Do you haft to be baptized?

[EricTheBaptist]

I know the Bible says Jesus was baptized, but are Christians required to be? I know a lot of Christians believe you don't haft to, and some believe you must be baptized.

 

[reba]

This battle is as old as the hills.

Haft too for what reason? He tells us to be so we should be.. I do not believe a death bed conversion type person needs to be baptized for salvation. I see baptism as a outward sign of an inward submission.

 

[Webb]

No where does the Bible say or even hint that baptism is "an outward sign of an inward submission". No, Christians do not need to be baptized, baptism is in order to become a Christrian. Is it necessary to be saved? Hear Jesus in Mk.16:15-16 or hear Peter in Acts 2:38.

 

[Grubal Muruch]

Reba was correct...Water baptism was for the "House of Israel," and not meant for gentiles, however, gentiles are not "held back" from being "water baptized." Gentiles are baptized by the, "Holy Spirit" Water baptism does not save, only the shed blood of Christ is able to do that...

 

[reba]

I agree Webb.

Some of what i see in Scripture:
I see 'baptism' cleansing of the earth , Noah's flood then on to the Children of Israel

Num 8:6 Take the Levites from among the children of Israel, and cleanse them.
Num 8:7 And thus shalt thou do unto them, to cleanse them: Sprinkle water of purifying upon them, and let them shave all their flesh, and let them wash their clothes, and so make themselves clean.
Num 19:19 And the clean person shall sprinkle upon the unclean on the third day, and on the seventh day: and on the seventh day he shall purify himself, and wash his clothes, and bathe himself in water, and shall be clean at even.
Num 19:20 But the man that shall be unclean, and shall not purify himself, that soul shall be cut off from among the congregation, because he hath defiled the sanctuary of the LORD: the water of separation hath not been sprinkled upon him; he is unclean.
We are priests
1Pe 2:9 But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should shew forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light:

Exo 30:18 Thou shalt also make a laver of brass, and his foot also of brass, to wash withal: and thou shalt put it between the tabernacle of the congregation and the altar, and thou shalt put water therein.
Exo 30:19 For Aaron and his sons shall wash their hands and their feet thereat:
Exo 30:20 When they go into the tabernacle of the congregation, they shall wash with water, that they die not; or when they come near to the altar to minister, to burn offering made by fire unto the LORD:

We have many passages speaking of the water cleansing...

Do we as Christians need be washed in water when we are washed in the Blood of the Lamb?

We also know who is the Living Water.

 

[EricTheBaptist]

I personally believe baptism is an inward acceptance and doesn't need to be preformed in ceremony.

 

[handy]

I personally believe baptism is an inward acceptance and doesn't need to be preformed in ceremony.

You know, I could personally believe that baptism can be performed by the flying spaghetti monster flinging tomato sauce...but that doesn't make it true. This is what Christian growth is all about, moving from our limited and often misunderstood conceptions into God's truth about things. And, the only way we can truly do that is via subjecting our own thoughts and ideas to the light of Scripture. That is what Scripture is for, for "reproof and correction" of mistaken ideas.

What biblical reasons do you have to hold to the idea that baptism is an inward acceptance? I can't think of any scripture whatsoever that describes baptism in such terms. Jesus certainly didn't give us an example of an "inward acceptance". He was baptized because He said it was fitting to "fulfill all righteousness". Water baptism is clearly part of what Christians did...as the Ethiopian said to Philip, "Here's water, what's to prevent me from being baptized?"

 

[jasoncran]

baptism is the outward expression of what has gone in the heart.

we do have weddings where our love is proclaimed publicly. why not with God? the water immersion is symbolic of the dying of us with christ and being raised.

 

[Webb]

Eric:

Having read all answers given your question on this thread, go back and read the simple, clear, straight-forward answer Jesus your saviour gave in Mark 16:15,15. Then turn again and read the direct answer Jesus' Spirit inspired apost gave to your question in Acts 2:38. You and I, all of us, will be judged by Jesus' word, John 12:48. With eternity starring each of us Whose word will you take????????

