Is water baptism necessary for salvation?

  • Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.

    You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Grailhunter

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2019
11,083
5,276
113
66
FARMINGTON
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Martin Luther on Water Baptism

Among Martin Luther’s greatest contributions to the world is how the washing of water in the name of the Triune God, amid the gathered Christian assembly, is at the heart of one’s entire life as a Christian.

In the fourth and final question, Luther purposefully chooses to use the same question in both Catechisms – how can water do such great things? For Luther, it was important that those being baptized be wholly immersed in the water and then drawn up out of the water. In the Large Catechism, Luther says that these “two parts, being dipped under the water and emerging from it point to the power and effect of baptism, which is nothing else than the slaying of the old Adam and the resurrection of the new creature, both of which must continue in us our whole life long.”66 Heiko A. Oberman comments in his book Luther: Man between God and the Devil that penance is not a separate sacrament because it is closely linked with baptism and that penance is a “return to baptism, a return to the beginning that God made there! Baptism grabs the Devil by the throat and the old Adam by the collar; where we turn, baptism marks us throughout our lives.”67 Thus, “Baptism is a dress rehearsal for the Last Day, and it is more. It is the actual enactment of the promise of God that finds fulfillment in that day, no day of judgment for those made alive in Christ as the judgment of being buried in Christ’s tomb fell upon them in baptism.”68 In the Small Catechism, Luther succinctly points out that baptism with water “signifies that the old person in us (Adam) with all sins and evil desires is to be drowned through daily sorrow for sin and repentance, and that daily a new person is to come forth and rise up to live before God in righteousness and purity forever.”69 At this point in Luther’s life he sees baptism as “no greater jewel” of the Christian life.70 g. The Augsburg Confession, 1530

It is through the writing of Augsburg Confession that we can unmistakably see how Luther’s strong beliefs about the role of baptism in the lives of Christians evolved from his early discussions. The role of original sin, the fall of Adam and baptism are linked in Article II: “Original sin is truly sin and condemns to God’s eternal wrath all who are not in turn born anew through baptism and the Holy Spirit.”72 Article IX specifically speaks about the issue of infant baptism and states that in addition to baptism being necessary for all people, “grace is offered through it, and that one should also baptize children, who through such baptism are entrusted to God and become pleasing to him.”73 Scaer identifies in his book Baptism that Article IX makes explicit what was already implicit in Articles II through V, namely that original sin (II) includes children, that the Holy Spirit is to bestow on the blessings of Christ’s ascension on those who believe (III), that those justified for Christ’s sake through faith will stand forgiven before God (IV) which can only take place through the ministry which offers grace through both sacraments.74 Scaer comes to the conclusion that infant faith is present, even though the Augsburg Confession does not clearly address it which was key for Luther.75 Baptism in Today’s Context In the latter half of the twentieth century, the world’s
 

Grailhunter

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2019
11,083
5,276
113
66
FARMINGTON
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
John Wesley on Water Baptism
I. 1. That it is. It is the initiatory sacrament, which enters us into covenant with God. It was instituted by Christ, who alone has power to institute a proper sacrament, a sign, seal, pledge, and means of grace, perpetually obligatory on all Christians. We know not, indeed, the exact time of its institution; but we know it was long before our Lord’s ascension. And it was instituted in the room of circumcision. For, as that was a sign and seal of God’s covenant, so is this.

2. The matter of this sacrament is water; which, as it has a natural power of cleansing, is the more fit for this symbolical use. Baptism is performed by washing, dipping, or sprinkling the person, in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, who is hereby devoted to the ever-blessed Trinity. I say, by washing, dipping, or sprinkling; because it is not determined in Scripture in which of these ways it shall be done, neither by any express precept, nor by any such example as clearly proves it; nor by the force or meaning of the word baptize.

3. That there is no express precept, all calm men allow. Neither is there any conclusive example. John’s baptism in some things agreed with Christ’s, in others differed from it. But it cannot be certainly proved from Scripture, that even John’s was performed by dipping. It is true he baptized in Enon, near Salim, where there was “much water.” But this might refer to breadth rather than depth; since a narrow place would not have been sufficient for so great a multitude. Nor can it be proved, that the 226 baptism of our Savior, or that administered by his disciples, was by immersion. No, nor that of the eunuch baptized by Philip; though “they both went down to the water:” For that going down may relate to the chariot, and implies no determinate depth of water. It might be up to their knees; it might not be above their ankles.

