baptism for salvation?

[JLB]

The following response was shared with me by one of my Elders at church.

Regarding 1 Peter 3:21.......Remember that it was Peter who commanded those who heard the gospel on Pentecost to be baptized in Jesus’ name, Acts 2:36-38 which is in perfect harmony with what Jesus told him and the other apostles in the great commission as per Matthew 28:18-20, Mark 16:15-16 & Luke 24:44-47.


It was also Peter who later in the same way, commanded Cornelius and his family to be baptized in water, Acts 10:48 after God showed his approval of them coming into the kingdom by giving them Holy Spirit baptism. Peter makes this point in both councils at Jerusalem which were specifically convened to discuss the Gentiles being baptized, Acts 11:15-18 & 15:1-11. He argued that HSb (for short) proved that they were “acceptable” (Acts 10:9-16) to receive gcb.


We should ask ourselves why God inspired Luke to record Peter’s defense of baptizing the Gentiles in both Acts 10 & 15 too, if not to help to us understand that HSb was only given to Cornelius to justify their receipt of gcb. I believe this is because gcb is the one baptism of Ephesians 4:5. Gcb is the only baptism which reenacts the death burial and resurrection of Jesus (the gospel, 1st Corinthians 15:1-4) according to Romans 6:3-6.


With the above as a context, we read in 3:20 of his first letter that Peter introduces the historic salvation of Noah which obviously brings water into the conversation.


Why? Does he do this to show that we don’t need water? On the contrary, he does it to show us that we do need water, stating very clearly that baptism saves us. Why else would he have commanded this on Pentecost? Why else would he have commanded it for Cornelius even after he and his entire family had been baptized with the Holy Spirit?


Only water could possibly make folks think that it was about cleansing the flesh, so he reassures them that it is not about that. Rather, it is an appeal to God for a good conscience because the promise with gcb is that sin is forgiven at that point.


That our sins are forgiven at baptism has already been mentioned from Acts 2:38 & Romans 6:3-6 but Colossians 2:11-14 gives it to us in additional detail.


1…. Like Romans 6 said, baptism is a burial from which we arise (HSb is not a burial

from which we arise) - Col. 2:12

2…. We arise saved through faith that God at that point has removed our sin and

the forgiveness of sin is never connected with HSb - Col. 2:11-13

3…. Jesus took away the “certificate of debt” nailing it to his cross. Remember

Romans 6:3 that we are baptized into the death (crucifixion) of Jesus and that

our old self was nailed to the cross, crucified, 6:6 with him. HSb is never said to

connect us with the cross of Jesus but gcb definitely does - Col 2:14.


You cite Hebrews 10:4 to say that no ritual can cleanse us from sin. Well, that’s not what the passage says. It teaches us that the blood of bulls and goats cannot take away sin, which is true. However, they forget that God took away/forgave the sin of those who offered up the blood of bulls and goats according to Leviticus 4:20, 26, 31 & 35.


God forgives sins according to His own plan and the law was His plan to forgive sin until the coming of His son whose blood would pay for the sins of us all (which the blood of animals could not). Those under the old covenant were forgiven because they, by faith, kept the law and offered the sacrifices that pointed to the sacrifice of Jesus. We, like those who kept the law, are forgiven because we do in faith what Jesus said. Jesus and his apostles said that we are to believe, repent and be baptized in His name according to his great commission. Our faith in Him compels us to believe that and do it.


The above point about forgiveness under the law is exactly what Romans 1:16-17 & 3:21-26 are given to explain. God is declared righteous because He paid with Jesus’ blood the debt of sin that He forgave through the keeping of the law and sacrifices. He did not welch on this debt, but paid it in full and teaches us that if we want to be forgiven now we must get to the water.



What about the Passover (Exodus 12)? Do I really have to put blood on the doorposts and lintels of the house? Gross. God knows who is in there and that we love him. He doesn't need me to put blood on the door. If I put blood on the door then I could claim that I saved myself. Right? I'll just explain to the death angel when he comes tonight how my faith in God's grace eliminates any need I may have to actually do what he says I need to do because any action on my part could be considered a work.



How were those healed when snakebitten in the wilderness (Numbers 21:4-9)? They had to look on the bronze serpent that Moses had put on a pole. How silly, right? Everyone knows that looking at a bronze serpent won't cure a snakebite, right?. Why if you crawled over and looked at it then you could claim that your own power to crawl had saved you and your healing would have been by your own works. Better to just lay there and fester and ask God to heal you rather than be so legalistic as to believe that God would actually require you to go look at that snake on a pole.


