Defending physical baptism?

[Shiranui117]

I have a friend who argues strongly (and quite well, I might add) that the physical baptism of water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is not the baptism that saves us, that there is no correlation between a physical act that cannot possibly save us, and of the baptism of the Holy Spirit that we are saved by. In his view, the physical baptism is at best a mere shadow of the real baptism of Spirit that God confers on us before, during or after the physical baptism. I’ve looked at all the catholic.com tracts for any Scriptural support, but he has explained all of the Scripture I have used in light of his view. If need be, I can post some of what he has said.

EDIT: Also, he does not believe that the Fathers are a valid source of info or teaching.

 

[TimothyH]

…he has explained all of the Scripture I have used in light of his view.

This tells me that you will not convince him using the Bible. In his mind he knows what scripture means and is set on it. As Jesus said, this kind of demon, "Can only come out through prayer.” (Mark 9:29)

If you must argue with this person, a good source of information would be the chapter on Justification in “A Biblical Defense of Catholicism” by Dave Armstrong. You can also read some of Dave’s articles on baptism on his Blog.

-Tim-

 

[losh14]

I have a friend who argues strongly (and quite well, I might add) that the physical baptism of water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is not the baptism that saves us, that there is no correlation between a physical act that cannot possibly save us, and of the baptism of the Holy Spirit that we are saved by.

It’s interesting to me that there is such a continuum within Christianity about Baptism - from those who say that Baptism is not necessary to those who say that not only is it necessary, but only as an adult and if you find that you did not sufficiently understand it the first time or that your faith has since become deeper, it is better to be baptized two, three or more times.

The starting point is - do you really want to get into this argument? Is it worth the friendship? Is it worth your time to invest? You alone know if you’re going to change his mind before a) he walks away from you altogether, disgusted by the disagreement b) he convinces you of his own point or c) you both get tired of the debate having gone nowhere.

If you do want to proceed, then start with his understanding of physical baptism. Clearly it’s called for in Scripture, clearly it’s practiced. Jesus Himself was physically baptized. Why? What’s the purpose in continuing this “shadow” of the Baptism of the Holy Spirit? Why was it still practiced from ancient times (ECF) to modern by the majority of Christians? You don’t have to argue for the authority of any post-Biblical scholars - only that it was indeed practiced, and without question.

It’d be interesting to see his arguments. I’m fairly certain there are some passages he’s neglecting altogether.

 

[Todd_Easton]

It is indeed the baptism of the Spirit that saves but the baptism of the Spirit is ordinarily received during physical water baptism. The baptism of the Spirit can be received before physical water baptism, as in the cases of what Catholics call “baptism by desire” and “baptism by blood” (martyrdom). And, insincerity on the part of the recipient at the time of physical water baptism can block the baptism of the Spirit, until such time as the insincerity is removed so, in that sense, the baptism of the Spirit can occur after physical water baptism.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

I have a friend who argues strongly (and quite well, I might add) that the physical baptism of water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is not the baptism that saves us, that there is no correlation between a physical act that cannot possibly save us, and of the baptism of the Holy Spirit that we are saved by."

Circumcision is a physical act. It isn’t one that by it’s own nature gives the child something which is of value to them at the moment of its occurrence.
Consider for a moment, Exodus 4:19 - 26, Notice what is going on there; Moses as the head of a family is taking his wife and children to Egypt. God has told moses to say to the head of the family, “Egypt”,
**
"I shall harden his heart, and he will not let the people go.
Exodu 4:22 And thou shalt say to him: Thus saith the Lord: Israel is my son, my firstborn.
Exodu 4:23 I have said to thee: Let my son go, that he may serve me, and thou wouldst not let him go: behold I will kill thy son, thy firstborn.
"

**God shows no partiality, no favoritism for any hipocrisy. Notice what immediately happens on that same road – Exodus 4:24.