4. And as nothing can be determined from Scripture precept or example, so neither from the force or meaning of the word. For the words baptize and baptism do not necessarily imply dipping, but are used in other senses in several places. Thus we read, that the Jews “were all baptized in the cloud and in the sea;” (1 Corinthians 10:2;) but they were not plunged in either. They could therefore be only sprinkled by drops of the sea-water, and refreshing dews from the cloud; probably intimated in that, “Thou sentest a gracious rain upon thine inheritance, and refreshedst it when it was weary.” (Psalm 67:9.) Again: Christ said to his two disciples, “Ye shall be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with;” (Mark 10:38;) but neither he nor they were dipped, but only sprinkled or washed with their own blood. Again we read (Mark 7:4) of the baptisms (so it is in the original) of pots and cups, and tables or beds. Now, pots and cups are not necessarily dipped when they are washed. Nay, the Pharisees washed the outsides of them only. And as for tables or beds, none will suppose they could be dipped. Here, then, the word baptism, in its natural sense, is not taken for dipping, but for washing or cleansing. And, that this is the true meaning of the word baptize, is testified by the greatest scholars and most proper judges in this matter. It is true, we read of being “buried with Christ in baptism.” But nothing can be inferred from such a figurative expression. Nay, if it held exactly, it would make as much for sprinkling as for plunging; since, in burying, the body is not plunged through the substance of the earth, but rather earth is poured or sprinkled upon it.

5. And as there is no clear proof of dipping in Scripture, so there is very probable proof of the contrary. It is highly probable, the Apostles themselves baptized great numbers, not by dipping, but by washing, sprinkling, or pouring water. This clearly represented the cleansing from sin, which is figured by baptism. And the quantity of water used was not material; no more than the quantity of bread and wine in the Lord’s supper. The jailer “and all his house were baptized” in the prison; 227 Cornelius with his friends, (and so several households,) at home. Now, is it likely, that all these had ponds or rivers, in or near their houses, sufficient to plunge them all? Every unprejudiced person must allow, the contrary is far more probable. Again: Three thousand at one time, and five thousand at another, were converted and baptized by St. Peter at Jerusalem; where they had none but the gentle waters of Siloam, according to the observation of Mr. Fuller: “There were no water-mills in Jerusalem, because there was no stream large enough to drive them.” The place, therefore, as well as the number, makes it highly probable that all these were baptized by sprinkling or pouring, and not by immersion. To sum up all, the manner of baptizing (whether by dipping or sprinkling) is not determined in Scripture. There is no command for one rather than the other. There is no example from which we can conclude for dipping rather than sprinkling. There are probable examples of both; and both are equally contained in the natural meaning of the word.

II. 1. What are the benefits we receive by baptism, is the next; point to be considered. And the first of these is, the washing away the guilt of original sin, by the application of the merits of Christ’s death. That we are all born under the guilt of Adam’s sin, and that all sin deserves eternal misery, was the unanimous sense of the ancient Church, as it is expressed in the Ninth Article of our own. And the Scripture plainly asserts, that we were “shapen in iniquity, and in sin did our mother conceive us;” that “we were all by nature children of wrath, and dead in trespasses and sins;” that “in Adam all die;” that “by one man’s disobedience all were made sinners;” that “by one man sin entered into the world, and death by sin; which came upon all men, because all had sinned.” This plainly includes infants; for they too die; therefore they have sinned: But not by actual sin; therefore, by original; else what need have they of the death of Christ? Yea, “death reigned from Adam to Moses, even over those who had not sinned” actually “according to the similitude of Adam’s transgression.” This, which can relate to infants only, is a clear proof that the whole race of mankind are obnoxious both to the guilt and punishment of Adam’s transgression. But; “as by the offense of one, judgment came upon all men to condemnation; so by the righteousness of one, the free gift came upon all men, to justification of life.” And the virtue of this free gift, the merits 228 of Christ’s life and death, are applied to us in baptism. “He gave himself for the Church, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word;” (Ephesians 5:25, 26;) namely, in baptism, the ordinary instrument of our justification. Agreeably to this, our Church prays in the baptismal office, that the person to be baptized may be “washed and sanctified by the Holy Ghost, and, being delivered from God’s wrath, receive remission of sins, and enjoy the everlasting benediction of his heavenly washing;” and declares in the Rubric at the end of the office, “It is certain, by God’s word, that children who are baptized, dying before they commit actual sin are saved.” And this is agreeable to the unanimous judgment of all the ancient Fathers.

