Do you haft to be baptized?

[Webb]

Hi ToverT

Not sure I understand what you are saying. Probably just me as I'm thick headed.

 

[Asyncritus]

Mat 5:37 But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil.

Joh 6:56 He that eateth my flesh, and drinketh my blood, dwelleth in me, and I in him.


Did he mean just what He said in Mat 5 :37?

Did he mean just what He said in John 6:56

Some things are symbolic some are not

Reba,

You're right. Some things are symbolic. Like baptism.

What does it symbolise?

Here's the answer:

3 Or are ye ignorant that all we who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?
4 We were buried therefore with him through baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life.
5 For if we have become united with him by the likeness of his death, we shall be also by the likeness of his resurrection;

That's Romans 6, which you might like to look at.

You might like to remember that the symbolic ALWAYS follows the literal.

The death of Christ is literal.

The breaking of bread and drinking of wine is symbolic.

The death and resurrection of Christ is literal.

The burying in baptism and rising out of the water is symbolic.

Don't confuse the two things.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Has anyone considered that the 1 baptism spoken of is plainly and simply a reference to being "baptized" into Christ as opposed to being baptized, added to, or being placed under the authority of anything but The Christ?

Yes. I shared this very thing in another forum.

 

[Asyncritus]

Has anyone considered that the 1 baptism spoken of is plainly and simply a reference to being "baptized" into Christ as opposed to being baptized, added to, or being placed under the authority of anything but The Christ?

:o 2:dunno

I don't get it.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

:o 2:dunno

I don't get it.

There was a problem with divisions in the early church. Baptism in the first century meant much, much more than what it means now. Back then you were baptized and identified with a particular teacher (example: John's baptism, etc.) and showed yourself to be a disciple of theirs through that baptism. But Paul explains in 1 Corinthians 1 that there is no other name into which the body of Christ has been baptized into. We all identify with and belong to the one Christ. 'One baptism' in scripture is a description of this singularity, not a teaching moment to tell us there is only one baptism, as so many erroneously think that means.

Bible interpreting Bible...that's easily the greatest source of knowledge and insight into the truths of God. Read 1 Corinthians 1.

 

[Asyncritus]

There was a problem with divisions in the early church. Baptism in the first century meant much, much more than what it means now.

Don't you think that the church nowadays should place more emphasis on baptism than it does?

Back then you were baptized and identified with a particular teacher (example: John's baptism, etc.) and showed yourself to be a disciple of theirs through that baptism.

That is correct. John's disciples were baptized by him. Jesus' disciples were also baptized by Him:

Jn 4.1 ¶ 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,)

Quite incidentally, do you notice that Jesus did NOT baptize with the Holy Spirit in Jn 4?

But Paul explains in 1 Corinthians 1 that there is no other name into which the body of Christ has been baptized into. We all identify with and belong to the one Christ. 'One baptism' in scripture is a description of this singularity, not a teaching moment to tell us there is only one baptism, as so many erroneously think that means.

So you think that ALL should/must be baptized into Christ, otherwise we do not identify with or belong to Christ?

As Paul says, as many of us as have been baptised into Christ have put on Christ. (Rom 6).

If we haven't been baptized into Christ, we HAVE NOT put on Christ. We are outside of Him, 12 That at that time ye were without [= outside of] Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
(Eph 4.12)

You know, JB that is one frightfully frightening list?

Not being baptized means you are

1 Outside Christ

2 Aliens from the commonwealth of Israel

3 Strangers from the covenants of Promise

4 Having no hope

5 Without God in the world.

All these guys arguing against water baptism should tremble at that list, especially no 5 - WITHOUT GOD in the world.

So get to it, chaps.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Don't you think that the church nowadays should place more emphasis on baptism than it does?

I only know of a couple of denoms that don't baptize. For the rest of us, no, there is no need for more emphasis on it. We do it, and that is enough. I would say some need to deemphasize it. Some seem to think it's the epitome of correct doctrine...as if correct doctrine is the 'believing' that saves anybody anyway. There is a manifestation of believing that matters, and it is head and shoulders above the obedience of water baptism.