What does circumcision of Moses’ own child have to do with serving God, other than obeying the covenant given to Abraham? It is the pre-figurement of baptism; by circumcision one “becomes” an Israelite – without it a male is not the firstborn of God. So, it clearly is the physical act of Sophira, circumcising the child, which saves it – and it clearly is her negligence prior to this time which put the child in danger of death. Circumcision is not required to be saved, as women are not circumcised, but it does save boys by fulfilling a contract with God and the Parent which is promised to those who are circumcised – but not to those who aren’t.

So, there clearly is a correlation between the act of circumcision, and likewise baptism, which has a promise attached to the act. Just as to Abraham, the covenant of circumcision was to him and his descendants – so Jesus has let us know that baptism is to us and to our descendants a promise as well.

To not baptize, then, is to put God to the test as a parent. Infant baptism is one of the forms of baptism to consider.

In his view, the physical baptism is at best a mere shadow of the real baptism of Spirit that God confers on us before, during or after the physical baptism.

A dollar bill is a mere shadow, or “promise” of an equivalent amount of work. That doesn’t make it fake money – just because it is a “NOTE” and not a Gold coin. It is as good as the Gold coin under ORDINARY circumstances here in the United states.

Baptism is the Legal tender of the Catholic Covenant – baptism in any of its forms.

I’ve looked at all the catholic.com tracts for any Scriptural support, but he has explained all of the Scripture I have used in light of his view. If need be, I can post some of what he has said.

EDIT: Also, he does not believe that the Fathers are a valid source of info or teaching.

The fathers are a valid source of historical information, regardless of whether one agrees with them or not in their conclusions. It may not be obvious that often times, those who were enemies of the Catholic church may in fact be more reliable in terms of highlighting what doctrines the Catholic church has held in the past. But, regardless of this, what particular arguments would you friend have against the “FACT” that baptism carries with it a promise?

Acts 2:38 But Peter said to them: Do penance: and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of your sins. And you shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Acts 2:39 For the promise is to you and to your children and to all that are far off, whomsoever the Lord our God shall call.

Penance, and baptism in the name of Christ is for the parents; but the promise is to the children as well who are “far off” from making any declaration of their own.

Peace to you.

 

[Shiranui117]

Thank you all for the help so far. I should clarify that this man isn’t someone I know IRL, just a guy I butt heads with on the Internet. I MAY try to use the bit from the Didache that one of those blog posts suggested, once I look up the context. I would imagine he would at least take a glance at something that was written before even some of the Gospels…

Here is where I got stuck (in quote tags are my words, in normal text are his) WARNING: LOTS OF TEXT INCOMING.

However, can you explain why people have always been baptized with water,

Well, we must go way back to the Old Testament to figure this one out, where the foundation was laid to prepare us for the New Testament baptism in any of its usages.
It is true, back in the Old Testament, God had people use a many different “shadows” to demonstrate the forgiveness of sins. We had offerings with fire, the shedding of blood, and washing or bathing. All 3 of them signify spiritual cleanness. Did that mean they were permanently clean ? No. While the believer could wash in water, offer a blood sacrifice, and make an offering by fire, and be ceremonially cleansed of his sin, he never had the permanent cleansing which identifies eternal life. He had to offer the same sacrifices again and again. We find this kind of language in Hebrews 10: 1-3

For the law having a shadow of good things to come, and not the very image of the things, can never with those sacrifices which they offered year by year continually make the comers thereunto perfect. For then would they not have ceased to be offered? Because that the worshippers once purged should have had no more conscience of sins. But in those sacrifices there is a remembrance again made of sins every year.

And in Hebrews 9: 9-10

Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.

Therefore, the Bible clearly shows the need for a more permanent cleansing. Jesus provided the permanent cleansing by His death on the cross. So we see the ceremonial acts of the Old Testament congregation, which looked forward to the washing away of sin by the coming Messiah, include the blood offerings, the burnt offerings, and washing with water. Washing with water could include sprinkling, washing the hands and feet, and even washing the whole body. Likewise, in the New Testament church age God introduced the ceremonial sign of water baptism which emphasized and pointed to our need to have our sins washed away. But again we must remember, it’s just a shadow of good things to come. It has no substance in itself. Just like the burnt offerings and the shedding of blood.