2. By baptism we enter into covenant with God; into that everlasting covenant, which he hath commanded forever; (Psalm 111:9;) that new covenant, which he promised to make with the spiritual Israel; even to “give them a new heart and a new spirit, to sprinkle clean water upon them,” (of which the baptismal is only a figure,) “and to remember their sins and iniquities no more;” in a word, to be their God, as he promised to Abraham, in the evangelical covenant which he made with him and all his spiritual offspring. (Genesis 17:7, 8.) And as circumcision was then the way of entering into this covenant, so baptism is now; which is therefore styled by the Apostle, (so many good interpreters render his words,) “the stipulation, contract, or covenant of a good conscience with God.”

3. By baptism we are admitted into the Church, and consequently made members of Christ, its Head. The Jews were admitted into the Church by circumcision, so are the Christians by baptism. For “as many as are baptized into Christ,” in his name, “have” thereby “put on Christ;” (Galatians 3:27;) that is, are mystically united to Christ, and made one with him. For “by one Spirit we are all baptized into one body,” (1 Corinthians 12:13,) namely, the Church, “the body of Christ.” (Ephesians 4:12.) From which spiritual, vital union with him, proceeds the influence of his grace on those that are baptized; as from our union with the Church, a share in all its privileges, and in all the promises Christ has made to it.

4. By baptism, we who were “by nature children of wrath” are made the children of God. And this regeneration which our Church in so many 229 places ascribes to baptism is more than barely being admitted into the Church, though commonly connected therewith; being “grafted into the body of Christ’s Church, we are made the children of God by adoption and grace.” This is grounded on the plain words of our Lord: “Except a man be born again of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.” (John 3:5.) By water then, as a means, the water of baptism, we are regenerated or born again; whence it is also called by the Apostle, “the washing of regeneration.” Our Church therefore ascribes no greater virtue to baptism than Christ himself has done. Nor does she ascribe it to the outward washing, but to the inward grace, which, added thereto, makes it a sacrament. Herein a principle of grace is infused, which will not be wholly taken away, unless we quench the Holy Spirit of God by long-continued wickedness.
 

Grailhunter

Well-Known Member
Jun 19, 2019
11,083
5,276
113
66
FARMINGTON
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Various statements from Christian denominations that require Water Baptism and or believe it is necessary for salvation.
The liturgy of baptism for Catholics, Eastern Orthodox, Lutheran, Baptist Anglican, Pentecostal, Presbyterian, Seventh-day Adventists, United Church of Christ, United Church of God, and Methodist makes clear reference to water baptism as not only a symbolic burial and resurrection, but an actual supernatural transformation of most believe in the concept regeneration and “new man” concept

Eastern Orthodox Christians usually insist on complete threefold immersion as both a symbol of death and rebirth into Christ, and as a washing away of sin. Latin Church Catholics generally baptize by affusion (pouring); Eastern Catholics usually by submersion, or at least partial immersion. However, submersion is gaining in popularity within the Latin Catholic Church. In newer church sanctuaries, the baptismal font may be designed to expressly allow for baptism by immersion Anglicans baptize by submersion, immersion, affusion or sprinkling.

Baptists argue that the Greek word βαπτίζω originally meant "to immerse". They interpret some Biblical passages concerning baptism as requiring submersion of the body in water. They also state that only submersion reflects the symbolic significance of being "buried" and "raised" with Christ. Baptist Churches baptize in the name of the Trinity—the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. However, they do not believe that baptism is necessary for salvation; but rather that it is an act of Christian obedience.