How was Naaman cleansed of his leprosy in 2nd Kings 5:1-14?He dipped 7 times in the Jordan river like he was told to do.Was it the Jordan that cleansed him?Of course we know it was God who cleansed him. But God only cleansed him when he went to the water and dipped like he was told.Why did God have him cleansed in this fashion and why did he have the record of it written down and preserved for us to read today?


Go wash in the pool of Siloam to get my sight back (John 9)? No way. That would be a work, right? Jesus already put the mud on my eyes so I'll just wait here for his work to give me my sight. Besides, he knows there are plenty of good water sources around Jerusalem and I could wash anywhere I wanted besides the pool of Siloam, that is if I were going to wash at all. But I'm not going to wash, even though he told me to go wash, because that would be trying to earn my sight myself and not depending on Jesus and the work that he has already done.


I digress.


God still does the washing away of sin. He has explained several times and in various ways, however, that he does it when we get to the water having faith in Jesus.

Great post.
Great scriptures.

We should obey the command to get Baptized.

We should get all three.

Especially the baptism of the Holy Spirit

JLB

 

[Asyncritus]

Could you give the scripture in Romans that states water Bsptism is essential.

Rom 6.3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

The figures being used are all consonant with baptism (immersion in) in water.

 

[Asyncritus]

How was Naaman cleansed of his leprosy in 2nd Kings 5:1-14?He dipped 7 times in the Jordan river like he was told to do.Was it the Jordan that cleansed him?Of course we know it was God who cleansed him. But God only cleansed him when he went to the water and dipped like he was told.Why did God have him cleansed in this fashion and why did he have the record of it written down and preserved for us to read today?

The point is, as you rightly say, that it is not the water, but the obedience to God command that it displays which saves us.

And Peter uses the words 'save us'.

Obedience is what God wants, not wilful nibbling away at the simple and obvious meaning of His Word.

 

[Asyncritus]

The fact that Jesus Himself was baptising, is the most powerful proof of His own attitude to baptism by water that it is possible to get.

22 ¶ After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.

The Holy Spirit was not yet given at Pentecost, and so all this caviling saying that baptism is baptism of the spirit is fallacious. Jesus, Paul, John, Peter, Philip all used water.

Why should we think any differently?

 

[veryberry]

Rom 6.3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

The figures being used are all consonant with baptism (immersion in) in water.

Why do you think that he is talking about water baptism? There are 7 baptisms in the bible and only 3 of them pertain to water.
3 of them are clearly given in Matt 3:11-12
1. Baptism of John the baptist - This was associated with the doctrine of water purification(Num. 8:7, 19:9, John 2:6)
2. Baptism of the Holy Ghost - This is the real baptism that counts for salvation of the soul, the waterless baptism.
3. Baptism of fire - because of the rejection of the Lord Jesus Christ, one is baptized into everlasting hellfire.
4. Baptism unto death - Matt. 20:22-23, Rom. 6:3-4 - When we are baptized into the Lord Jesus Christ(1 Cor 12:13), we, in like manner have died to sin.
5. Baptism unto Moses - 1 Cor 10:1-2 - Israel walked on dry ground and never got wet. The Egyptians however, got wet and all drowned.(this might be a picture of something)
6. Peter's baptism - Acts 2:38 - This is much like John the Baptist baptism. But once a Jew was baptized, he then received(baptized by) the Holy Ghost. Dunked first, then saved.
7. Gentile baptism - Acts 10:47-48 - Unlike the Jews, Gentiles were baptized by the Holy Ghost, then they were baptized in water. Saved first, then dunked.

 

[veryberry]

The fact that Jesus Himself was baptising, is the most powerful proof of His own attitude to baptism by water that it is possible to get.

22 ¶ After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.

The Holy Spirit was not yet given at Pentecost, and so all this caviling saying that baptism is baptism of the spirit is fallacious. Jesus, Paul, John, Peter, Philip all used water.

Why should we think any differently?

John 4:1-2 - When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
2.(Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

Jesus did not baptize anyone.

 

[veryberry]

The point is, as you rightly say, that it is not the water, but the obedience to God command that it displays which saves us.

And Peter uses the words 'save us'.

Obedience is what God wants, not wilful nibbling away at the simple and obvious meaning of His Word.

