Born of Water and Born of Spirit to enter heaven

[Potluck]

Dadof10,
I know what I experienced. No way am I going to be convinced it was a dream, hallucination or something I ate. Your interpretation is the way you believe. So be it. You cannot shake my faith or convince me it's null and void because it doesn't fit your beliefs. That's just the way it is. And I'm not alone. It's really not that uncommon.

"And posing irrefutable arguments to Protestants."

Then I'm assuming your interpretation is what you are taught? I know the Catholic Church here in town, St. Gregory, claims the Church is the way to salvation. Without the theological teachings of that particular church a non-member would think you have to be a member to be saved. There is no clarification or condition with that claim made to the public. I make no objection to the Catholic Church and those that know me here will tell you I am not anti-Catholic. I don't wish to open a debate about the Catholic Church. Obama is much more of a threat than this simple hayseed can ever be. But St. Gregory makes that claim none-the-less.
I've said if that's what you want to believe then fine but your reply is far from courteous reciprocation. I've stood shoulder to shoulder with Baptists passing out fliers on the street when they visited Salt Lake City some time ago. Under the banner of unity believes/debates of baptism were put aside to further the cause for Christ. Those couple days were very uplifting.

 

[zeke]

I know the Catholic Church here in town, St. Gregory, claims the Church is the way to salvation. Without the theological teachings of that particular church a non-member would think you have to be a member to be saved. There is no clarification or condition with that claim made to the public. I make no objection to the Catholic Church and those that know me here will tell you I am not anti-Catholic. I don't wish to open a debate about the Catholic Church.

The question regarding baptism is not a "denominational thing" - it is a "biblical thing". It doesn't matter what the RCC teaches or what Protestant sects teach - what matters is what the Bible teaches and the word of God is clear - those who will be Christ's disciples must first believe, repent and be baptized "for the forgiveness of sins" Acts 2:38. Baptism in water is from God - not man. It became an essential part of the gospel of Christ the moment it was commanded by God.

I think John Piper (Baptist) states it very well...

Jesus made baptism part of his ministry and part of our mission. Baptism is not man's idea. It was God's idea. It is not a denominational thing. It is a Biblical thing. It started with John the Baptist at the beginning of our gospels. He came, verse 11 says, to "baptize with water for repentance." It continued in the ministry of Jesus himself. John 4:1 says, "Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John," although it was the disciples, not Jesus who did the actual immersing (John 4:2). And the practice was picked up by the church not because of their own wisdom, but because of the command of the Lord. At the end of his earthly ministry Jesus said, "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19). So Jesus made baptism part of his ministry and part of our mission

...the practice of baptism was universal in the early church. It was not just for converted Jews or converted gentiles, or any one specific church. It was practiced for all converts in all the churches. (Piper)​

 

[zeke]

When an infant is baptized, he does nothing to merit salvation. It is freely given and NOTHING is required from him.

A little off-topic but the argument for 'infant baptism' is an argumentum e silentio – a notion based on the absence of evidence. New Testament baptism is always presented as 'believer baptism' and the prerequisites for baptism are always presented as “faith and repentance”. If one is baptized without faith and repentance he/she only gets wet. Infants do not have the intellectual capacity to believe and they have committed no sins to repent from.

There is nothing magical about the water of baptism - baptism is simply the "answer of a good conscience toward God" that points the believer to the resurrection of Jesus Christ. Baptism in an act of obedience that puts one "into Christ". It is the blood of Christ alone that cleanses us from all sin as we are baptized into Christ --'calling on the name of the Lord'...

And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.'
(Act 22:16)​

 

[Potluck]

..it is a "biblical thing"

...when interpreted as such.

I interpret it all differently. Job 40:14 keeps getting in the way. I won't ignore it. It's pretty straight forward.

So what ya'll are saying is that I can't be saved unless some guy baptizes me with water?
How does Christ's baptism with the Holy Ghost fit into all this? Or is that fella I mentioned somehow authorized to do it by proxy?

 

[zeke]

...when interpreted as such.

I interpret it all differently.

Then you need to change your interpretation to line up with God's word. Jesus was clear - the promise of salvation is made to the one who believes and is baptized and the one who disbelieves (whether baptized or not baptized) is condemned. The word of God always trumps the doctrines of men. The choice is yours...

