Baptism, non-essential!

[NotWorthy]

3000 were baptized after they had recieved the word, also look at phillip and the eunuch, whats **very important **is that Phillip specifically asks the eunuch of his belief in Christ before agreeing to baptize him…

So all that proves is that BOTH are necessary.

No argument there. Doesn’t this coincide with Peter saying “Repent (If you believe, then you will repent) and be baptized…”?

 

[NotWorthy]

Christ shed blood is what washes sin from us…

No, no, no. Because then all sins would be wiped away, Simon. Our initiation into the New Covenant, the Covenant created by Christ’s shedding of his blood, is what washes away our sins.

Those not of the Covenant, do not get their sins forgiven.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

“I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized into my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel…” (1 Cor. 1:14-17).

If baptism is necessary for salvation then why did Paul downplay it and even exclude it from the description of what is required for salvation? It is because baptism isn’t necessary for salvation.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

So all that proves is that BOTH are necessary.

John,
The theif! no water baptism…

 

[NotWorthy]

Rob, first you need to know what baptism is. It is an outward representation of an inward reality. For example, it represents the reality of the inward washing of Christ’s blood upon the soul. Lets look at scripture…
That is why it is used in different ways.
**It is said to represent the death of the person **
**Rom. 6:3-5Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? Therefore we have been buried with him by baptism into death, so that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.
For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we will certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. **

**OK, you’ve proven that there is “A BAPTISM” that is necessary.

Gal. 3:27As many of you as were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

the cleansing of that person’s sins

**

Acts 22:16And now why do you delay? Get up, be baptized, and have your sins washed away, calling on his name.”

You still have proven that “A BAPTISM” is necessary.

the identification with the one “baptized into” as when the Israelites were baptized into Moses

1 Cor. 10:2and all were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea,

Once again, Paul shows that it’s the SAME BAPTISM. The Cloud (The angel of God) and the sea (There’s that water again!). Look at the verses again:

I do not want you to be unaware, brothers, that our ancestors were all under the cloud and all passed through the sea, 2 and all of them were baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.**

You see, it’s one Baptism - Spirit AND water.

and being united in one church

**

1 Cor. 12:13For in the one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

Also, baptism is one of the signs and seals of the Covenant of Grace that was instituted by Jesus. It is in this sense a sacrament. A sacrament is a visible manifestation of something spoken. It is also said to be a visible sign of an inward grace. For example, the communion elements of bread and wine are called the sacrament of communion. When we take communion we are partaking of the sacrament.
The Covenant of Grace is the covenant between God and Man where God promises to Man eternal life. It is based upon the sacrifice of Jesus on the cross and the condition is faith in Jesus Christ. As the Communion Supper replaced Passover, baptism, in like manner, replaces circumcision.

Just as you said. It is an inward grace. Be baptized and receive the Holy Spirit (which is that inward Grace).

Circumcision was the initiatory rite into the Abrahamic covenant; it did not save.

This, I believe, is a Non-Sequitor, for the Old Covenant didn’t save, so of course, circumcision didn’t save. Baptism of the New Covenant is the perfect anti-type of circumcision, for it does save.

A covenant is a pact or agreement between two or more parties and that is exactly what the Abrahamic covenant was. God said to Abraham, “I will establish my covenant as an everlasting covenant between me and you and your descendants after you for the generations to come, to be your God and the God of your descendants after you” (Genesis 17:7, NIV). God later instructed Abraham to circumcise not only every adult male, but also 8 day old male infants as a sign of the covenant (Gen. 17:9-13). If the children were not circumcised, they were not considered to be under the promissory Abrahamic covenant. This is why Moses’ wife circumcised her son and threw the foreskin at Moses’ feet. (Ex. 4:24-25). She knew the importance of the covenant between God and her children. But at the same time we must understand that circumcision did not guarantee salvation to all who received it. It was a rite meant only for the people of God, who were born into the family of God (who were then the Jews).

So if you weren’t circumcised by the Laws of Moses, then you weren’t part of the Covenant.

Just as if you are **not **Baptized per the Laws of the New Covenant, then you are **not **part of that New Covenant.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

No, no, no. Because then all sins would be wiped away, Simon. Our initiation into the New Covenant, the Covenant created by Christ’s shedding of his blood, is what washes away our sins.

Those not of the Covenant, do not get their sins forgiven.

If this is the case then again I ask what of the theif…

That cannot be achieved by sprinkling a dab of water on a babies head, which is unbiblical… Our initiation John, is being born of the Spirit…(born again).

 

[NotWorthy]

“I am thankful that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, so no one can say that you were baptized into my name. (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.) For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel…” (1 Cor. 1:14-17).

If baptism is necessary for salvation then why did Paul downplay it and even exclude it from the description of what is required for salvation? It is because baptism isn’t necessary for salvation.

Simon, you know why, and it’s in the preceding verses. Many Corinthians were saying they were followers of Apollos, or this person, or that person. Paul, by not baptizing, was preventing further confusion.

