Is water baptism necessary for salvation?

[reformed1689]

Nope, you can not isolate one thing or in this case a book or verse and assume that is how everything should be. What happens when one jettisons the historic Church is what we see here when people think that Baptism is not a requirement and that mere belief is, sadly most evangelicals reject what has always been taught from the beginning. sigh.

Baptism was never taught as a requirement for salvation in Scripture.

 

[historyb]

Hello @historyb,

There is no falsehood.

With respect, that 'crowd' that you refer to, to whom Peter gave the words, 'repent, and be baptized', were men of Israel, inhabitants of Judea and Jerusalem, whom Peter could address as, 'brethren'. This was very much a Jewish necessity, in order that the Lord Jesus Christ may return and the times of refreshing from the presence of the Lord take place as prophesied (Acts 2 & 3).

No, the testimony of Scripture does not tell us that water baptism is a requirement for salvation. If it did, such words as that found in John's gospel in chapter 20, would not have been written:-

'And many other signs truly did Jesus
in the presence of His disciples,
which are not written in this book:
But these are written,
that ye might believe
that Jesus is the Christ,
the Son of God;
and that believing
ye might have life
through His Name.'
(John 20:30-31)

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Chris

Scripture and Apostolic Tradition passed down from the beginning verify that Baptism was and is a requirement. I am sorry you reject the historic Apostolic Tradition and Fathers in favor of a strange new gospel.

 

[historyb]

Baptism was never taught as a requirement for salvation in Scripture.

Of course it was and is in the real Churches, you just reject truth in favor of a strange new gospel that is all

 

[reformed1689]

Of course it was and is in the real Churches, you just reject truth in favor of a strange new gospel that is all

No, I actually hold to Scripture and not the traditions of man.

 

[charity]

'For God so loved the world
that He gave His only Begotten Son,
that whosoever believeth on Him,
should not perish,
but have everlasting life.'

Praise God!

 

[n2thelight]

'For God so loved the world
that He gave His only Begotten Son,
that whosoever believeth on Him,
should not perish,
but have everlasting life.'

Praise God!

@historyb

Would you add to the verse to include being baptized ?

 

[n2thelight]

I do think we should be as Christ set the example .

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

How about I send you the book of Acts as an e-book? It is probably missing from your Bible.

I had a friend; he knew the whole Bible, by heart so to speak. We were Boere, you know, those odd people who now-a-days are called 'Afrikaans-sprekende Suid-Afrikaners' DUH! But he loved to say to me in English, 'A man convinced against his will is of the same opinion still'.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

during the Acts period the call of Peter, made in Acts 3:19-20 to his countrymen was still being heard; and the door was still open for them to repent. So, yes, I believe that water baptism was still in place during that period. This is where @GerhardEbersoehn will disagree with me I believe.

Acts 3:37 - 47!! "How beautiful are the feet... Isaiah 52:7-9 FULFILLED. Now Romans 10:15, "And HOW shall they preach EXCEPT THEY BE SENT"! Verse 12, "For there is NO DIFFERENCE between the Jew and the Greek". Listen to what real apostolic baptism used to be: Paul speaks of the apostles including Peter, "preaching and baptising - baptising and preaching" ['hendiadys' remember?] "The same Lord OVER ALL, is RICH OVER all UNTO all .. for whosoever shall call upon THE NAME OF THE LORD shall be saved" : shall be "BAPTISED IN THE NAME". No water, how can it be clearer? Only Salvation - "Glad Tidings" of Salvation without righteousness by works be the works water-baptism.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

'Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized,

The Greek using both, - emphatically - 'MEH-TI to hudoor'-"NO WATER whatsoever", and, - emphatically - 'TIS tou MEH'-"NO ONE whosoever" is no rhetorical QUESTION, but straight out PROHIBITION of anything FURTHER, AFTER THE HOLY SPIRIT HAD DONE EVERYTHING required of everybody the apostle or the 'baptismal candidates' for completed and eternal salvation. They were "baptised in the NAME" and "The Holy Spirit fell on all them which HEARD THE WORD". They "BELIEVED"; they were "ASTONISHED" their baptism surpassed understanding; "the GIFT of the Holy Spirit" had followed; they spoke in other languages; above all, "they MAGNIFIED GOD". But some say no, it's not good enough, <<Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized ... in WATER?>>! Not only is it an absurdity, it is decrying the efficiencies of the Lord Himself.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

What happens when one jettisons the historic Church is what we see here when people think that Baptism is not a requirement and that mere belief is, sadly most evangelicals reject what has always been taught from the beginning.

I beg your pardon, but <<that Baptism is not a requirement and that mere belief is>>, sadly is underestimating the greatness of "The Great Commission" of Jesus - in person - given to the disciples - in person - in Galilee after his Resurrection WHEREWITH CHRIST MADE THEM APOSTLES. But them and them ALONE! Since the Church has the apostles and their report in the New Testament, it also has their baptism in the New Testament in their report. The Church has authority to proclaim what the apostles proclaimed, but has no authority to continue the baptism which Christ meant for the apostles and their age only. What is apostolic authentic and unique because it was the beginnings of and laid the foundation for the future, cannot be made replicas of, or they must be faked. So the fraudulent is easy to recognise because water-baptism at no stage was apostolic and never at all was authentic Christian, whereas to "baptise IN THE NAME" was apostolic and had been authentic Christian during the apostles' time.