Absolutely. Obedient to what? of works? nay, but of faith.

Romans 1:5 - By whom we have received grace and apostleship, for obedience to the faith among all nations, for his name:
How are we obedient to the faith? By believing, trusting in the finished work of the Lord Jesus Christ.
Romans 3:22 - Even the righteousness of God which is by faith of Jesus Christ unto all and upon all them that believe: for there is no difference:
Romans 5:19 - For as by one man's disobedience many were made sinners, so by the obedience of one shall many be made righteous

 

[JLB]

Rom 6.3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

The figures being used are all consonant with baptism (immersion in) in water.

I would tend to agree, however...

Being baptized into Christ, does not necessarily mean water Baptizm.

Look at this scripture, and the language used.

5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. Acts 19:5-6


Do you believe, when these heard this, they were baptized in water again?

also, as Paul teaches through shadows and types, we see this symbolism used to illustrate baptisms. -

1 Moreover, brethren, I would not that ye should be ignorant , how that all our fathers were under the cloud, and all passed through the sea; 2 And were all baptized unto Moses in the cloud and in the sea;
1 Corinthians 10:1-2

This would tell me from Paul's perspective, that being baptized into Christ is a different Baptism than Baptism in water.


JLB

 

[JLB]

The problem for me comes from reading the account in Acts 10 -

44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered, 47 "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days. Acts 10:44-48

Baptized in the name of the Lord, in this verse, to me means, they were baptized in water, as Peter indicated.

In the Acts 19 passage, the same phrase is used which says -

When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. [Acts 19:5], which to me, I believe, means they were baptized into Christ, or born again, rather than being baptized in water again.

I do know that a person must be born again before they can be baptized in the Holy Spirit, which the Apostles say "receive" the Holy Spirit.

So when Cornelius heard the words and believed, he was born again, then immediately he was baptized in the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues.

To me, being born again, is being baptized into Christ. Being born again is a type of baptism as illustrated by natural child birth in John 3.

Which 1 Corinthians 10 seems to point to.


JLB

 

[Webb]

John 4:1-2 - When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
2.(Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

Jesus did not baptize anyone.

Not personally but by His authority.

 

[JLB]

The fact that Jesus Himself was baptising, is the most powerful proof of His own attitude to baptism by water that it is possible to get.

22 ¶ After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.

The Holy Spirit was not yet given at Pentecost, and so all this caviling saying that baptism is baptism of the spirit is fallacious. Jesus, Paul, John, Peter, Philip all used water.

Why should we think any differently?

Agreed

 

[Kidron]

Its a wonder to me that this "saved by water" debate is endless.

and hello, Newbie 1616.

and the good news is, that Water cant save a bar of soap.
water has no power to redeem, has no power to justify, has no power to remove judgement for sin due every sinner.
If it could, then every time someone took a shower, .......BINGO, PRESTO, ...they'd be saved.

Water, and water baptism, as regarding a believer, is a statement of their born again condition, whereby they have publically proclaimed their new status as an adopted Son of God.
This adoption does not take place in the water.
It takes place in the heart, when you "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" and RECEIVE him by faith.
At that very instant, God, through the Holy Spirit, "quickens" your dead spirit and regenerates it and thereby seals you, with the Holy Spirit into this eternally redeemed Family of BELIEVERS.

Once this has happened, then we are to go and get "baptised" as our PUBLIC statement that this redemption of our souls via the Grace of God, ..Romans 3:21-28 has happened.

And an analogy, i'll put it to you like this.

When you join the Army, you SIGN UP........then.....THEN, you get the uniform.
The uniform is proof of your signing up.
If you dont wear it, you are still signed up.
If you have never signed up, but you buy an army uniform, you can wear it, but you are not in the army, you are just in the suit.

Baptism is the army suit.
Salvation, is signing up.

 

[for_his_glory]

Ephesians 5.26. (I don't see it as a reference to baptism, though.)

Blessings.

Thank you farouk. It does have much significant as it is all in submitting ourselves to the Holy Spirit and the works of the Lord within our ownselves.

 

[veryberry]

Its a wonder to me that this "saved by water" debate is endless.

and hello, Newbie 1616.

and the good news is, that Water cant save a bar of soap.
water has no power to redeem, has no power to justify, has no power to remove judgement for sin due every sinner.
If it could, then every time someone took a shower, .......BINGO, PRESTO, ...they'd be saved.

