on one having Become Saved.
Any ANNOUNCING of one who is Saved, simply gives others NOTICE of the ones Standing in Christ.
It serves as a Benefit for men to know and engage with Brothers IN Christ.
And serves as an Opportunity to Speak the word of God, to willing ears of those NOT in Christ.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Marymog]

Now this is an entirely different issue.

The Lord Jesus Christ -- before His ascension -- commanded Christian baptism by immersion (since that is what the Greek word means). At the same time He taught the doctrine of the Trinity. So water baptism by immersion is an imperative for all those who truly believe and are converted. It is a testimony to the world that they have been saved by grace.

MATTHEW 28
18 And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
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:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

In view of this, Peter COMMANDED the saved Jews to be baptized on the day of Pentecost, and he also COMMANDED the saved Gentiles to be baptized in the house of Cornelius. All through the book of Acts, those who believed were immediately baptized by immersion.

Hi Enoch.

As you know baptize does NOT mean immersion only. It also means to dip or wash clean. Something or someone can be washed or dipped without being immersed. I know it is a waste of time with you to discuss that FACT with you so I digress.

Furthermore there is a 1st century Christian historical writing (written during the time of the Apostles) that says pouring on water is an acceptable form of baptism sooooo either the Christians who walked and talked with the Apostles are wrong about this or you are wrong.

If water is imperative then it must do something. Sooooo what does it do?

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Touché
So...shall we say it is not either v Or, but BOTH ...and, let it drop ?

Hi BG,

Yes, they were ALSO saved by being INSIDE the Ark so one could say both saved them.

The main point of that entire passage is that water baptism now saves US. No need for a boat....:)

Mary

 

[Helen]

While not a question to me. I am taking advantage of the open forum.



A water Baptism necessary?
No.

A water Baptism necessary to Become a Member of Christ's spiritual Church?
No.

A water Baptism necessary to Become a Member of a man-made Church?
Yes.



Any SAVED person can announce at ANY time, they ARE Saved. Ceremony not required.



The VALIDITY hinges on one having Become Saved.
Any ANNOUNCING of one who is Saved, simply gives others NOTICE of the ones Standing in Christ.
It serves as a Benefit for men to know and engage with Brothers IN Christ.
And serves as an Opportunity to Speak the word of God, to willing ears of those NOT in Christ.

Glory to God,
Taken

Amen 100% agree.

 

[Enoch111]

...pouring on water is an acceptable form of baptism...

This was to be THE EXCEPTION according to the Didache (2nd century). But unless you understand that Christian baptism indicates the death, burial, and resurrection of the convert with Christ, in order to "walk in newness of life" you will not understand why immersion is the only valid form of Christian baptism.

f water is imperative then it must do something. Sooooo what does it do?

It is imperative because it is a COMMANDMENT of Christ. The one who repents and believes on Christ immediately puts himself/herself under the authority of Christ as Lord, therefore this is the first commandment to be obeyed by a new convert.

So water baptism tells the world that you have not only believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, but you understand that your old life is dead and buried, and you will now walk in newness of life by the power of the Spirit. And the first indication of that is obedience to Christ in baptism.

Kindly notice what was done in the house of the Gentile Cornelius:
...Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days. (Acts 10:46-48)

 

[Enoch111]

I guess if you change words in Scripture (from by to through) then YES, that passage can kind of fit your theory.....I personally don't feel comfortable changing Scripture to fit my belief.

I did not change anything. That word dia should have been translated as "through". "By" is a substitute which really should not have been used.
New International Version
to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water...
English Standard Version
because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.
New American Standard Bible
who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.
American Standard Version
that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water
English Revised Version
which aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water:

 

[Marymog]

FWIW . . . I think the point is, they went "through the water" like everyone else, but instead of being destroyed, like eveyone else, they were saved, because they were in the ark.

But again . . . fwiw . . . baptism does save us.

Much love!
Mark

While not a question to me. I am taking advantage of the open forum.