He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.
(Mar 16:16 NKJV)

There is a way that seems right to a man, but in the end it leads to death. (Proverbs 14:12)
​

 

[Potluck]

Sure thing zeke. I agree. I believe Christ has the power of salvation though His baptism of the Holy Spirit.
I get nervous when someone says they have been given the power of God to do His work when in fact it's Christ's baptism that does the saving. And that not by proxy.

I also agree it's not a denominational thing. One doesn't need to be a member of any organization to be saved.

 

[zeke]

Sure thing zeke. I agree. I believe Christ has the power of salvation though His baptism of the Holy Spirit.
I get nervous when someone says they have been given the power of God to do His work when in fact it's Christ's baptism that does the saving. And that not by proxy.

Do you deny that the ordinance of baptism is from God? If baptism in water is 'from God' (and it is) and I baptize the repenting believer in accordance with the command of the Lord to "go...teach..baptize" in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit am I not doing God's will or do I stand condemned - in your mind?

And Jesus came and spoke to them, saying, "All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen.
(Mat 28:18-20 NKJV)​

Did Jesus clearly state that one must be "born of water and the Spirit" to enter God's kingdom? Is baptism in water - the baptism that puts one "into Christ" really "proxy salvation" as you suggest or is it the door to salvation that puts the believer in union Christ as he/she is "baptized into His death"? Your logic appears to be 'fuzzy'.

 

[Potluck]

Do I or do I not have to be baptized with water by a person to be saved?
I know the scripture. I know interpretation can and is often debated.
A yes or no answer is all I seek.

 

[dadof10]

Dadof10,
I know what I experienced. No way am I going to be convinced it was a dream, hallucination or something I ate. Your interpretation is the way you believe. So be it. You cannot shake my faith or convince me it's null and void because it doesn't fit your beliefs. That's just the way it is. And I'm not alone. It's really not that uncommon.

"And posing irrefutable arguments to Protestants."

Then I'm assuming your interpretation is what you are taught? I know the Catholic Church here in town, St. Gregory, claims the Church is the way to salvation. Without the theological teachings of that particular church a non-member would think you have to be a member to be saved. There is no clarification or condition with that claim made to the public. I make no objection to the Catholic Church and those that know me here will tell you I am not anti-Catholic. I don't wish to open a debate about the Catholic Church. Obama is much more of a threat than this simple hayseed can ever be. But St. Gregory makes that claim none-the-less.
I've said if that's what you want to believe then fine but your reply is far from courteous reciprocation. I've stood shoulder to shoulder with Baptists passing out fliers on the street when they visited Salt Lake City some time ago. Under the banner of unity believes/debates of baptism were put aside to further the cause for Christ. Those couple days were very uplifting.

I apologize if I offended you. I don't know how to put a smilie in the text using my phone. The "posing" sentence was supposed to be a little jab, instead you took it as a sucker punch. Sorry.

 

[dadof10]

Do I or do I not have to be baptized with water by a person to be saved?
I know the scripture. I know interpretation can and is often debated.
A yes or no answer is all I seek.

Yes, you do. Baptism is the normative means of salvation and as such, IF YOU ARE CAPABLE, you are required to accept baptism. There are people who are unable to accept baptism due to circumstances (the Thief on the cross) or ignorance, invincible or not. How else do you explain:

"eight persons, were saved through water.
21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, (1Peter (RSV) 3)

There is really nothing to "interpret" here. It's pretty straight forward.

 

[Potluck]

Yes, you do. Baptism is the normative means of salvation and as such, IF YOU ARE CAPABLE, you are required to accept baptism. There are people who are unable to accept baptism due to circumstances (the Thief on the cross) or ignorance, invincible or not. How else do you explain:

"eight persons, were saved through water.
21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, (1Peter (RSV) 3)

There is really nothing to "interpret" here. It's pretty straight forward.

1Pe 3:20 Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
1Pe 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:


"The like figure" or "which corresponds to this"

The flood symbolizes baptism for the eight while baptism symbolizes salvation as in "by the resurrection of Jesus Christ".

Baptism symbolizes Christ's death, burial and resurrection.

We are saved by what baptism symbolizes not by the ritual itself. Otherwise we're compelled to come up with an array of exceptions due to the misinterpretation of what the ritual illustrates. When that occurs we fall into man's judgment, debate thereof and become prey to opinion. Scripture makes no such exceptions, you won't find any, none can be found for good reason. None are needed when baptism by water is taken for what it is, the representation of Christ's death, burial and resurrection. Can you find any of those exceptions declared in the bible? Of course not. The exceptions you mention are not supported by scripture. Those are of your own design needed to support what water baptism isn't.