 

[handy]

baptism is the outward expression of what has gone in the heart.

we do have weddings where our love is proclaimed publicly. why not with God? the water immersion is symbolic of the dying of us with christ and being raised.

Again, easily said...now provide the Scriptural evidence that this is truth.

 

[jasoncran]

12Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

13Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
14I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;
15Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name.
16And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. 17For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect.

hmm paul seldom baptised must have won not many a soul then.

two thats it.and whatever he baptised in that house. are really going to say that? the greatest of the apostles only won less then ten souls?

and this site says way better then i could dig.

http://www.allaboutgod.com/is-baptism-necessary-for-salvation.htm

jesus baptised none!if baptism by water was needed then john the the baptist also saved souls. which he didnt he prepared e way to the lord.


keep in the word baptism isnt even an english word, it means to dip. by that thinking then as the upc says one needs to have the holy ghost to be saved.(as in pentacostal type)

You are here: God >> Is Baptism Necessary For Salvation


Is Baptism Necessary for Salvation – The Meaning
People around the world ask this question: Is baptism necessary for salvation? The word "baptism" is a transliteration of the Greek word "baptisma" and this word is from a primary Greek verb "bapto," which is also the root of the word baptize. The word means to dip, to dye or to change the identification of. When a piece of white cloth was "bapto" into a vat of blue dye, it no longer was white cloth because its identification was changed to blue cloth. That is the root of the meaning of the word

from that link and given what the says it make sense. we are in essenced changed at the rebirth.

i do question if one doesnt want to do that.

 

[Webb]

But Paul DID baptize, I Cor. 1:14,16. Was he thus disobedient and a false teacher? The Bible says nothing about who or who may not baptize. WHO physically baptizes a person is not important. What is important is that the individual be baptized in the Bible taught way (immersed) and for the Bible taught reason, to be saved, for the remission of sins ( as I have stated in a prior post and gave scriptural ref.). While not a preacher I have had the blessed experience of teaching many and the even more blessed privilege of seeing some of them baptized. Some I have baptized myself. Usuallly I have the preacher, and elder, a kinsman or some other do the baptizing. I do this because I believe it enables the candidate for baptism to have a strong tie the preacher, elder (who will more likely live in the area longer than others) or kinsman, giving them another reason not to fall away as some in the 1st century and even today.

Not EVEN a careful reading of I Cor. 1 clearly shows the main reason WHY Paul baptized few---Too many have "preacheritis" then, as now.

 

[jasoncran]

But Paul DID baptize, I Cor. 1:14,16. Was he thus disobedient and a false teacher? The Bible says nothing about who or who may not baptize. WHO physically baptizes a person is not important. What is important is that the individual be baptized in the Bible taught way (immersed) and for the Bible taught reason, to be saved, for the remission of sins ( as I have stated in a prior post and gave scriptural ref.). While not a preacher I have had the blessed experience of teaching many and the even more blessed privilege of seeing some of them baptized. Some I have baptized myself. Usuallly I have the preacher, and elder, a kinsman or some other do the baptizing. I do this because I believe it enables the candidate for baptism to have a strong tie the preacher, elder (who will more likely live in the area longer than others) or kinsman, giving them another reason not to fall away as some in the 1st century and even today.

Not EVEN a careful reading of I Cor. 1 clearly shows the main reason WHY Paul baptized few---Too many have "preacheritis" then, as now.

really. God sent him not to baptise but to preach the gospel right here.

17For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect

so if he was sent to do as you say then why did he not say i baptised few because others were doing it. instead he says verse seventeen. lets not read into this more.

if preaching the gospel must include the act of salvation and water is the only way then that statement?