So because of this, we must realize the reason people have used water from then until now is because it truly does “signify” purity and cleanness. We know this from the Bible. But that’s all it does. It just represents it, despite not actually being it. It’s a shadow of things to come, and that is the need for our sins to be permanently washed away by Jesus. There is no need for actual water to be involved in the Baptism of the Spirit. But now you asked this question:
(cont)

 

[Shiranui117]

and why Christ Himself, as well as the Apostles, drew a connection between the Spirit and water in regards to baptism?

And I thought I did answer what the connection between water and Spirit was in my 2nd post, but I’ll post it again in a bit more detail. The connection you are referring to can be found in verses like this:

From John 3:5:

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

So in this verse we have Jesus saying unless you are Born Again, you cannot enter into the kingdom of God. And he does use the word water. So when we see that we automatically think of literal water. But what is the water referring to here ? The water cannot be a reference to the physical water of baptism since there is no salvation substance in that act. Well, the Bible tells us what it refers to in John 4:14:

But whosoever drinketh the water that I shall give him shall never thirst; but the water that I shall give him shall be in him a well of water springing up into everlasting life.

And 7: 37-38

In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.

The water refers to the cleansing accomplished by Jesus on the cross which is the Gospel. The permanent cleansing. The Holy Spirit indicates the cleansing is to be applied to our lives by the Holy Spirit. Both of these actions are required in order for a man to be saved. That water of which we are to drink and which flows from the believer as we read in Acts is the Gospel as it is applied by the Holy Spirit to the life of the individual He is saving. Remember that faith cometh by hearing and hearing by the Word of God (Romans 10:17). The Word of God is the Gospel which we must hear as a prerequisite for salvation. In other words, God is declaring in John 3:5 that we will become saved when we have heard the Gospel and it is applied to our hearts by the action of the Holy Spirit.

Ezekiel 36:25-27:

Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

God ties the gift of the Holy Spirit, the cleansing from sins, and the sprinkling with water together as one great promise. Jesus cleansed us. The Holy Spirit applied the cleansing by giving us a new heart, by making us born again.

So, we are baptized into one body by the action of the Holy Spirit. 1 Corinthians 12:13:

For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

To “drink” in this verse obviously does not refer to drinking actual water. To be baptized with the Holy Spirit is to have the cleansing provided by the atonement applied and made an integral part of our lives by the Holy Spirit at the moment we are regenerated, at the time we become born again or born from above. And we know that while water does relate to “cleansing”, it does not identify anything at all with eternal life, or receiving Salvation. The cleansing was done by Jesus on the cross.

Hope this clarifies.

 

[PJM]

=Shiranui117;8270147]I have a friend who argues strongly (and quite well, I might add) that the physical baptism of water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is not the baptism that saves us, that there is no correlation between a physical act that cannot possibly save us, and of the baptism of the Holy Spirit that we are saved by. In his view, the physical baptism is at best a mere shadow of the real baptism of Spirit that God confers on us before, during or after the physical baptism. I’ve looked at all the catholic.com tracts for any Scriptural support, but he has explained all of the Scripture I have used in light of his view. If need be, I can post some of what he has said.

EDIT: Also, he does not believe that the Fathers are a valid source of info or teaching.

Jesus Christ clearly disagrees: READ John 3:5, and …

John.3: 5 "Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God”.

Mark.1: 4 "John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. "

God Bless,
Pat
Luke.3: 3 “and he went into all the region about the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins”

 

[puzzleannie]

I have a friend who argues strongly (and quite well, I might add) that the physical baptism of water in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit is not the baptism that saves us, that there is no correlation between a physical act that cannot possibly save us, and of the baptism of the Holy Spirit that we are saved by. .

he will be forced into defending his position on the basis that “Jesus lied” when he told the disciples to baptise with water and the trinitarian formula and when he himself declared in no uncertain terms that baptism in water and the Holy Spirit are required for salvation. keep hammering at him to show you where Jesus lied.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

I can see, after reading your talk with him that he is doing most of the explaining; and you don’t seem to notice things that he is defining/delineating for you.

