Is water baptism necessary for salvation?

[OzSpen]

Baptism is not mentioned in John chapter 3. I don't believe in baptismal regeneration.

Clearly from Acts 2.41, people were baptized because they believed the Gospel; they didn't get baptized in order to believe.

farouk,

‘Born of water and the Spirit’ (John 3:5). What does it mean? If we look in the context, could we get a hint? ‘Flesh gives birth to the flesh’ (v 6) could point to water as physical birth vs spiritual birth. The meaning of the phrase has generated lots of possible meanings, such as:

• It describes two births, physical vs spiritual birth. But there are no ancient sources that present the view that natural birth is from water. But the context is talking about one birth, ‘from above’, ‘born again’.

• Some think ‘water’ refers to Christian baptism. Such a view would not be relevant to Nicodemus (see John 3:10 and Jesus’ taking the Jews to task that they didn’t know what he was talking about). There is the added problem that baptismal regeneration (necessity of baptism for salvation) is not taught elsewhere in the NT – except in the non-canonical Mark 16:16). There is no believe + baptism to be saved. John 3:16 is clear: ‘For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life’. So here in John 3, we have confirmation that salvation is available to ‘whoever believes in [Jesus]’ and they ‘shall not perish but have eternal life’. It does not state that salvation is for those who believe and are baptised.

• Some want this ‘water’ to refer to John the Baptist’s baptism, a baptism of repentance.

• ‘Jesus is arguing against the ritual washings of the Essenes’ – a conservative group that promoted rituals. This is the group associated with the Dead Sea Scrolls.

• The most satisfactory conclusion, in my view, is that ‘born of water and the Spirit’ is influenced by three factors: (1) It is a parallel meaning to ‘born from above’ and so only one birth is in view – the born again, new birth. (2) A unity of water-spirit; (3) Jesus criticises Nicodemus (in 3:10) for not understanding these things, especially since he was ‘Israel’s teacher’. Note, Ezekiel 36:25-27. Nicodemus should have known this Scripture that demonstrates cleansing from impurity and transformation of the heart.

• Therefore, ‘born of water and spirit’ (drop the capital S) points to ‘a new begetting, a new birth that cleanses and renews, the eschatological cleansing and renewal promised by the Old Testament prophets’ (Carson 1991:195; many of the above points are based on Carson 1991:191-195).

Oz

Works consulted

Carson, D A 1991. The Gospel according to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press / Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

 

[farouk]

Be careful once Pandora is out of the box, she doesn’t fit back in very nicely.

Not sure what exactly your comment refers to. The Lord knows who are His, in any case.

 

[farouk]

farouk,

‘Born of water and the Spirit’ (John 3:5). What does it mean? If we look in the context, could we get a hint? ‘Flesh gives birth to the flesh’ (v 6) could point to water as physical birth vs spiritual birth. The meaning of the phrase has generated lots of possible meanings, such as:

• It describes two births, physical vs spiritual birth. But there are no ancient sources that present the view that natural birth is from water. But the context is talking about one birth, ‘from above’, ‘born again’.

• Some think ‘water’ refers to Christian baptism. Such a view would not be relevant to Nicodemus (see John 3:10 and Jesus’ taking the Jews to task that they didn’t know what he was talking about). There is the added problem that baptismal regeneration (necessity of baptism for salvation) is not taught elsewhere in the NT – except in the non-canonical Mark 16:16). There is no believe + baptism to be saved. John 3:16 is clear: ‘For God so loved the world that he gave his one and only Son, that whoever believes in him shall not perish but have eternal life’. So here in John 3, we have confirmation that salvation is available to ‘whoever believes in [Jesus]’ and they ‘shall not perish but have eternal life’. It does not state that salvation is for those who believe and are baptised.

• Some want this ‘water’ to refer to John the Baptist’s baptism, a baptism of repentance.

• ‘Jesus is arguing against the ritual washings of the Essenes’ – a conservative group that promoted rituals. This is the group associated with the Dead Sea Scrolls.