Churches of Christ
Baptism in Churches of Christ is performed only by full bodily immersion based on the Koine Greek verb baptizo which means to dip, immerse, submerge or plunge.
 
Last edited:

CharismaticLady

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2019
7,784
3,150
113
76
Tennessee
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
'Behold, the Lamb of God ,
which taketh away
The sin of the world'

(John 1:29b)

Hello @FHII,

It was essential that this event took place, at the time it did, for John the Baptist was the forerunner, prophesied In Malachi 3:1 & Malachi 4:6. God had sent Him at that time to baptize. He did not know the identity of the One he had been told would be made manifest: only how, and by what means that recognition would come.

The Lord Jesus Christ, and John himself, moved at the impulse of God's will and not their own. This occurence therefore was not random, but by God's hand. Enabling John to speak the words:- 'Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world'.

Praise God!

Thank you. :)
In Christ Jesus
Chris[/QUOTE]

It appears that John the Baptist did know who Jesus was according to Matthew 3. They were cousins, after all. But, more than that, John the Baptist had the Holy Spirit from inside the womb.

Matthew 3:
11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. 12 His winnowing fan is in His hand, and He will thoroughly clean out His threshing floor, and gather His wheat into the barn; but He will burn up the chaff with unquenchable fire.”
13 Then Jesus came from Galilee to John at the Jordan to be baptized by him. 14 And John tried to prevent Him, saying, “I need to be baptized by You, and are You coming to me?”
15 But Jesus answered and said to him, “Permit it to be so now, for thus it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness.” Then he allowed Him.
 

Ernest T. Bass

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
1,845
616
113
out in the woods
You will begin speak the truth once you stop interjecting the word and concept of HO2.
You selectively cite Robertson. Here is the full treatment on Act 2:38;
Seems Robertson isn't as wishy washy as you portray him to be.


And you'll never find that anywhere in Gods word. What did Paul say about baptism and the gospel?

1 Cor 1:17
17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, that the cross of Christ should not be made void.NASB

Paul makes a distinction between the gospel and baptism and baptism is not part of the gospel. It comes after one is saved. It is not part of salvation itself.

Again, Robertson wrote "One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not."

---Substituting one's peroneal theology into the verse is no way to handle God's word. People substituting their personal theologies into the Bible is how we end up with 1000's of religious groups that all contradict each other yet all claim they are right instead of having "one body" that goes by 'one faith".

---making 'eis' to mean "because" in Acts 2 creates problem neither Robertson or you deal with. If they were saved prior to verse 38 then in what verse were they saved and why? How would they "save themselves" in v40?

---1 Cor 1:17 does NOT say baptism (noun) is not necessary to salvation. This verse is NOT commanding Paul NOT to baptize (verb) mean Paul was for Paul DID baptize 1 Cor 1:14;16 and did not sin for baptizing. Paul was under the great commission as all other disciples are to go teach and baptize and 1 Cor 1:17 does not contradict the great commission.

In 1 Corinthians 1:12-13 Paul used the necessity of being baptized in the name of Christ to be "of Christ". Paul's point being that if you are going to be "OF" someone then two things must be true of that someone. The someone must:
1) be crucidifed for you
2) you must be baptized in that someone's name

Since these 2 things are only true of Christ therefore no one can be "of Paul" or "of Cephas" or of any man. It means if you are to be "of Christ" then Christ must have been:
1) crucified for you and
2) you must be baptized in the name of Christ.

Both must be true to be of Christ. Those that have not been baptized in the name of Christ therefore are not "of Christ.

In verse 17 Paul is a figure of speech a 'not-but elliptical' statement where emphasis is put upon one thing (preaching) over another (baptizing) but not to the total exclusion of baptizing.

Another example of a not but elliptical: "Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price." 1 Peter 3:3-4

Peter is NOT literally telling wives they should not plait their hair nor wear gold nor not put on apparel but Peter is telling wives to put more emphasis on the inward (spiritual) adorning over the outward adoring but not to the total exclusion of the outward adorning. Likewise Paul was to put more emphasis on preaching over baptizing but not to the total exclusion of baptizing.