So you think that ALL should/must be baptized into Christ, otherwise we do not identify with or belong to Christ?

If you belong to Christ, you have to belong to Christ through the Holy Spirit. It's just that, Biblically, some already belong to him through the Holy Spirit before they get water baptized. It's scriptural and we need to accept that.

There's way more important things in the kingdom than being told when you received the Holy Spirit...way more important things. Similar to circumcision, if a person is baptized but they do not live according to the fruit of the Spirit they have become as if they are not baptized. Some in the church put too much emphasis on baptism. To them baptism is to the Christian church what circumcision was to the Jews.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

As Paul says, as many of us as have been baptised into Christ have put on Christ. (Rom 6).

If we haven't been baptized into Christ, we HAVE NOT put on Christ. We are outside of Him

And for me and countless others in the church this means having been baptized into Christ by the Spirit before water baptism. If it happened for you or anyone else at your water baptism, then great.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

You know, JB that is one frightfully frightening list?

Not being baptized means you are

1 Outside Christ

2 Aliens from the commonwealth of Israel

3 Strangers from the covenants of Promise

4 Having no hope

5 Without God in the world.

All these guys arguing against water baptism should tremble at that list, especially no 5 - WITHOUT GOD in the world.

So get to it, chaps.

It is imperative that you be baptized into Christ through the Holy Spirit. Just don't be terribly surprised when someone receives the Holy Spirit before their water baptism, that's all.

 

[TRUTH over TRADITION]

:o 2:dunno

I don't get it.

Has anyone considered that the 1 baptism spoken of is plainly and simply a reference to being "baptized" into Christ as opposed to being baptized, added to, or being placed under the authority of anything but The Christ?

I was suggesting that Paul was not referring to the method of baptism at all in Ephesians four. What instead was being referenced is the "what" that baptism put one into at that time, namely the Christ.
Paul was saying that there was one faith that mattered (faith in Jesus as the Christ and the hope that Jesus promised), one church or better yet, Ekklesia (Christ's called out assembly), and one baptism (baptism = that which adds one to the number) that had any relavence to the hope the believers had in them.
Any other faith (trusting in the flesh), group (Pharissee, Jew, etc.), or entity one was baptised into was ultimately a waste of time and useless.

That still leaves us to ask this question:
How was one baptized into Christ?

According to Paul and the othe NT writers like Luke it appears that water baptism was indeed the mechanism employed to accomplish the task.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

That still leaves us to ask this question:
How was one baptized into Christ?

According to Paul and the othe NT writers like Luke it appears that water baptism was indeed the mechanism employed to accomplish the task.

Yes, but not as a rule...which some insist it was, but which plain scripture shows us was not.

 

[Asyncritus]

Yes, but not as a rule...which some insist it was, but which plain scripture shows us was not.

Sorry JB, plain scripture says exactly the opposite. I listed about 40 NT passages which show that water baptism was the thing, and I won't re-list them here.

ToT

According to Paul and the othe NT writers like Luke it appears that water baptism was indeed the mechanism employed to accomplish the task.

That's about as correct a statement as one could wish.

BTW JB, what about this fire thing I asked you about a while ago? Jesus was to baptise with the HSp and with fire, If you received the HSp, then what about the fire?

 

[Jethro Bodine]

Sorry JB, plain scripture says exactly the opposite. I listed about 40 NT passages which show that water baptism was the thing, and I won't re-list them here.

And I and others have showed you in the Bible that receiving the Holy Spirit through water baptism is not the hard and fast rule some insist the Bible says it is. We see this is true in the church even to this day.

What this means is you can preach water baptism for the forgiveness of sins, but that you must leave room for God to save people before their water baptism. This is so simple, but some make it so complicated, and for reasons I suggest are not very useful or practical.

BTW JB, what about this fire thing I asked you about a while ago? Jesus was to baptise with the HSp and with fire, If you received the HSp, then what about the fire?

I already told you it was with fire.