Water, and water baptism, as regarding a believer, is a statement of their born again condition, whereby they have publically proclaimed their new status as an adopted Son of God.
This adoption does not take place in the water.
It takes place in the heart, when you "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" and RECEIVE him by faith.
At that very instant, God, through the Holy Spirit, "quickens" your dead spirit and regenerates it and thereby seals you, with the Holy Spirit into this eternally redeemed Family of BELIEVERS.

Once this has happened, then we are to go and get "baptised" as our PUBLIC statement that this redemption of our souls via the Grace of God, ..Romans 3:21-28 has happened.

And an analogy, i'll put it to you like this.

When you join the Army, you SIGN UP........then.....THEN, you get the uniform.
The uniform is proof of your signing up.
If you dont wear it, you are still signed up.
If you have never signed up, but you buy an army uniform, you can wear it, but you are not in the army, you are just in the suit.

Baptism is the army suit.
Salvation, is signing up.

Amen!

 

[JLB]

Its a wonder to me that this "saved by water" debate is endless.

and hello, Newbie 1616.

and the good news is, that Water cant save a bar of soap.
water has no power to redeem, has no power to justify, has no power to remove judgement for sin due every sinner.
If it could, then every time someone took a shower, .......BINGO, PRESTO, ...they'd be saved.

Water, and water baptism, as regarding a believer, is a statement of their born again condition, whereby they have publically proclaimed their new status as an adopted Son of God.
This adoption does not take place in the water.
It takes place in the heart, when you "believe on the Lord Jesus Christ" and RECEIVE him by faith.
At that very instant, God, through the Holy Spirit, "quickens" your dead spirit and regenerates it and thereby seals you, with the Holy Spirit into this eternally redeemed Family of BELIEVERS.

Once this has happened, then we are to go and get "baptised" as our PUBLIC statement that this redemption of our souls via the Grace of God, ..Romans 3:21-28 has happened.

And an analogy, i'll put it to you like this.

When you join the Army, you SIGN UP........then.....THEN, you get the uniform.
The uniform is proof of your signing up.
If you dont wear it, you are still signed up.
If you have never signed up, but you buy an army uniform, you can wear it, but you are not in the army, you are just in the suit.

Baptism is the army suit.
Salvation, is signing up.

Show up for roll call in boot camp without the suit and see what happens.


JLB

 

[Mark1616]

You need to find new Elders.

Veryberry, thank you for your opinion. I've carefully examined and considered all your arguments.......and I think I'll keep the Elders I currently have.

 

[Mark1616]

Since this thread covers a very hot topic, I now see that responding to one person at a time, one per day, is going to be an endless endeavor. I'm still responding to arguments from page 1, and we're on page 5 already! So what I'll do is just put up a 2-part response, to EVERYONE on this thread. And then if anyone has any further questions for me, send me a PM and I'll be happy to answer them as best I can. So here's my first response (and both responses, BTW, were also shared with me by my aforementioned Elder).

First of all, I believe the best place to begin is Ephesians 4:5, to see if the “one baptism” is Holy Spirit baptism or water baptism which I also call “great commission baptism” (gcb for short) from Matthew 28:18-20, Mark 16:15-16 and Luke 24:44-47. I believe it especially noteworthy that Jesus said in Matthew 28:19 that we are to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Talk about authority! I know of no other command we are given to do in the name of all three members of the Godhead. Since there is only one baptism wouldn’t that be the one the apostles practiced and continually taught us about? Also, if Holy Spirit baptism is the one baptism, why then was water baptism practiced so prolifically and then recorded for us to read about in the NT? If gcb is not the one baptism, why should it still be done today at all?

There are only two instances of Holy Spirit baptism that are identified as such in the NT. The first is in Acts 2:1-4 which Jesus had foretold the apostles would happen in 1:5-8. The other was in Acts 10:34-48 when Cornelius and his family received it from God just as the apostles had. No other baptism recorded in the NT is specifically said to be Holy Spirit baptism so it is left up to us to decide which it is by the contextual evidence. There are several differences between Holy Spirit baptism and great commission baptism; to note a few:

1) Holy Spirit baptism was administered by God, not men (and)
2) Holy Spirit baptism was never commanded by God to be done by men but gcb certainly was (hence “great commission baptism)
3) Holy Spirit baptism was done to show God’s approval according to Acts 10:47, 11;16-17 & 14:26-15:9
4) Holy Spirit baptism is not said to “put us into Christ” or “into his death” as great commission baptism is said to do, Romans 6:3-6 & Galatians 3:26-27
5) Holy Spirit baptism was a means to receive miraculous gifts as with the apostles in Acts 2 and Cornelius and family in Acts 10
6) Holy Spirit baptism was accompanied by obvious signs such as a sound like wind, fire-like appearances and miraculously speaking in human languages previously unknown to the speakers. Gcb had no such signs.