• The most satisfactory conclusion, in my view, is that ‘born of water and the Spirit’ is influenced by three factors: (1) It is a parallel meaning to ‘born from above’ and so only one birth is in view – the born again, new birth. (2) A unity of water-spirit; (3) Jesus criticises Nicodemus (in 3:10) for not understanding these things, especially since he was ‘Israel’s teacher’. Note, Ezekiel 36:25-27. Nicodemus should have known this Scripture that demonstrates cleansing from impurity and transformation of the heart.

• Therefore, ‘born of water and spirit’ (drop the capital S) points to ‘a new begetting, a new birth that cleanses and renews, the eschatological cleansing and renewal promised by the Old Testament prophets’ (Carson 1991:195; many of the above points are based on Carson 1991:191-195).

Oz

Works consulted

Carson, D A 1991. The Gospel according to John. Leicester, England: Inter-Varsity Press / Grand Rapids, Michigan: William B. Eerdmans Publishing Company.

Ephesians 5.26 also speaks of 'the washing of water by the word'.

 

[Waiting on him]

Not sure what exactly your comment refers to. The Lord knows who are His, in any case.

I agree completely.

 

[CharismaticLady]

The scenario you mention shows the person who lives in, is overcome by and dies in sin, was never truly born again in the first place; this is my understanding of Scripture.

Only a born again Christian is sanctified, so there is something wrong with the theory you've been taught according to Hebrews 10:26-31.

 

[Grailhunter]

I don't expect to see Hitler at all. I don't care if the Catholic church has him in good standing or not. It is not up to them.

As for a serial killer who comes to Christ like Jeffrey Dahmer, Susan Atkins, Tex Watson or the Son of Sam, we will be shoulder to shoulder.

You are reasoning with human reasoning, but Jesus says otherwise:

Matthew 20:
“For the kingdom of heaven is like a landowner who went out early in the morning to hire laborers for his vineyard. 2 Now when he had agreed with the laborers for a denarius a day, he sent them into his vineyard. 3 And he went out about the third hour and saw others standing idle in the marketplace, 4 and said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard, and whatever is right I will give you.’ So they went. 5 Again he went out about the sixth and the ninth hour, and did likewise. 6 And about the eleventh hour he went out and found others standing idle, and said to them, ‘Why have you been standing here idle all day?’ 7 They said to him, ‘Because no one hired us.’ He said to them, ‘You also go into the vineyard, and whatever is right you will receive.’

8 “So when evening had come, the owner of the vineyard said to his steward, ‘Call the laborers and give them their wages, beginning with the last to the first.’ 9 And when those came who were hired about the eleventh hour, they each received a denarius. 10 But when the first came, they supposed that they would receive more; and they likewise received each a denarius. 11 And when they had received it, they complained against the landowner, 12 saying, ‘These last men have worked only one hour, and you made them equal to us who have borne the burden and the heat of the day.’ 13 But he answered one of them and said, ‘Friend, I am doing you no wrong. Did you not agree with me for a denarius? 14 Take what is yours and go your way. I wish to give to this last man the same as to you. 15 Is it not lawful for me to do what I wish with my own things? Or is your eye evil because I am good?’ 16 So the last will be first, and the first last. For many are called, but few chosen.”

Willie brought this up...again if you are saved at 12 or 100 you saved the same.
The issue is really are there levels of reward.
I am not saying that there are Christians in hell....
Different rewards is all.
The walk with Christ.
You spend your life thinking about Christ....doing things because of the love that Christ taught you. It is a different relationship, a different salvation a different sanctification.
The next guy believes but hardly cracks open the bible and really does not think a whole lot about it....but he does believe.
How much work do you have to do to be saved? Not about work....it is about belief.
How many people wonder if saved is solid? It is.
How many people wonder about what kind of repentance it takes to be saved?
A lot of people agree...just do not think that far...
Your thinking your beliefs and mine are that far off?

 

[farouk]

, so there is something wrong with the theory you've been taught according to Hebrews 10:26-31.

I'm not sure what it is that you are attributing to me; I agree with your statement: Only a born again Christian is sanctified.

 

[farouk]

@Waiting on him Thanks for the 'like'.