 

[NotWorthy]

John,
The theif! no water baptism…

Baptism of Blood!!!

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Baptism of Blood!!!

Where’s that?
What’s that?
How was it administered?

I was expecting that silly Baptism by desire …

 

[NotWorthy]

If this is the case then again I ask what of the theif…

That cannot be achieved by sprinkling a dab of water on a babies head, which is unbiblical… Our initiation John, is being born of the Spirit…(born again).

In numerous other threads:

• We’ve shown that Scripture supports the baptism of “whole households” which normally includes infants.
• We’ve shown that Baptism replaces Circumcision, which includes infants.
• We’ve shown that the Early Church practiced infant baptisms.

But let’s stick to the topic - “Is Baptism Necessary”, shall we?

Our inititiation is NOT just “being born of the Spirit”. As Jesus tells Nicodemus, so very clearly, our inititiation is being born “of water AND the Spirit”. It’s one Baptism that does this.

 

[myfavoritmartin]

Simon, you know why, and it’s in the preceding verses. Many Corinthians were saying they were followers of Apollos, or this person, or that person. Paul, by not baptizing, was preventing further confusion.

So it wasn’t detrimental to salvation? or maybe Paul didn’t care about actual souls rather just telling the story of Christ?? I don’t get it John.

 

[VociMike]

Question for myfavoritemartin:

If a Christian refuses to obey God’s command and get baptized, is that person saved?

 

[NotWorthy]

If this is the case then again I ask what of the theif…

OK, since the Apostles never preached that “Unless one is dying on the Cross next to Christ, they have Salvation”, I’d file this under “Christ can bring anyone under extra-ordinary circumstances to heaven with Him”, for all things are possible with God.

With the extreme possibility that I will not die under “extreme circumstances”, I’m going to bank on the terms Christ and the Apostles gave those of us who will probably die under ordinary circumstances. And that begins with Baptism. It doesn’t end with Baptism, but it does begin there.

 

[Church_Militant]

Baptism is a covenant sign and is not essential for salvation, in fact I think satan licks his chops at this verse (acts 2:38) in that many people think that being baptized is the necessary factor in salvation.

I disagree with your statemnt.

If baptism is “not essential for salvation”, then explain this verse to me.

Acts Of Apostles 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? Rise up, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, invoking his name.

Satan must love this quote then:

1 Peter 3:21
Come on in. The water’s nice. A little wash in the, “bath of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit” can’t hurt (Titus 3:5). As Ananias said, “why delay? Get up and have yourself baptized and your sins washed away” (Acts 22:16). The Ethiopian eunuch heard the gospel and didn’t delay (Acts 8:36).

God bless.

-Rob

Quote the balance of the verse, so as to not confuse…

arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, **calling on the name of the Lord. **

So…obviously they are of equal importance…

 

[NotWorthy]

Where’s that?
What’s that?
How was it administered?

I was expecting that silly Baptism by desire …

If you are willing to shed your blood out of love for Christ, don’t you think a merciful God is going to look kindly on you?

The Thief, by his profession, knew that Christ could have saved him from death on the Cross, and yet he just asked for Jesus’ rememberance.

 

[NotWorthy]

So it wasn’t detrimental to salvation? or maybe Paul didn’t care about actual souls rather just telling the story of Christ?? I don’t get it John.

No, Paul didn’t say I’m glad you weren’t baptized. Paul is saying, I’m glad I didn’t take part in it, because you idiots would mistakenly think you were now part of the “Church of Paul”.

Paul, as over-seer of the Church of Corinth, could help clear up this confusion among the priests under him, simply because he wasn’t part of the problem in the first place.

 

[BobCatholic]

Let’s look at five basic interpretations to this section of scripture in reference to water.

Why should I care about any of these interpretations unless they are from the Twelve Apostles?

Which one of these is from the Twelve Apostles?

if none of them, why should I accept any of them? I want apostolic doctrine, not man-made doctrine.

 

[BobCatholic]

That cannot be achieved by sprinkling a dab of water on a babies head, which is unbiblical…

Who has made the authoritative magisterial ruling that says this? Why should I accept their magisterial authority?

 

[BobCatholic]

If baptism is necessary for salvation then why did Paul downplay it and even exclude it from the description of what is required for salvation? It is because baptism isn’t necessary for salvation.

Where did Paul EXCLUDE it as necessary for salvation?

 

[NotWorthy]

Simon, I still think you sort of glossed over the verses from Ezekiel. As I demonstrated, they are right in line with Peter’s words, and they should remove any ambiguity to Peter’s speech:

I will sprinkle clean water upon you to cleanse you from all your impurities, and from all your idols I will cleanse you. I will give you a new heart and place a new spirit within you,

Ezekiel is clearing describing Water Baptism, linking it to the forgiveness of sins, and stating that it also gives us a New Spirit, what we Christians now know is the Holy Spirit.

Ezekiel is describing being born “of water and spirit”.