(note: When explaining to the council in Jerusalem in Acts 11 about the Gentiles coming into the kingdom, Peter said that the Holy Spirit fell on Cornelius and his family just as He had upon them “at the beginning”, 11:15. Peter did not say “just as it has fallen on all converts to Christianity since Pentecost”. He goes back to reference the one other point in time when this happened at Pentecost to explain the significance of God baptizing a Gentile family with His Spirit. To me, this is good evidence that Holy Spirit baptism was not taking place on a regular basis.)

In my estimation, the evidence clearly shows that gcb is the one baptism of Ephesians 4:5. Why else would Philip go down into the water with the eunuch in Acts 8:35-38? Philip preached Jesus from Isaiah 53 according to the text and obviously convinced the eunuch that he needed to be baptized in water. When the eunuch asked to be baptized in water, Philip did not respond by saying, “Oh, you have misunderstood, I was talking about Holy Spirit baptism”. Nor did Peter say to Cornelius and his family in Acts 10 that they did not need gcb because they had already been baptized by God in His Spirit. In fact, Peter commanded/ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus, Acts 10:48. This shows very clearly that Holy Spirit baptism and baptism in the name of Jesus were two very different and distinct things. God does one, but commands us to keep the other.

 

[Mark1616]

Part 2 of my "community response" (again, from my church Elder):

Water and the new birth: God sent one prophet to prepare the way for Jesus. His name was John. He was called “the baptizer” because in preparation for the coming Messiah/Christ he baptized people; so many people that he was given the title of baptizer. So God sends one prophet to prepare the way for his son and gives that one prophet a baptism (John 1:29-34) and that one prophet baptized so many people that he was called “the baptizer”. Is this coincidence? Is it merely incidental? Another “John”, the apostle, wrote about John the baptizer saying that the prophet’s work was to testify about the Light who of course was Jesus, John 1:6-8.

John wrote the following very significant fact about those who believed in Jesus: “He came to His own, and those who were His own did not receive Him. But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, even to those who believe in His name, who were born, not of blood nor of the will of the flesh nor of the will of man, but of God” (John 1:11-13) John writes here that those who receive/believe in Jesus are given something. They are given the right to become children of God. Those who do not believe in Jesus evidently have no right to become God’s children. Belief in Jesus is said here to be the point at which we are given the right to become God’s children.

Having the right to be God’s children, however, is not the same as being God’s children. It seems obvious therefore, that the next question would be, “At what point to we become children of God?” Jesus answers this question in John 3:3-5. Nicodemus comes to Jesus and immediately expresses faith in him in 3:2 saying, “We know that You have come from God as a teacher; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him”. Having expressed faith, what can we assume Nicodemus had at that point? Can we not assume that based on his faith in Jesus, God had given Nicodemus the right to become one of His children according to John 1:12?

It seems to me that Jesus immediately introduced the next step Nicodemus needed to take to actually become one of God’s children according to this new covenant Jesus was bringing. Jesus told him that he needed to be “born again” by water and the Spirit of God, 3:3 & 5. Jesus stated it very exclusively laying down clearly and repeating it a second time to show that only those born by water and the Spirit of God would come into the kingdom. Logically, this means that all who are not born again by water and the Spirit of God will not become part of the kingdom. Some say that the “water” part of the new birth is when we are literally, physically born from our mother’s womb in childbirth. There are at least five reasons why I do not believe this is what Jesus was saying.

1) First, it just doesn’t make sense that Jesus would tell Nicodemus that he must be born physically first to be born into the kingdom. Consider that Jesus did not tell Nicodemus that he needed to believe in him because Nicodemus already believed. So why would he tell him that he needed to be born when he was already born? It certainly seems redundant and unnecessary to me and Jesus did not do or say things that were redundant or unnecessary.

2) Secondly, John had previously described physical birth as being “born of blood” in 1:13. It doesn’t make sense that John would refer to physical birth as being born of blood and then shortly thereafter write that Jesus referred to physical birth as being born of water.