I don’t have much problem with most of what he says; although I think it is facile.
Water isn’t just a sign and shadow of cleaning – it is a cleaning.
Fire isn’t a just sign and shadow of cleaning – it’s sterilization.

His entire focus relies on a disbelief that he holds in himself – that water itself can’t bring about true cleansing; I will refer back to what I have already said, and emphasize it: By washing with water, we do as we are commanded – and for doing that act, Jesus THEN fulfills the promise he made IF we do as he asks.

The issue isn’t about water – the issue is about obedience. Doing things GOD’S way, rather than re-inventing the wheel (so to speak). Even though water itself doesn’t guarantee one will be clean tomorrow – it also doesn’t cause one to be dirty tomorrow. For this reason, much of what your friend says is true – but really it misses the heart of the PROBLEM.

Jesus did not finish the cleansing of us on the cross. The very book of Hebrews makes it clear than Jesus’ completion of the sacrifice REQUIRED him entering heaven ETERNALLY to cleanse us in perpetuity. He doesn’t wash us over and over, rather he washes us perpetually.

Hebre 2:17 Wherefore, it behoved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest before God, that he might be a propitiation for the sins of the people.

This, at first glance refers to the past … but look at the context in Hebrews:

…
Hebre 4:8 For if Jesus had given them rest he would never have afterwards spoken of another day.
Hebre 4:9 There remaineth therefore a day of rest for the people of God.
…
Hebre 4:11 Let us hasten therefore to enter into that rest: lest any man fall into the same example of unbelief.

Clearly, they speak of a future; and what then is the future of a priest after the cross?

Hebre 4:14 Having therefore a great high priest that hath passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God: let us hold fast our confession.

This happened some 40+ days after the cross. And it is AS PRIEST that he enters the heavens.

Hebre 4:15 For we have not a high priest who cannot have compassion on our infirmities: but one tempted in all things like as we are, without sin.
Hebre 4:16 Let us go therefore with confidence to the throne of grace: that we may obtain mercy and find grace in seasonable aid.

Why go forward, if all was done in the past on the cross?

Hebre 5:1 For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in the things that appertain to God,* that he may offer up gifts and sacrifices for sins*:

Again, if the priest did not end at the cross, but entered into heaven, what is the purpose?

Hebre 5:2 Who can have compassion on them that are ignorant and that err: because he himself also is compassed with infirmity.
Hebre 5:3 And therefore he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins.

That is what Jesus is doing NOW in heaven, offering ONE sacrifice perpetually – not dying over and over, but completing the sacrifice on the cross by offering it eternally; Your friend looks at the cross and sees an “over and done with”; which is not what happened at all, rather it was the beginning of a perfect offering.
The words Jesus says in the book of John – “Consummate!” are often wrongly translated “It is finished.!”; That’s not what he said in John. A quick glance at the other gospels reveals that the meaning of the last word Jesus spoke is equivalent to the personal name of his Father. In the book of John, Jesus seeing that all things were (finished! no!!!) RATHER consummate, said TO FULFILL THE SCRIPTURES …
And his last words by translation are either YHWH spoken in Greek as the fullness of BEING (Te-Tele-s-TAI ) with an extra sigma – There is no “IT” nor “is” in the actual sentence, just a perfect participle of BEING. That is the name of the Father – and that is why it can be recorded as “Father! into your hands I commend my spirit.” in one Gospel, and “Telestai!” in the book of John.

The book of Hebrews is well worth reading carefully.

Notice that in the Book of John, the Apostle says – out of his [Jesus’ side] flowed blood and WATER. Not just blood, but blood AND water.
So I answer your friend, that this water Jesus speaks of may be BOTH physical and spiritual. For he did not deny, but made physical water flow out of his belly on the cross.

Again, baptism is the legal TENDER on earth of the promise God made.
Be baptized AND THEN you will receive the holy spirit.

Peace to you.

 

[PJM]

=Huiou Theou;8278360]I can see, after reading your talk with him that he is doing most of the explaining; and you don’t seem to notice things that he is defining/delineating for you.

