This is a remake of the thread I started in the Christian Talk and Advice forums. Here is the original thread.
Anyways...
Do you have to be baptized in order to be saved? I used to think that you don't, but these verses got me thinking...
1 Peter 3:21
After reading some of the posts in the thread, I replied with this,
Touche. But you can't just disregard this verse. If my doctrine is wrong, surely there must be some explanation for this verse? And St. Peter simply mentions this fact without presenting it as something novel or new. The way he just passingly mentions it assumes that we already know that Baptism saves because he was writing to orthodox Christians who already knew and had been taught that.
Anyways, there's also Heb. 10:22, Jn. 3:5, Titus 3:5, Acts 2:38 or Mark 16:16.
Is there any proof for this? Do you have any specific source?
Believing like all Christianity has historically believed is dangerous? How so?
St. Paul also said that "there must be divisions among you" (1 Cor. 11:19).
I agree, to an extent. That's why Orthodox Christians see salvation as a process where we always strive for salvation as opposed to Protestantism's "once saved always saved" idea.
Anyways...
Do you have to be baptized in order to be saved? I used to think that you don't, but these verses got me thinking...
1 Peter 3:21
John 3:5and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God.[a] It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
Jesus answered, “Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit
After reading some of the posts in the thread, I replied with this,
We are not saved by water baptism.
1 Peter 3:21 is only one verse that says that. Wisdom tells us we do not build a doctrine on the strength of one isolated verse. There are no others.
Touche. But you can't just disregard this verse. If my doctrine is wrong, surely there must be some explanation for this verse? And St. Peter simply mentions this fact without presenting it as something novel or new. The way he just passingly mentions it assumes that we already know that Baptism saves because he was writing to orthodox Christians who already knew and had been taught that.
Anyways, there's also Heb. 10:22, Jn. 3:5, Titus 3:5, Acts 2:38 or Mark 16:16.
In the same parallel order, of water and Spirit we see Jesus referencing flesh (water) and Spirit. In the days that Jesus lived, the common wording for the act of giving birth used the term for 'water', which was a common reference to the amniotic fluid that passes at birth. That is what Jesus was referring to. He was not referring to water baptism.
Is there any proof for this? Do you have any specific source?
When speaking of Baptism, it is dangerous to view Baptism as a line in the sand which divides those destine to hell, and those headed toward heaven.
Believing like all Christianity has historically believed is dangerous? How so?
I agree, and a very good point indeed.
As dangerous is to view Baptism as a rite which allows you to be a member of a particular denomination ( 1 Corinthians 1)
St. Paul also said that "there must be divisions among you" (1 Cor. 11:19).
Too often the gospel is presented as if there is some kind of "essential checklist" that must be checked off and then "your in!" And, if something isn't necessary for salvation, then it isn't necessary at all. This really isn't the way to look at the gospel or our salvation
I agree, to an extent. That's why Orthodox Christians see salvation as a process where we always strive for salvation as opposed to Protestantism's "once saved always saved" idea.