3) Thirdly, we are not born of water, but amniotic fluid, if that can even be said. Jesus designed the process of human birth and it just doesn’t seem to me that he would refer to such a precise and specifically designed process in such a bland way, especially when physical birth had just been described by his apostle as birth by blood. Technical? Perhaps some would think that. I like to think of it more as accurate. Jesus was always accurate. We say a woman’s “water breaks” just prior to birth because it appears that way to us and it is accommodative language. Jesus of course knows better.

4) Perhaps most important to me in making the point that Jesus was literally speaking of water baptism is the fact that just sixteen brief verses from this record is where John tells us that Jesus and his apostles are out in the countryside baptizing people, 3:22. Thirty-one verses away we are being informed that Jesus and his disciples were baptizing even more people than John the baptizer (4:1-2). Imagine….. Wouldn’t it seem odd to us to read that Jesus, for example, told Nicodemus after Nicodemus was raised up out of the water of baptism that this immersion in, and rising from water, was not what he was talking about concerning being born by water in their previous conversation?

5) The real clincher is when you compare John 3:3 & 5 with Romans 6:4 and 2nd Corinthians 5:17 as below. Jesus speaks of a “new birth” in John 3:5 when “born of water and the Spirit” while his apostle, Paul, speaks of “newness of life” in Romans 6:3-4 when one is baptized into Christ. It seems to me from each of these passages that there is no new birth and no newness of life without baptism in water. Are the two not parallel? Are the new birth and newness of life two different things, or are they the same thing? How could they not be the same?

Then there is that phrase “baptized into Christ” used in Romans 6:3 (and Galatians 3:27 as well). How does one get “into Christ”? The language of the NT teaches us in these two passages that we are baptized into Christ. There is no other passage in the NT that teaches any other way to get into Christ other than to be baptized into him. This is why when we read in 2nd Corinthians 5:17 that if any man be “in Christ” he is a “new creature” which to mean screams “born again” and “newness of life” from these other statements made by Jesus and Paul. This is in keeping with Luke’s account of the establishment of the church in Corinth from Acts 18:5-8. Luke wrote that Paul preached the gospel and that many of the Corinthians were “believing and being baptized”, 18:8.

Wait, did Luke say “believing and being baptized”? Isn’t that the combination of the teachings of John 1:12 and John 3:5? #1 Those who believe in Jesus are given the right to become children of God and #2 then become children of God when they are born into the kingdom by water and the Spirit of God? Yes, it did say “believing and being baptized”! No wonder. This is in perfect harmony with what Jesus said in Mark 16:16 where Jesus said that all who believe and are baptized will be saved. It is in perfect harmony with what happened on Pentecost when Peter preached Jesus and as soon as the people expressed their new belief in Jesus (Acts 2:36-37) he immediately told them to ask Jesus into their hearts…….. no, just kidding. He immediately told them to be baptized (Acts 2:38). This is the same pattern we see in all of Acts. People hear the gospel, believe and are then immediately baptized.
How could we not conclude that we are being shown that the new birth takes place when folks who believe in Jesus are baptized in water like those on Pentecost (Acts 2:36-38), those in Samaria (Acts 8:12), Simon (Acts 8:13), the eunuch (Acts 8:35-38), Saul (Acts 9:3-19), Cornelius (Acts 10:36-48), Lydia (Acts 16:14-15), the jailor (Acts 16:27-33), the Corinthians (Acts 18:8) and even, yes even the Ephesian men who had already been baptized with John’s baptism were baptized again in the name of Jesus (Acts 19:1-7)? Notice especially here with the Ephesians that water baptism had to be what is meant in 19:5 because the text carefully records that the Holy Spirit did not come upon them for the purpose of enabling them to do miracles until after Paul laid hands on them specifically for that purpose, Acts 19:6.

Isn’t it interesting that in all of the examples above we see the same thing? People hear about Jesus, they come to believe in him and then are immediately baptized? Isn’t it also interesting that with all these examples of conversion there is not a single instance of anyone being told to ask Jesus into their hearts or even to pray at all? Why would God’s Spirit inspire Luke to record the spread of the gospel as it took place over several decades and give us several examples of people becoming Christians, yet never show us or teach us or reveal to us in any way the most crucial aspect of salvation, namely, the “sinner’s prayer”? He didn’t reveal it to us because it is not of God.