John 6:27 "Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed."

Jesus here is NOT literally telling them to not work for the physical food they eat for such would contradict 2 Thessalonians 3:10. Jesus is saying to put more emphasis on working for the spiritual food over the physical food but not to the total exclusion of working for the physical food.


Paul was baptized himself to be saved Acts 22;16, he baptized others 1 Cor 1:14,16 and taught the necessity of baptism to be of Christ 1 Cor 1:12-13 therefore 1 Cor 1:17 does not teach that baptism (noun) is not necessary or not part of the gospel but shows placement of emphasis of one thing (preaching) over another (baptism) but not to the total exclusion of baptism.
 
Last edited:

CharismaticLady

Well-Known Member
Jun 13, 2019
7,784
3,150
113
76
Tennessee
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Again, Robertson wrote "One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not."

---Substituting one's peroneal theology into the verse is no way to handle God's word. People substituting their personal theologies into the Bible is how we end up with 1000's of religious groups that all contradict each other yet all claim they are right instead of having "one body" that goes by 'one faith".

---making 'eis' to mean "because" in Acts 2 creates problem neither Robertson or you deal with. If they were saved prior to verse 38 then in what verse were they saved and why? How would they "save themselves" in v40?

---1 Cor 1:17 does NOT say baptism (noun) is not necessary to salvation. This verse is NOT commanding Paul NOT to baptize (verb) mean Paul was for Paul DID baptize 1 Cor 1:14;16 and did not sin for baptizing. Paul was under the great commission as all other disciples are to go teach and baptize and 1 Cor 1:17 does not contradict the great commission.

In 1 Corinthians 1:12-13 Paul used the necessity of being baptized in the name of Christ to be "of Christ". Paul's point being that if you are going to be "OF" someone then two things must be true of that someone. The someone must:
1) be crucidifed for you
2) you must be baptized in that someone's name

Since these 2 things are only true of Christ therefore no one can be "of Paul" or "of Cephas" or of any man. It means if you are to be "of Christ" then Christ must have been:
1) crucified for you and
2) you must be baptized in the name of Christ.

Both must be true to be of Christ. Those that have not been baptized in the name of Christ therefore are not "of Christ.

In verse 17 Paul is a figure of speech a 'not-but elliptical' statement where emphasis is put upon one thing (preaching) over another (baptizing) but not to the total exclusion of baptizing.

Another example of a not but elliptical: "Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price." 1 Peter 3:3-4

Peter is NOT literally telling wives they should not plait their hair nor wear gold nor not put on apparel but Peter is telling wives to put more emphasis on the inward (spiritual) adorning over the outward adoring but not to the total exclusion of the outward adorning. Likewise Paul was to put more emphasis on preaching over baptizing but not to the total exclusion of baptizing.

John 6:27 "Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed."

Jesus here is NOT literally telling them to not work for the physical food they eat for such would contradict 2 Thessalonians 3:12. Jesus is saying to put more emphasis on working for the spiritual food over the physical food but not to the total exclusion of working for the physical food.


Paul was baptized himself to be saved Acts 22;16, he baptized others 1 Cor 1:14,16 and taught the necessity of baptism to be of Christ 1 Cor 1:12-13 therefore 1 Cor 1:17 does not teach that baptism (noun) is not necessary or not part of the gospel but shows placement of emphasis of one thing (preaching) over another (baptism) but not to the total exclusion of baptism.

The one verse that popped into my head regarding this topic of baptism is Matthew 10:32-33.
32 “Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven. 33 But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven.
 

farouk

Well-Known Member
Jan 21, 2009
30,790
19,230
113
North America
No, the born again experience requires death and burial before rebirth.

Death is repentance and burial is water baptism.

Baptism after being born again is a buried alive experience.

Terrifying indeed
Acts 2.41-42 makes it clear that the ppl were baptized because they had believed; they had gladly received his word. They did not become baptized in order to believe.
 