 

[jasoncran]

webb up to that point he plainly says a few. not much and how many works did he do? im sure he led souls to the lord. so one cant say if so-so asked him what must i do to be saved he wouldnt have said wait.. lets do it now.

tommorow isnt promised. i wonder if these baptism must be needed for salvation wait months to mass baptism. yet if said souls dies before then i guess he wasnt saved so that rcc idea of baptism by intent comes in.

i have issues with those that refuse to be baptised.

sorry i disagree given what i know of water in the ot idea of it. often say things are symbolic.

jesus didnt baptise now did he surely he would have if that was needed.

 

[handy]

I think this is apples and oranges, Jason.

For the record, Paul didn't save anyone's soul either...no one saves a soul except God Himself.

Paul certainly won souls in that he shared the gospel. But, are you seriously thinking that of all that heard Paul preach and respond to his message...they didn't get baptized? Or only those whom Paul himself baptized were baptized and all else who heard his message weren't? Just because Paul wasn't taking them down into the water himself doesn't mean that the local pastors and brethren weren't baptizing those who believed.

When those in the early church heard the message and received they were baptized. We see this over and over.

Acts 2:41: So then, those who had received his word were baptized; and that day there were added about three thousand souls.

Acts 8:12: But when they believed Philip preaching the good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were being baptized, men and women alike.

Acts 16:33: And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household.

Acts 18:8: Crispus, the leader of the synagogue, believed in the Lord with all his household, and many of the Corinthians when they heard were believing and being baptized.

Acts 19:4-5: Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in Him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus.†5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.



For all who think we don't "have" to be baptized...(as if we should only do what we 'have' to do) and believe that baptism is somehow only a "symbol" (not the the bible ever teaches this idea) and therefore unnecessary, consider this:

Acts 10: 44-48: While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. 45 All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?†48 And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.

Here we see clearly that the Gentile received the Holy Spirit. The Spirit was manifested clearly within them. So, what was Peter's response..."Wow, they don't need no water baptism, they have the Spirit, by golly!"

No...the response was to order that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.

How on earth are we in the Church getting this message so wrong...that water baptism is somehow....unnecessary? Jesus was baptized. Jesus ordered the Apostles to go out into the world and baptized. The Apostles had people baptized.

And now Christians are beginning to believe and teach that baptism isn't necessary?

 

[handy]

jesus didnt baptise now did he surely he would have if that was needed.

John 4:1-2 "Therefore when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John (although Jesus Himself was not baptizing, but His disciples were)"

Same as with Paul...Just because Jesus didn't personally, physically baptize people Himself doesn't mean that He doesn't want us to be baptized...He commanded his disciples to baptize.

He also commanded us to do so as well, remember:

"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.â€

 

[Webb]

Jason, in repliy to your post #14, read your Bible carefully and find that NO delay is ever mentioned in performing the act of baptism, begining with Acts 2: "THEN they that gladly recieved his word were baptized: and THE SAME DAY there were added unto them about three thousand souls." (emp. mine, Webb). Check it all out! Why the "post haste" if baptism is not important? Of course, Satan would have you delay, or say its not important etc.. Eternity is at stake man!!

 

[reba]

John 4:1-2 "Therefore when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John (although Jesus Himself was not baptizing, but His disciples were)"

Same as with Paul...Just because Jesus didn't personally, physically baptize people Himself doesn't mean that He doesn't want us to be baptized...He commanded his disciples to baptize.

He also commanded us to do so as well, remember:

"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.â€

Christians battle so much if Jesus had done the baptizing folks today would say we dont have too because Jesus isn't here to do it!

Sprinkled, immersed , what phraseology, in the river, in a baptismal, what age, how soon , as a family the silly arguments go on and on.

 

[Webb]

Yes Reba it is silly and the devil would have it so, AND only because God has said baptism is by immersion and for the remission of sins. The devil would have that belittled and disobeyed, no strange wonder about that, now, is it???

 

[Grubal Muruch]

Water can not do, what it took "blood' to wash away...