 

[farouk]

@charity Hi; has this thread developed in ways you anticipated?

 

[CharismaticLady]

Willie brought this up...again if you are saved at 12 or 100 you saved the same.
The issue is really are there levels of reward.
I am not saying that there are Christians in hell....
Different rewards is all.
The walk with Christ.
You spend your life thinking about Christ....doing things because of the love that Christ taught you. It is a different relationship, a different salvation a different sanctification.
The next guy believes but hardly cracks open the bible and really does not think a whole lot about it....but he does believe.
How much work do you have to do to be saved? Not about work....it is about belief.
How many people wonder if saved is solid? It is.
How many people wonder about what kind of repentance it takes to be saved?
A lot of people agree...just do not think that far...
Your thinking your beliefs and mine are that far off?

One thing about the parable that was not brought up. What if one of the workers who had been there 11 hours, but walked off the job before the end of the 12th hour. Would he still be paid a day's wage?

 

[Grailhunter]

One thing about the parable that was not brought up. What if one of the workers who had been there 11 hours, but walked off the job before the end of the 12th hour. Would he still be paid a day's wage?

That is a good example of what happens to some people in life. Some people are in and out....I am sure you have seen it....Not on the walk with Christ....Did they stop believing or did they stop caring? Who knows the heart of men. Still again, that is what judgment is for.....it is not all decided before we get there. The reasons I believe what I believe is because it answers a lot of what you see argued on this forum. God does make sense.

 

[CharismaticLady]

That is a good example of what happens to some people in life. Some people are in and out....I am sure you have seen it....Not on the walk with Christ....Did they stop believing or did they stop caring? Who knows the heart of men. Still again, that is what judgment is for.....it is not all decided before we get there. The reasons I believe what I believe is because it answers a lot of what you see argued on this forum. God does make sense.

Great is your reward in heaven. It just doesn't say what that is based on. But I don't know if you've seen this or not on the forum, but among Calvinists, Galatians 5:19-21 about not inheriting the Kingdom of Heaven, they believe that they will be in heaven, but their rewards on earth will be few.

 

[Grailhunter]

Great is your reward in heaven. It just doesn't say what that is based on. But I don't know if you've seen this or not on the forum, but among Calvinists, Galatians 5:19-21 about not inheriting the Kingdom of Heaven, they believe that they will be in heaven, but their rewards on earth will be few.

I don't care what the Calvinist believe. lol You say that you will be shoulder to shoulder with people like Hitler. I am saying that if they believe they still go to heaven....but maybe not get to party with CharismaticLady.

 

[CharismaticLady]

I don't care what the Calvinist believe. lol You say that you will be shoulder to shoulder with people like Hitler. I am saying that if they believe they still go to heaven....but maybe not get to party with CharismaticLady.

I said nothing of the kind about Hitler. Read it again.

 

[Grailhunter]

I said nothing of the kind about Hitler. Read it again.

Joke

 

[Waiting on him]

I don't care what the Calvinist believe. lol You say that you will be shoulder to shoulder with people like Hitler. I am saying that if they believe they still go to heaven....but maybe not get to party with CharismaticLady.

There is no-pecking order in heaven, otherwise it would be no different than this place

 

[CharismaticLady]

Joke

No, you just had the wrong people.

 

[Grailhunter]

There is no-pecking order in heaven, otherwise it would be no different than this place

Hi there WOH, I have no problem with you believing what you believe....but I believe heaven could not be anything like it is here.
So as for you, are you going to tell a new Christian, don''t worry about doing anything....it ends up all the same.

 

[Grailhunter]

No, you just had the wrong people.

No I was saying I was joking

 

[Waiting on him]

Hi there WOH, I have no problem with you believing what you believe....but I believe heaven could not be anything like it is here.
So as for you, are you going to tell a new Christian, don''t worry about doing anything....it ends up all the same.

It’s interesting, all the talk about the laborers brought into the vineyard and who’s getting what and what’s due, and where the harder workers are going, and how they should receive special consideration, is all a bunch of pelican hockey. The point is Christ is all about equality it’s not like this system where it’s all performance based.