Ernest T. Bass

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
1,845
616
113
out in the woods
The one verse that popped into my head regarding this topic of baptism is Matthew 10:32-33.
32 “Therefore whoever confesses Me before men, him I will also confess before My Father who is in heaven. 33 But whoever denies Me before men, him I will also deny before My Father who is in heaven.

Yes, confession is necessary to salvation also. Even though I say and believe that water baptism is essential to salvation I do NOT believe that "baptism alone" saves. Salvation requires belief John 8:24, repentance Luke 13:3 confession Matthew 10:32-33 and baptism Mk 16:16.
Peter said in 1 Peter 3:21 that baptism now saves us but he did not say baptism ALONE now saves us. Peter is using baptism in this verse as a synecdoche where baptism includes belief, repentance and confession. Belief ALONE without confession will not save (John 12:42) just as belief alone without repentance will not save as belief alone without baptism will not save.
 

GerhardEbersoehn

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
6,136
558
113
Johannesburg
www.biblestudents.co.za
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Again, Robertson wrote "One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not."

---Substituting one's peroneal theology into the verse is no way to handle God's word. People substituting their personal theologies into the Bible is how we end up with 1000's of religious groups that all contradict each other yet all claim they are right instead of having "one body" that goes by 'one faith".

Amen! 100% true; 100% agreed.
(But what does <peroneal> mean?)
 

GerhardEbersoehn

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
6,136
558
113
Johannesburg
www.biblestudents.co.za
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
1 Cor 1:17 does NOT say baptism (noun) is not necessary to salvation. This verse is NOT commanding Paul NOT to baptize (verb) mean Paul was for Paul DID baptize 1 Cor 1:14;16 and did not sin for baptizing. Paul was under the great commission as all other disciples are to go teach and baptize and 1 Cor 1:17 does not contradict the great commission.

In 1 Corinthians 1:12-13 Paul used the necessity of being baptized in the name of Christ to be "of Christ". Paul's point being that if you are going to be "OF" someone then two things must be true of that someone. The someone must:

1) be crucidifed for you

2) you must be baptized in that someone's name

Since these 2 things are only true of Christ therefore no one can be "of Paul" or "of Cephas" or of any man. It means if you are to be "of Christ" then Christ must have been:

1) crucified for you and

2) you must be baptized in the name of Christ.

Both must be true to be of Christ. Those that have not been baptized in the name of Christ therefore are not "of Christ.
….
Paul was baptized himself to be saved Acts 22;16, he baptized others 1 Cor 1:14,16 and taught the necessity of baptism to be of Christ 1 Cor 1:12-13 therefore

Here again, <Ernest T. Bass, post: 667401, member: 6115> SPEAKS AND WRITES THE TRUTH!

Nowhere does your statement contain the word 'WATER'. Instead, one finds these words, <baptized in the name of Christ> <baptized in that someone's name> <baptized in the name of Christ> <not been baptized in the name of Christ therefore are not "of Christ> <necessity of baptism to be of Christ>
 

Truther

Well-Known Member
Dec 2, 2019
10,295
1,479
113
62
Lodi
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
Acts 2.41-42 makes it clear that the ppl were baptized because they had believed; they had gladly received his word. They did not become baptized in order to believe.
Exactly, they believe, then were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of their sins.

Notice how they were "added" to the church in the passage.....

41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.


Exactly...baptized into Christ per Romans 6.
 

GerhardEbersoehn

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
6,136
558
113
Johannesburg
www.biblestudents.co.za
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
In verse 17 Paul is a figure of speech a 'not-but elliptical' statement where emphasis is put upon one thing (preaching) over another (baptizing) but not to the total exclusion of baptizing.


Another example of a not but elliptical: "Whose adorning let it not be that outward adorning of plaiting the hair, and of wearing of gold, or of putting on of apparel; But let it be the hidden man of the heart, in that which is not corruptible, even the ornament of a meek and quiet spirit, which is in the sight of God of great price." 1 Peter 3:3-4

Peter is NOT literally telling wives they should not plait their hair nor wear gold nor not put on apparel but Peter is telling wives to put more emphasis on the inward (spiritual) adorning over the outward adoring but not to the total exclusion of the outward adorning. Likewise Paul was to put more emphasis on preaching over baptizing but not to the total exclusion of baptizing.