I don’t have much problem with most of what he says; although I think it is facile.
Water isn’t just a sign and shadow of cleaning – it is a cleaning.
Fire isn’t a just sign and shadow of cleaning – it’s sterilization.

His entire focus relies on a disbelief that he holds in himself – that water itself can’t bring about true cleansing; I will refer back to what I have already said, and emphasize it: By washing with water, we do as we are commanded – and for doing that act, Jesus THEN fulfills the promise he made IF we do as he asks.

The issue isn’t about water – the issue is about obedience. Doing things GOD’S way, rather than re-inventing the wheel (so to speak). Even though water itself doesn’t guarantee one will be clean tomorrow – it also doesn’t cause one to be dirty tomorrow. For this reason, much of what your friend says is true – but really it misses the heart of the PROBLEM.

Jesus did not finish the cleansing of us on the cross. The very book of Hebrews makes it clear than Jesus’ completion of the sacrifice REQUIRED him entering heaven ETERNALLY to cleanse us in perpetuity. He doesn’t wash us over and over, rather he washes us perpetually.

Hebre 2:17 Wherefore, it behoved him in all things to be made like unto his brethren, that he might become a merciful and faithful high priest before God, that he might be a propitiation for the sins of the people.

This, at first glance refers to the past … but look at the context in Hebrews:

…
Hebre 4:8 For if Jesus had given them rest he would never have afterwards spoken of another day.
Hebre 4:9 There remaineth therefore a day of rest for the people of God.
…
Hebre 4:11 Let us hasten therefore to enter into that rest: lest any man fall into the same example of unbelief.

Clearly, they speak of a future; and what then is the future of a priest after the cross?

Hebre 4:14 Having therefore a great high priest that hath passed into the heavens, Jesus the Son of God: let us hold fast our confession.

This happened some 40+ days after the cross. And it is AS PRIEST that he enters the heavens.

Hebre 4:15 For we have not a high priest who cannot have compassion on our infirmities: but one tempted in all things like as we are, without sin.
Hebre 4:16 Let us go therefore with confidence to the throne of grace: that we may obtain mercy and find grace in seasonable aid.

Why go forward, if all was done in the past on the cross?

Hebre 5:1 For every high priest taken from among men is ordained for men in the things that appertain to God,* that he may offer up gifts and sacrifices for sins*:

Again, if the priest did not end at the cross, but entered into heaven, what is the purpose?

Hebre 5:2 Who can have compassion on them that are ignorant and that err: because he himself also is compassed with infirmity.
Hebre 5:3 And therefore he ought, as for the people, so also for himself, to offer for sins.

That is what Jesus is doing NOW in heaven, offering ONE sacrifice perpetually – not dying over and over, but completing the sacrifice on the cross by offering it eternally; Your friend looks at the cross and sees an “over and done with”; which is not what happened at all, rather it was the beginning of a perfect offering.
The words Jesus says in the book of John – “Consummate!” are often wrongly translated “It is finished.!”; That’s not what he said in John. A quick glance at the other gospels reveals that the meaning of the last word Jesus spoke is equivalent to the personal name of his Father. In the book of John, Jesus seeing that all things were (finished! no!!!) RATHER consummate, said TO FULFILL THE SCRIPTURES …
And his last words by translation are either YHWH spoken in Greek as the fullness of BEING (Te-Tele-s-TAI ) with an extra sigma – There is no “IT” nor “is” in the actual sentence, just a perfect participle of BEING. That is the name of the Father – and that is why it can be recorded as “Father! into your hands I commend my spirit.” in one Gospel, and “Telestai!” in the book of John.

The book of Hebrews is well worth reading carefully.

Notice that in the Book of John, the Apostle says – out of his [Jesus’ side] flowed blood and WATER. Not just blood, but blood AND water.
So I answer your friend, that this water Jesus speaks of may be BOTH physical and spiritual. For he did not deny, but made physical water flow out of his belly on the cross.

Again, baptism is the legal TENDER on earth of the promise God made.
Be baptized AND THEN you will receive the holy spirit.

Peace to you.