Hear the Gospel, believe the Gospel, repent, publicly confess that Jesus is God's Son, and be baptized. Then you're saved. NOT BY THE WATER ITSELF (how many times do I have to repeat this?), but by Jesus' blood and by grace through faith (active, obedient faith. The only kind that isn't dead.). Then God adds you to His Son's church (Acts 2:47). That is all I've got for now on this subject; again, if anyone has any questions, send me a PM.

 

[JLB]

Since this thread covers a very hot topic, I now see that responding to one person at a time, one per day, is going to be an endless endeavor. I'm still responding to arguments from page 1, and we're on page 5 already! So what I'll do is just put up a 2-part response, to EVERYONE on this thread. And then if anyone has any further questions for me, send me a PM and I'll be happy to answer them as best I can. So here's my first response (and both responses, BTW, were also shared with me by my aforementioned Elder).

First of all, I believe the best place to begin is Ephesians 4:5, to see if the “one baptism” is Holy Spirit baptism or water baptism which I also call “great commission baptism” (gcb for short) from Matthew 28:18-20, Mark 16:15-16 and Luke 24:44-47. I believe it especially noteworthy that Jesus said in Matthew 28:19 that we are to baptize in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit. Talk about authority! I know of no other command we are given to do in the name of all three members of the Godhead. Since there is only one baptism wouldn’t that be the one the apostles practiced and continually taught us about? Also, if Holy Spirit baptism is the one baptism, why then was water baptism practiced so prolifically and then recorded for us to read about in the NT? If gcb is not the one baptism, why should it still be done today at all?

There are only two instances of Holy Spirit baptism that are identified as such in the NT. The first is in Acts 2:1-4 which Jesus had foretold the apostles would happen in 1:5-8. The other was in Acts 10:34-48 when Cornelius and his family received it from God just as the apostles had. No other baptism recorded in the NT is specifically said to be Holy Spirit baptism so it is left up to us to decide which it is by the contextual evidence. There are several differences between Holy Spirit baptism and great commission baptism; to note a few:

1) Holy Spirit baptism was administered by God, not men (and)
2) Holy Spirit baptism was never commanded by God to be done by men but gcb certainly was (hence “great commission baptism)
3) Holy Spirit baptism was done to show God’s approval according to Acts 10:47, 11;16-17 & 14:26-15:9
4) Holy Spirit baptism is not said to “put us into Christ” or “into his death” as great commission baptism is said to do, Romans 6:3-6 & Galatians 3:26-27
5) Holy Spirit baptism was a means to receive miraculous gifts as with the apostles in Acts 2 and Cornelius and family in Acts 10
6) Holy Spirit baptism was accompanied by obvious signs such as a sound like wind, fire-like appearances and miraculously speaking in human languages previously unknown to the speakers. Gcb had no such signs.

(note: When explaining to the council in Jerusalem in Acts 11 about the Gentiles coming into the kingdom, Peter said that the Holy Spirit fell on Cornelius and his family just as He had upon them “at the beginning”, 11:15. Peter did not say “just as it has fallen on all converts to Christianity since Pentecost”. He goes back to reference the one other point in time when this happened at Pentecost to explain the significance of God baptizing a Gentile family with His Spirit. To me, this is good evidence that Holy Spirit baptism was not taking place on a regular basis.)

In my estimation, the evidence clearly shows that gcb is the one baptism of Ephesians 4:5. Why else would Philip go down into the water with the eunuch in Acts 8:35-38? Philip preached Jesus from Isaiah 53 according to the text and obviously convinced the eunuch that he needed to be baptized in water. When the eunuch asked to be baptized in water, Philip did not respond by saying, “Oh, you have misunderstood, I was talking about Holy Spirit baptism”. Nor did Peter say to Cornelius and his family in Acts 10 that they did not need gcb because they had already been baptized by God in His Spirit. In fact, Peter commanded/ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus, Acts 10:48. This shows very clearly that Holy Spirit baptism and baptism in the name of Jesus were two very different and distinct things. God does one, but commands us to keep the other.

A]. Acts 19 clearly speaks of Holy Spirit Baptism.

B]. There is One Baptism with three expressions, just as there is One God with three expressions.

JLB

 

[turnorburn]

My statement from post #53: every man woman and child that repented accepted Christ on their death beds whether it be at home in a hospital bed a prison camp a prisoner on death row are now in the belly of hell because they weren't baptized..

did you ask your elder about this..

Thank you

tob