A few months later I saw the Holy Spirit descend on a congregation. It took me prolly 15 years or more after that to make the connection with what I saw that day and what happened on the Day of Pentecost.


But I told you the Biblical evidence I had that confirmed my salvation and the receiving of the Holy Spirit before my water baptism was the testimony of the Spirit himself within me confirming my adoption as a son of God. It's interesting how people say one can not have that testimony and that it is our obedience that confirms the presence of the Spirit, yet the Bible plainly speaks about it. Don't you have that testimony?

"15...you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.” 16 The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children." (Romans 8:15-16) (emphasis mine)

I had this testimony before my water baptism. Before I even knew this scripture, and the story of Cornelius existed. And a testimony that did not change after I was water baptized so as to suggest the first experience with the testimony of the Spirit in sonship was not genuine.

 

[Asyncritus]

I already told you it was with fire.

I'm still no wiser. What does that mean?

 

[Asyncritus]

"15...you received the Spirit of sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.†16 The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children." (Romans 8:15-16) (emphasis mine)

I'm still a little surprised that you keep quoting this verse.

You do know, don't you, that this letter was written to water-baptised believers as ch 6 shows very clearly?

 

[francisdesales]

I'm still no wiser. What does that mean?

Let me know when he tells you - I asked the same question...

Regards

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I'm still no wiser. What does that mean?

Having the Holy Spirit is not just an intellectual truth as so many in the church only know it to be because that is what they are taught. The Holy Spirit is at times like fire inside of you. His presence manifests like fire within.

I'm guessing you have never had this experience, so you are going to be tempted to trash the experience, even though Jesus plainly said he would baptize with the Holy Spirit and fire. For those of us who have experienced it we know exactly what he was talking about.

 

[Jethro Bodine]

I'm still a little surprised that you keep quoting this verse.

You do know, don't you, that this letter was written to water-baptised believers as ch 6 shows very clearly?

And don't you know that you are talking to a baptized church?

What sense does it make to belabor the point that you have to be water baptized to have the Holy Spirit and be saved to an already baptized church? It is one of the most meaningless and contentious arguments I've ever heard.

You do know, don't you, that this letter was written to water-baptised believers as ch 6 shows very clearly?

The suggestion being, you can only have the testimony of the Spirit inside of you after being water baptized. But I explained to you that the testimony of the Spirit that I am a son of God that I now have in me after my water baptism is the same testimony I had before my water baptism.

If you don't know this testimony for yourself you're going to have a hard time understanding it and will want to try to tear it down. But, as I've shown you, receiving the Holy Spirit before water baptism, and having the personal testimony of the Holy Spirit that you are a son of God are both solid Biblical facts (and that the Holy Spirit can be like fire). There is no way to honestly discredit those things in a person's life. I'm water baptized, so why would you want to anyway? Hopefully, by now you can see this is not about not obeying the command to water baptized. It's about letting God do what God wants to do without the interference of our misguided and uneducated doctrines about baptism that add nothing to the kingdom of God.

 

[Asyncritus]

And don't you know that you are talking to a baptized church?

Erm... no, I don't.

There is no way to honestly discredit those things in a person's life. I'm water baptized, so why would you want to anyway? Hopefully, by now you can see this is not about not obeying the command to water baptized. It's about letting God do what God wants to do without the interference of our misguided and uneducated doctrines about baptism that add nothing to the kingdom of God.

I was on about being water-baptised. I'm happy to hear that you are, but there are a lot of readers who aren't, and may not be simply because of this doctrine you teach.

To them, I would say, make sure that you are water baptised - totally immersed - instead of being sprinkled when you were a baby.

 

[Asyncritus]

Having the Holy Spirit is not just an intellectual truth as so many in the church only know it to be because that is what they are taught. The Holy Spirit is at times like fire inside of you. His presence manifests like fire within.

I'd like to tell you a little story, JB.

Two Mormons came to my house, and claimed to have the holy spirit within them.

I said, How do you know?

They said: 'by this burning feeling in mah heart when ah pray'.

Is that what you mean?