Adding One important fact to thios GREAT post:

It’s NOT the water [by itself]; IT’s the Sacrament and Sacramental Grace that uses the water as “the sign.” It’s through the SACRAMENT that sufficient Grace lows to accomplish what it does.

God Bless,
Pat

 

[Shiranui117]

Huiou Theou, that was an excellent post, and I will be sure to bring those points up the next time I respond to him. Puzzleannie, thank you for the advice. I will admit, I have been put on the defensive several times. Now it’s my turn to bring the pressure

Jesus Christ clearly disagrees: READ John 3:5, and …

John.3: 5 "Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God”.

Mark.1: 4 "John the baptizer appeared in the wilderness, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. "

God Bless,
Pat
Luke.3: 3 “and he went into all the region about the Jordan, preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins”

Ahh, and I’ve used this on him before, too. Here was his response to what I said (same format as before; quoted words mine, normal words his)

Yes, it is the Holy Spirit that we are baptized into. Or, more correctly, the Father, Son and Holy Spirit (Matthew 28:19) However, the exact form of the baptism involves water; that’s just the way things work. Also, the Apostles were able to baptize, as Scripture plainly attests. Or, did the Apostles never baptize anyone? Moreover, why does Jesus tell the Apostles to baptize people, if they can’t even baptize to begin with?

Indeed, the Apostles did give people the Holy Spirit…because God gave them that ability. It’s not like they were going around giving them part of their own Spirit, God used them to bring Salvation to the people who he chose to be saved. But it was still God saving them.

And, No, the exact form of baptism where you receive Salvation has NOTHING to do with water. At least…not the water most associate it with. And I’m glad you brought up Acts, because this is where God hammers home the point. We read in Acts 1:5

For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

John even says that himself in the Gospel of John. Right here God differentiates between water baptism and being baptized with the Holy Ghost. The water baptism of John had no cleansing value in itself, which as we know from the Bible, is what being “baptized” really is. The washing away of our sins. Do you think any person who has not been water baptised cannot be saved or something ? When we read things like Mark 16:16:

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

And Acts 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.

We must understand that water baptism is not in view. It can only be the baptism (the washing) which we experience as Jesus had our sins, which had been placed on Him, washed away. Only when God applies this washing to our lives are we saved. Now, something you might bring up are verses like this from John 3:5

Verily, verily, I say unto three, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

The water refers to the cleansing accomplished by Jesus on the cross which is the Gospel. The Holy Spirit indicates the cleansing is to be applied to our lives by the Holy Spirit. Both of these actions are required in order for a man to be saved.

Ezekiel used language similar to Jesus in John 3. We read in Ezekiel 36:25-27:

Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

God ties the gift of the Holy Spirit, the cleansing from sins, and the sprinkling with water together as one great promise. Jesus cleansed us. The Holy Spirit applied the cleansing by giving us a new heart, by making us born again.

So we are baptized into one body by the action of the Holy Spirit. I Corinthians 12:13:

For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

Not water. Water is just…water. It doesn’t do anything for us. God doesn’t need to use water to give us the Holy Spirit.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

Indeed, the Apostles did give people the Holy Spirit… … But it was still God saving them.

And, No, the exact form of baptism where you receive Salvation has NOTHING to do with water. At least…not the water most associate it with. And I’m glad you brought up Acts, because this is where God hammers home the point. We read in Acts 1:5

For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

Duh, they were already baptized by John with water … were they not?
Andrew, my name saint, was a disciple of John – that’s where he was told who would eventually baptize him with the holy spirit, and even Jesus HIMSELF went into the water to be baptized by JOHN.

In order to hold this position, your friend must show someone who received the baptism of the HOLY Spirit BEFORE water was administered, AND show that water was not EVER used afterward. For the mere resting of the Holy Spirit on someone who is on earth does not constitute their eternal Salvation – it is but a sign that God will favor them IF they do his will – which is measured at the culmination of their life and may be lost; or dirtied; while still here on earth.