John 6:27 "Labour not for the meat which perisheth, but for that meat which endureth unto everlasting life, which the Son of man shall give unto you: for him hath God the Father sealed."

Jesus here is NOT literally telling them to not work for the physical food they eat for such would contradict 2 Thessalonians 3:10. Jesus is saying to put more emphasis on working for the spiritual food over the physical food but not to the total exclusion of working for the physical food.

1 Cor 1:17 does not teach that baptism (noun) is not necessary or not part of the gospel but shows placement of emphasis of one thing (preaching) over another (baptism) but not to the total exclusion of baptism.


Now: How come the totality of what you claim, IS NOT CORRECT OR TRUE?


First, Your argument of: <<a 'not-but elliptical' statement where emphasis is put upon one thing (preaching) over another (baptizing) but not to the total exclusion of baptizing>> is a manufactured attempt at escaping or rather defying the unity, oneness and completeness of the baptism which is <<of Christ>>, the baptism exactly wherein and wherewith <<emphasis is put upon one thing>>— upon the ONENESS of the <preaching> AND the <baptizing> to the total exclusion of duality or plurality, name it what you like, of ‘baptism’ and / plus / add ‘water’.

Rather, in fact, the <statement> which you aver is <<a 'not-but elliptical' statement>>, is NO <<‘elliptical' statement>>. It is a FULL statement of un-mediated momentary ‘baptism’ made by God the Holy Spirit the Baptist and undergone by a simultaneously discipled believer the baptised, OF: being “baptized-in-The-NAME” by an APOSTLE sent by CHRIST, whose baptism, as John the Baptist made sure, “IS NOT WITH WATER”.
 
Last edited:

GerhardEbersoehn

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
6,136
558
113
Johannesburg
www.biblestudents.co.za
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Truther said:
the born again experience requires death and burial before rebirth. Death is repentance and burial is water baptism. Baptism after being born again is a buried alive experience.

....
Acts 2.41-42 makes it clear that the ppl were baptized because they had believed; they had gladly received his word. They did not become baptized in order to believe.

Acts 2.41-42 says the people "welcoming His Word were baptised"--while / through "welcoming His Word" two in one the same. Indeed they <<were baptized because they had believed>> = <<they had gladly received his word>> True! <<They did not become baptized in order to believe>>! Amen!
 

GerhardEbersoehn

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
6,136
558
113
Johannesburg
www.biblestudents.co.za
Faith
Christian
Country
South Africa
Yes, confession is necessary to salvation also. Even though I say and believe that water baptism is essential to salvation I do NOT believe that "baptism alone" saves. Salvation requires belief John 8:24, repentance Luke 13:3 confession Matthew 10:32-33 and baptism Mk 16:16.
Peter said in 1 Peter 3:21 that baptism now saves us but he did not say baptism ALONE now saves us. Peter is using baptism in this verse as a synecdoche where baptism includes belief, repentance and confession. Belief ALONE without confession will not save (John 12:42) just as belief alone without repentance will not save as belief alone without baptism will not save.

Then you are so clear and unambiguous:
Peter said in 1 Peter 3:21 that baptism now saves us but he did not say baptism ALONE now saves us. Peter is using baptism in this verse as a synecdoche where baptism includes belief, repentance and confession. Belief ALONE without confession will not save (John 12:42) just as belief alone without repentance will not save as belief alone without baptism will not save.

Then you turn around and directly contradict your very statement: <<though I say and believe that water baptism is essential to salvation I do NOT believe that "baptism alone" saves.>>

Water has nothing to do with the baptism "IN THE NAME OF CHRIST".
baptism includes belief, repentance and confession. Belief ALONE without confession will not save (John 12:42) just as belief alone without repentance will not save as belief alone without baptism will not save.
Baptism indeed <<is used as a synecdoche>>, not as a divider between baptism in the Name and baptism in water.
 

hermeneutics

Active Member
Nov 29, 2019
104
51
28
western arkansas
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
In another thread, the subject of water baptism has intervened into the subject of the thread, and threatens to divert (The Hope Of The World). This subject can be a contentious one, but I hope it can be approached with love on all sides.