A water Baptism necessary?
No.

A water Baptism necessary to Become a Member of Christ's spiritual Church?
No.

A water Baptism necessary to Become a Member of a man-made Church?
Yes.


Any SAVED person can announce at ANY time, they ARE Saved. Ceremony not required.


The VALIDITY hinges on one having Become Saved.
Any ANNOUNCING of one who is Saved, simply gives others NOTICE of the ones Standing in Christ.
It serves as a Benefit for men to know and engage with Brothers IN Christ.
And serves as an Opportunity to Speak the word of God, to willing ears of those NOT in Christ.

Glory to God,
Taken

Thank you Taken.

You say that water baptism is not necessary. If it is not necessary HOW do we fulfill Jesus command: Go you therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit:?

The Protestant teaching is that baptism is a public announcement/ceremony of one being saved. Baptism is just a symbol. You believe that one does not need to make a public pronouncement at all. It seems you disagree with the Protestant teaching on this matter. Who's teaching do you adhere to?

If the VALIDITY hinges on one having Become Saved then using water to baptize is not necessary.......Correct? (using water doesn't make it valid)

Mary

 

[Marymog]

This was to be THE EXCEPTION according to the Didache (2nd century). But unless you understand that Christian baptism indicates the death, burial, and resurrection of the convert with Christ, in order to "walk in newness of life" you will not understand why immersion is the only valid form of Christian baptism.

It is imperative because it is a COMMANDMENT of Christ. The one who repents and believes on Christ immediately puts himself/herself under the authority of Christ as Lord, therefore this is the first commandment to be obeyed by a new convert.

So water baptism tells the world that you have not only believed on the Lord Jesus Christ, but you understand that your old life is dead and buried, and you will now walk in newness of life by the power of the Spirit. And the first indication of that is obedience to Christ in baptism.

Kindly notice what was done in the house of the Gentile Cornelius:
...Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days. (Acts 10:46-48)

Thank you Enoch.

It is refreshing to see that you are familiar with the Didache. You are right, it is an exception (last resort) HOWEVER it is an acceptable exception form of baptism soooo immersion is NOT the only form of a valid baptism especially when the word baptize means to wash or dip and both washing and dipping can be done WITHOUT immersion.

(But if you have no running water, then baptize in some other water; and if you are not able to baptize in cold water, then do so in warm. But if you have neither, then pour water on the head three times.)

The 1st century Christians practiced (as a last resort) pouring also, not immersion ONLY. I trust they knew what they were doing. I don't trust the men of the Reformation to be right on this when they say "immersion only".

If it is imperative because it is a COMMANDMENT of Christ then using water baptism is necessary to obtain a full and proper baptism. Since it is "imperative" that means it is not "symbolic" and it actually does something because without using water it is not a valid baptism. That means that water baptism is NOT just a telling to the world that you believe in Christ. Using water is NECESSARY and IMPARATIVE because one COULD tell the world VERBALLY that you believe in Christ. I agree with you....water is imperative.

I do notice that the house of Cornelius did NOT forbid water. They knew water was necessary. Thank you for that quote from Scripture.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

I did not change anything. That word dia should have been translated as "through". "By" is a substitute which really should not have been used.
New International Version
to those who were disobedient long ago when God waited patiently in the days of Noah while the ark was being built. In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water...
English Standard Version
because they formerly did not obey, when God’s patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.
New American Standard Bible
who once were disobedient, when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water.
American Standard Version
that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water
English Revised Version
which aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water:

KJV: Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.

ALSO the following say "by" water: Good news Translation, ISV, New Heart English Bible, AKJV, Douay-Rheims Bible, Webster's bible, Wycliffe bible

Sooooo who is right???

I wonder if @Nancy will like my post?

EDIT: I noticed in the past you liked to quote the KJV. Why don't you like to quote it now? Curious Mary

 

[Marymog]

Amen 100% agree.