In scripture baptism was done by immersion. Why? To symbolize the person's death, being buried and raised again "in like figure", "which corresponds to" Christ's death, burial and resurrection. John's baptism was prophecy symbolizing what was to come. We do it today in remembrance of what Christ had done, a declaration on our part that we believe Christ was indeed resurrected from the dead.

 

[zeke]

Do I or do I not have to be baptized with water by a person to be saved?
I know the scripture. I know interpretation can and is often debated.
A yes or no answer is all I seek.

The answer you seek is found in Holy Writ - the promise of salvation is to those who believe and are baptized and those who disbelieve are condemned already.

He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.
(Mar 16:16)​

Baptism in water - baptism performed by the hands of men - is from God, not man. The Lord instituted baptism and commands that all who will be His are to submit to baptism in water. It is at the point of baptism in water that the believer becomes "united with Christ".

 

[zeke]

In scripture baptism was done by immersion. Why? To symbolize the person's death, being buried and raised again "in like figure", "which corresponds to" Christ's death, burial and resurrection. John's baptism was prophecy symbolizing what was to come. We do it today in remembrance of what Christ had done, a declaration on our part that we believe Christ was indeed resurrected from the dead.

We submit to baptism today because it is the act of obedience ordained by Jesus Christ that puts the believer 'into union with Christ'. That which baptism symbolizes should not be expected without first submitting to baptism - a baptism into His death...

Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.
(Rom 6:3-4)​

 

[Potluck]

The answer you seek is found in Holy Writ - the promise of salvation is to those who believe and are baptized and those who disbelieve are condemned already.

He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.
(Mar 16:16)​

Baptism in water - baptism performed by the hands of men - is from God, not man. The Lord instituted baptism and commands that all who will be His are to submit to baptism in water. It is at the point of baptism in water that the believer becomes "united with Christ".

"baptism performed by the hands of men"

Job 40:14 Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.

When I believe I do the ritual of baptism as an outward sign of that belief. I believe He died, was buried and rose again. And I would think that if that ordinance as you call it, believe and be baptized, is so important for one's salvation, essential in your opinion, it should also be found in Matthew, Luke and John. But it's not. It shows up in only the one book of Mark. What IS found in all of them is that of belief in Christ. There are quite a few verses where baptism isn't even mentioned when belief unto salvation was spoken of. You'd expect baptism would accompany every one of them if it was such an important condition of that salvation. Many times baptism does not accompany those verses alluding to belief in Christ. Baptism is rarely even mentioned in the book of John.
How could John, Matthew and Luke have overlooked such a crucial element of salvation, such a critical commandment from Christ if baptism is so necessary?

 

[zeke]

"baptism performed by the hands of men"

Job 40:14 Then will I also confess unto thee that thine own right hand can save thee.

When I believe I do the ritual of baptism as an outward sign of that belief. I believe He died, was buried and rose again. And I would think that if that ordinance as you call it, believe and be baptized, is so important for one's salvation, essential in your opinion, it should also be found in Matthew, Luke and John. But it's not. It shows up in only the one book of Mark. What IS found in all of them is that of belief in Christ. There are quite a few verses where baptism isn't even mentioned when belief unto salvation was spoken of. You'd expect baptism would accompany every one of them if it was such an important condition of that salvation. Many times baptism does not accompany those verses alluding to belief in Christ. Baptism is rarely even mentioned in the book of John.
How could John, Matthew and Luke have overlooked such a crucial element of salvation, such a critical commandment from Christ if baptism is so necessary?

You continue to 'kick against the pricks' - why? The ordinance of baptism is mentioned throughout the NT and it is what it is - an act of obedience ordained by Jesus Christ...a sign of fellowship with Christ in His death and resurrection...the act of being engrafted into Christ...the point of remission of sins and the start of one's "walk in newness of life".

Of Baptism

1. Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be unto the party baptized, a sign of his fellowship with him, in his death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into him; of remission of sins; and of giving up into God, through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness of life.
( Romans 6:3-5; Colossians 2;12; Galatians 3:27; Mark 1:4; Acts 22:16; Romans 6:4 )

2. Those who do actually profess repentance towards God, faith in, and obedience to, our Lord Jesus Christ, are the only proper subjects of this ordinance.
( Mark 16:16; Acts 8:36, 37; Acts 2:41; Acts 8:12; Acts 18:8 )

3. The outward element to be used in this ordinance is water, wherein the party is to be baptized, in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
( Matthew 28:19, 20; Acts 8:38 )

4. Immersion, or dipping of the person in water, is necessary to the due administration of this ordinance. ( Matthew 3:16; John 3:23 )

~ THE BAPTIST CONFESSION OF FAITH​

 

[Potluck]

I see people getting baptized in those verses yes. I see people getting baptized at church.
There is a lot in common within the synoptic Gospels. But declaration of an ordinance whereby one must be baptized, support for the claim of necessity for water baptism or a crucial and essential step required to enter into the presence of the Father isn't one of them.