 

[reformed1689]

I beg your pardon, but <<that Baptism is not a requirement and that mere belief is>>, sadly is underestimating the greatness of "The Great Commission" of Jesus - in person - given to the disciples - in person - in Galilee after his Resurrection WHEREWITH CHRIST MADE THEM APOSTLES. But them and them ALONE! Since the Church has the apostles and their report in the New Testament, it also has their baptism in the New Testament in their report. The Church has authority to proclaim what the apostles proclaimed, but has no authority to continue the baptism which Christ meant for the apostles and their age only. What is apostolic authentic and unique because it was the beginnings of and laid the foundation for the future, cannot be made replicas of, or they must be faked. So the fraudulent is easy to recognise because water-baptism at no stage was apostolic and never at all was authentic Christian, whereas to "baptise IN THE NAME" was apostolic and had been authentic Christian during the apostles' time.

It also has them breaking bread togeter as part of their report (Acts 2) but I don't see you claiming that as necessary for salvation.

 

[3rdAngel]

Water baptism is symbolic of dying to self and walking in newness of life in Christ through His Spirit *ROMANS 6; GALATIANS 5:16; ROMANS 8:1-4. This is like circumcision is a sign of a new heart to follow God's laws through faith *EZEKIEL 36:26; ROMANS 2:28-29 which is the new covenant promise of salvation from sin to walk in newness of life *HEBREWS 8:10-12; JOHN 8:31-36; ROMANS 6 to all those who believe and follow God's Word *JOHN 3:16-21. "If you continue in my word you are my disciples in deed, you shall know the truth and the truth shall set you free" *JOHN 8:31-36.

 

[Waiting on him]

I beg your pardon, but <<that Baptism is not a requirement and that mere belief is>>, sadly is underestimating the greatness of "The Great Commission" of Jesus - in person - given to the disciples - in person - in Galilee after his Resurrection WHEREWITH CHRIST MADE THEM APOSTLES. But them and them ALONE! Since the Church has the apostles and their report in the New Testament, it also has their baptism in the New Testament in their report. The Church has authority to proclaim what the apostles proclaimed, but has no authority to continue the baptism which Christ meant for the apostles and their age only. What is apostolic authentic and unique because it was the beginnings of and laid the foundation for the future, cannot be made replicas of, or they must be faked. So the fraudulent is easy to recognise because water-baptism at no stage was apostolic and never at all was authentic Christian, whereas to "baptise IN THE NAME" was apostolic and had been authentic Christian during the apostles' time.

I appreciate you answering the question I posed some time ago “what qualifies one to baptize men”.

 

[Willie T]

Does anyone here think the Jews, Jesus, or John The Baptist invented the ritual of baptism?

 

[reformed1689]

Does anyone here think the Jews, Jesus, or John The Baptist invented the ritual of baptism?

It depends what type of baptism you are talking about.

 

[charity]

(Ref replies #629 & #630)

Hello @GerhardEbersoehn,

The word of God that comes to mind, on reading your two entries referenced above, is that spoken by the Apostle Paul in Ephesians 5:26, concerning the Church:-

'Husbands, love your wives,
even as Christ also loved the church,
and gave Himself for it;
That He might sanctify and cleanse it
With the washing of water by the Word.
That He might present it to Himself,
a glorious church,
not having spot, or wrinkle,
or any such thing;
but that it should be holy and without blame'
(Ephesians 5:25-27)

In quoting this I am merely showing that I acknowledge that the Word of God is likened to water: it's application having the same effect. However I cannot acknowledge that preaching and baptizing are one and the same as you suggest, having found no scriptural evidence that the figure hendiadys can be applied to them.

I believe that water baptism is NOT the One Baptism of Ephesians 4:5: part of the sevenfold unity of the Spirit that we are urged to KEEP; but believe that the believer is baptized the moment the Word of God concerning the person and work of His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, is received and believed: and is thereby sealed by that Holy Spirit of promise.

Praise God!

I have mis-givings regarding your reasoning, for it is not a concept that I have heard before: but thank you for expressing it; for I am considering what you have said carefully in the light of God's Word.

Thank you.
In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[charity]

Does anyone here think the Jews, Jesus, or John The Baptist invented the ritual of baptism?

Hello @Willie T,

Of course not!

In Christ Jesus
Chris

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

I cannot acknowledge that preaching and baptizing are one and the same as you suggest, having found no scriptural evidence that the figure hendiadys can be applied to them.

True. I meant for the apostles there was no difference between their preaching and teaching. They as it were buried the (new and reborn) believers "in the Name" through the Living Water of the Word. It never became an exclusive privilege of the generic Church after the apostles. False spirits after them swiftly cracked the barren ground all around. We have a nice name in my 'taal' for one such 'onkruidbossie', 'kankerroos'. False spirits and false apostles spread like a cancer. Where they grew, truth pro rata caught the root-rot.

 

[GerhardEbersoehn]

I believe that water baptism is NOT the One Baptism of Ephesians 4:5: part of the sevenfold unity of the Spirit that we are urged to KEEP; but believe that the believer is baptized the moment the Word of God concerning the person and work of His Son, the Lord Jesus Christ, is received and believed: and is thereby sealed by that Holy Spirit of promise.

Agreed, except for your capital lettered word, <<we are to KEEP>>. Not BELIEVE rather? Believe the APOSTLES' baptism-- believe the JESUS mandated baptism?
Yes, the believers who came to believe after the apostles' age, are baptised with Christ's baptism of in, with, and by the Word and Holy Spirit --- through which they are reborn and are saved and, once for all, indeed are sealed. But our receiving is of the apostles' blessing received from Christ with authority to all the world. Not ours. We are baptised by faith through grace with no authority; the apostles baptised with authority received from the Lord Jesus in the flesh and having been living witnesses and disciples of Him on earth. There cannot be greater difference. And all the difference has got nothing to do with water. That's my point. Jesus' baptism executed by his "sent" - apostles, never was 'water-baptism', not once. And therefore the Church disobeys rather than obeys when it baptised with any water-baptism.