Hi BG,

Since you 100% agree that water baptism is not necessary how do we fulfill the commandment of Jesus in Matthew 28:19?

Curious Mary

 

[Nancy]

Hi BG,

Since you 100% agree that water baptism is not necessary how do we fulfill the commandment of Jesus in Matthew 28:19?

Curious Mary

I guess the thief on the cross got a pass, eh?

 

[Taken]

Thank you Taken.

You say that water baptism is not necessary. If it is not necessary HOW do we fulfill Jesus command: Go you therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit:?

By understanding HOW to fulfill Jesus' command.

The Protestant teaching is that baptism is a public announcement/ceremony of one being saved. Baptism is just a symbol.

Water Baptism is a scheduled event.
It allows that person to become a member of that Church. The congregation becomes the witnesses of the person being Baptized in water and becoming a member of their Church.

A scheduled Water Baptism, IF one Chooses to become a member of that particular church...DOES SO AFTER having accepted an "alter call" to move forward to the alter, before witnesses of a Congregation, to Confess their Belief In God, In Christ Jesus.
Their choosing to CONFESS, IS the time they become Baptized in the HOLY SPIRIT, BY the Power of the Holy Spirit, Because of their Confession.

If they also choose to become A Member of that Church, they schedule a Water Baptism. It is a ceremony of the Person Having been Baptized with the Holy Spirit, becoming a Church member.

You believe that one does not need to make a public pronouncement at all. It seems you disagree with the Protestant teaching on this matter.

I believe men are taught to confess thee Lord God, before men. But I do not believe a Confession before men IS REQUIRED to become Converted.
As if a person alone, dying, and confesses to the Lord God....and the Lord would say...uh hold that thought until the public shows up.

Moreso it seems to me, People who are not Protestants sometimes think they are the authority on Protestants.

Who's teaching do you adhere to?

Jesus' teaching.

If the VALIDITY hinges on one having Become Saved then using water to baptize is not necessary.......Correct? (using water doesn't make it valid)

Clearly Water was used by Priests to "purify" themselves before entering the Temple.

Clearly that was temporary.

Clearly men brought Sin offerings (animals), to be sacrificed to receive forgiveness of sins.

Clearly that was a temporary forgiveness, as it was a yearly event.

Clearly the Jerusalem Temple was the ONLY Temple sanctioned for Animal Sacrifices and forgiveness of sin.

Clearly that Temple stands no more.

Clearly Animal sacrifices, for forgiveness of sin have been haulted.

Clearly water Baptism is John's Baptism.

Clearly John's Baptism with Water BECAME a new Method for men to receive forgiveness of Sin.

Clearly John's Water Baptism was temporary.

Clearly Jesus offered a Permanent Baptism of the Holy Spirit.

CLearly a permanent Baptism requires a Confession of the Indiviudal to the Lord, and the Lord has given His Word to Baptize the Individuals who give a true heartfelt confession.

Clearly the Apostles teaching of Christ, is purposed for men to Hear and Choose for themselves to become Converted and receive the Baptism of the Holy Sprit by the Lord God Himself.

Glory to God,
Taken

 

[Enoch111]

EDIT: I noticed in the past you liked to quote the KJV. Why don't you like to quote it now? Curious Mary

Curious Mary, don't be contrary. You presumed that "through" was changing Scripture. And I showed you that it is exactly what is in Scripture (originally and lately). I will still continue using the KJV.

 

[Marymog]

I guess the thief on the cross got a pass, eh?

Yes, thru grace and the promise of Jesus. There is no indication in Scripture that the thief on the cross was a Christian yet Jesus assures him that he is saved and even promises that he will go to heaven that very day. FURTHERMORE, Whether or not the thief had been baptized is unknown sooooo you are only PRESUMING he was not baptized.

Just last February you said you "love the KJV" and in August of last year you said "I tend to the KJV". Do you not love or tend to the KJV now?

Curious and Bible Study Mary