Believing Christ died, was buried and rose again is undeniably the ultimate condition within all three and even in John for entering into Heaven. We may see people being sent to baptize by water but that as an illustration of faith, a declaration of that faith to self and/or within a public view as profession of belief for the coming baptism by the Holy Ghost through Christ. In reality water baptism was pretty much all they had therefore John came baptizing with water for the batism of the Holy Ghost had not yet come. They were still under The Law. Christ had not yet died, had not yet been buried and of course had not yet risen.

It appears the first baptism of the Holy Ghost came in Acts Ch2. Up until then baptism was the prophetic act of faith. There's little wonder water baptism had such significance since it essentially acted out the coming glorification of Christ and His ultimate gift of His baptism of the Holy Ghost. It was the perfect method of displaying what was coming, it was a prophetic announcement by the participants to those who would know Christ's coming authority of salvation. The Law was still in force, The veil in the Holy of Holies not yet been torn and Christ not yet glorified through His divine work on the cross. Acting out His death, burial and resurrection in symbolism was a great way to teach and spread the Word.


Anyway, I've enjoyed the discussion with both of you, zeke and Dadof10. Civil discourse is always a pleasure but I have nothing else say and see no reason to rehash what's already been said. I'll leave you both to make your closing statements.


God Bless you both.

 

[zeke]

Anyway, I've enjoyed the discussion with both of you, zeke and Dadof10. Civil discourse is always a pleasure but I have nothing else say and see no reason to rehash what's already been said. I'll leave you both to make your closing statements.


God Bless you both.

It's been a pleasure discussing this important subject with you Potluck. I would add nothing new but would reiterate that the ordinance of baptism is presented in the NT as an essential part of the gospel of Christ - it is not an option. Baptism is God's idea - not man's. It is an act of obedience ordained by Jesus Christ as a sign of fellowship with Him in His death, burial and resurrection. It is the point where the believer is 'engrafted into Christ' as he/she receives the remission of sins and the indwelling gift of the Holy Spirit - born of water and of the Spirit. Baptism is where the 'new man' in Christ starts his "walk in newness of life". God bless.

 

[dadof10]

I see people getting baptized in those verses yes. I see people getting baptized at church.
There is a lot in common within the synoptic Gospels. But declaration of an ordinance whereby one must be baptized, support for the claim of necessity for water baptism or a crucial and essential step required to enter into the presence of the Father isn't one of them.

Believing Christ died, was buried and rose again is undeniably the ultimate condition within all three and even in John for entering into Heaven. We may see people being sent to baptize by water but that as an illustration of faith, a declaration of that faith to self and/or within a public view as profession of belief for the coming baptism by the Holy Ghost through Christ. In reality water baptism was pretty much all they had therefore John came baptizing with water for the batism of the Holy Ghost had not yet come. They were still under The Law. Christ had not yet died, had not yet been buried and of course had not yet risen.

It appears the first baptism of the Holy Ghost came in Acts Ch2. Up until then baptism was the prophetic act of faith. There's little wonder water baptism had such significance since it essentially acted out the coming glorification of Christ and His ultimate gift of His baptism of the Holy Ghost. It was the perfect method of displaying what was coming, it was a prophetic announcement by the participants to those who would know Christ's coming authority of salvation. The Law was still in force, The veil in the Holy of Holies not yet been torn and Christ not yet glorified through His divine work on the cross. Acting out His death, burial and resurrection in symbolism was a great way to teach and spread the Word.


Anyway, I've enjoyed the discussion with both of you, zeke and Dadof10. Civil discourse is always a pleasure but I have nothing else say and see no reason to rehash what's already been said. I'll leave you both to make your closing statements.


God Bless you both.

God bless you too, Potluck, it's been a pleasure. The only closing statement I have is I would encourage you to re-read 1Pt. 3:20-21. Even if you don't hold that water baptism actually saves, these verses and others like them certainly point to baptism being far more than just symbolic. See you around I'm sure.