Again; The holy spirit rested on a Donkey – but that reception of the Holy Spirit by the donkey doesn’t make the Donkey a saint; And the rider of the Donkey also received the Holy Spirit who opened his mouth to bless all Israel. A true prophet of God. But Jesus warned us:

There will be people who say in the last day, “did we not prophecy in your name?” and he will say “I never knew you.”

Numbe 22:28 And the Lord opened the mouth of the ***, and she said: What have I done to thee? Why strikest thou me, lo, now this third time?
Numbe 22:29 Balaam answered: Because thou hast deserved it, and hast served me ill: I would I had a sword that I might kill thee.

2Pete 2:15 Leaving the right way, they [prophet/teachers] have gone astray, having followed the way of Balaam of Bosor who loved the wages of iniquity,
2Pete 2:16 But had a check of his madness, the dumb beast used to the yoke, which, speaking with man’s voice, forbade the folly of the prophet

John even says that himself in the Gospel of John. Right here God differentiates between water baptism and being baptized with the Holy Ghost. The water baptism of John had no cleansing value in itself, which as we know from the Bible, is what being “baptized” really is. The washing away of our sins.

Nope.
1Pete 3:21 Whereunto baptism, being of the like form, now saveth you also: not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but, the examination of a good conscience towards God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

The expression; washing away our sins is ONE interpretation, but not the only – and certainly not the most correct. It is called the sacrament of faith and lavier of regeneration; these are more correct than “washing away”.

 

[Huiou_Theou]

Baptism kills; Think about it and Peter’s epistle – where did Noe’s sins get “washed away”?

Baptism is not complete without two things, form and matter. The holy Spirit could NOT come before Jesus did something, so it came after Jesus did that thing; Jesus even said, if I don’t go to the father, the Holy Spirit will NEVER come to you.

So, there is a time delay between the Baptizing with water and the reception of the Holy Spirit in the case of some baptisms, but the physical water IS NOT PROVABLY MISSING IN ANY OF THEM.

And God’s promise as spoken by the Prophet Joel said, God’s spirit would be poured out on ALL flesh – however, that doesn’t mean all of them were saved to eternal life.

The epistle of Peter makes it clear, however, that there were some drowned in the flood (baptism) of Noe who disobeyed – to whom Jesus would preach in prison; Again, the water was not enough – but when the time was right; some of their tombs could be opened. They were already drowned in baptism, but the Holy Spirit could not yet come to them.

Do you think any person who has not been water baptised cannot be saved or something ? When we read things like Mark 16:16:

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

And Acts 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.

I believe someone can run a red light and not be hit by a car; but that doesn’t mean that I think one can always run a red light without hitting a car – because OBVIOUSLY they might be killed; I believe someone could have their heart restart spontaneously without CPR, but that doesn’t mean I should not give CPR to someone whose heart has stopped – because they OBVIOUSLY might die without CPR !!!

Water Baptism is a one way argument; It guarantees a salvation under ORDINARY circumstances – but lack of it does not necessarily mean the person will not be saved; The bottom line is that: A Guarantee based on a promise is better than a gamble with only a chance of success.

We must understand that water baptism is not in view. It can only be the baptism (the washing) which we experience as Jesus had our sins, which had been placed on Him, washed away. Only when God applies this washing to our lives are we saved. Now, something you might bring up are verses like this from John 3:5

Of course it is in view. In each instance people obey God; if they Holy Spirit came first – you will find those same people going to the Water second; for they know that the Lord made a command. Water KILLS, it DROWNS out sin, it covers the ground like the feet of a foreign army coming to annihilate the people of the land they cover, we also DIE in baptism WITH christ. Any study of the word “covered” in scripture will show that its PRIMARY meaning is destruction; and only secondarily does it mean hiding.

Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you. A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh. And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

God ties the gift of the Holy Spirit, the cleansing from sins, and the sprinkling with water together as one great promise. Jesus cleansed us. The Holy Spirit applied the cleansing by giving us a new heart, by making us born again.

Jesus cleansed us with water. He cleansed the feet of his priests on threat of ex-communication in the upper room – with water. In all cases, physical water was present during one part of cleansing. God doesn’t need ANYTHING to baptize – but we need water to do so.