On the side of the necessity for water baptism for salvation, certain verses were quoted in that thread by a participant, which could provide a starting point.

John 3:5, Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38, 1 Peter 3:21
remission - the cancellation of a debt, charge, or penalty.

Mar_1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

Heb 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
Heb 10:18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.

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.

Luk_3:3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;

Luk_24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Normally I would not post on this subject but the only scriptures that point out remission of our sins is in baptism. Why would we not be willing to be baptized?

1Ti 5:24 Some men's sins are open beforehand, going before to judgment; and some men they follow after.
 
Last edited:

Nondenom40

Active Member
May 21, 2019
493
246
43
Illinois
Faith
Christian
Country
United States
remission - the cancellation of a debt, charge, or penalty.

Mar_1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

Heb 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
Heb 10:18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.

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.

Luk_3:3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;

Luk_24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.

Normally I would not post on this subject but the only scriptures that point out remission of our sins is in baptism. Why would we not be willing to be baptized?
Luke 24:47 doesn't mention baptism at all. Luke 3 only says they came to John for baptism but he even said to show fruits of repentance first. In Acts 2 they were baptized after they heard the preaching of Peter and the Holy Spirit fell. In Luke 7:50 Jesus told the woman to go in peace 'your faith has saved you', not your faith + ______. Nope, baptism doesn't save a single soul. Your faith in Christ does.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helen and charity

charity

Well-Known Member
Nov 26, 2017
3,234
3,192
113
75
UK
Faith
Christian
Country
United Kingdom
remission - the cancellation of a debt, charge, or penalty.

Mar.1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.
Heb 10:16 This is the covenant that I will make with them after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their hearts, and in their minds will I write them;
Heb 10:17 And their sins and iniquities will I remember no more.
Heb 10:18 Now where remission of these is, there is no more offering for sin.
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.
Luk_3:3 And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;
Luk_24:47 And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
'John did baptize in the wilderness,
and preach the baptism of repentance
for the remission of sins.'

(Mark 1:4)

Hello @hermeneutics,

Thank you for your contribution.
Looking up 'remission' in the Strong's concordance, I see that it's reference number is G859 - (Gr. aphesis), which is from G863 - meaning freedom; (figuratively) pardon. It is translated:- 'deliverance', 'forgiveness', 'liberty' and 'remission':-

- remission
:- Matthew 26:28, Mark 1:4. Luke 1:77, Luke 3:3; Luke 24:47, Acts 2:38, Acts 10:43, Hebrews 9:22 ,Hebrews 10:18.
- deliverance:- Luke 4:18
- forgiveness:- Acts 5:31, Acts 13:38, Acts 26:18, Ephesians 1:7, Colossians 1:14
- liberty in:- Luke 4:18, Hebrews 13:23.
----------------

* In Romans 3:25, remission is the translation of another Greek word, G3929 (Gr. paresis) - which is from G2935; (praetermission) - meaning toleration: and translated: - remission.
Total KJV occurrences: 1

'Being justified freely by His grace
through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus:
Whom God hath set forth to be a propitiation
through faith in His blood,
to declare His righteousness
for the remission of sins that are past,
through the forbearance of God;
To declare, I say, at this time His righteousness:
that He might be just,
and the justifier of him which believeth in Jesus.'

(Romans 3:24-26)

* It is good to place these two Greek words, both translated 'remission' side by side, in order to see the contrast between the two, and how the Holy Spirit has used them, isn't it? :)

Thank you for this,
In Christ Jesus
Chris
 
  • Like
Reactions: Helen

Ernest T. Bass

Well-Known Member
Jan 14, 2014
1,845
616
113
out in the woods
Water has nothing to do with the baptism "IN THE NAME OF CHRIST". Baptism indeed <<is used as a synecdoche>>, not as a divider between baptism in the Name and baptism in water.

You say this but provide no proof. Clearly baptism in the name of the Lord is water baptism Acts 2:38 cf Acts 10:47-48 else why would Peter say "water" if he were not referring to water baptism?