Is Baptism necessary for Salvation?

[donadams]

That could be a general figure of speech for all the trials and tribulations we must endure, but also the final test of our work.

Now if anyone builds on this foundation with gold, silver, precious stones, wood, hay, straw, each one’s work will become clear; for the Day will declare it, because it will be revealed by fire; and the fire will test each one’s work, of what sort it is. If anyone’s work which he has built on it endures, he will receive a reward. If anyone’s work is burned, he will suffer loss; but he himself will be saved, yet so as through fire. (1 Cor. 3:12-15)

No far more powerful than that
Ez36:25-27
25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.

26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.

27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do them.

Rom 5:5 And hope maketh not ashamed; because the love of God is shed abroad in our hearts by the Holy Ghost which is given unto us.

The light of truth! The fire of divine love, as represented by the tongues of fire at Pentecost

Thks

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

The light of truth! The fire of divine love, as represented by the tongues of fire at Pentecost

I wouldn't put everything under the overarching unbrella of "love". God hates sin as much as he loves sinners, fire as a heavenly element often symbolizes divine judgement, for God himself is an "all consuming fire". In one of the bowl judgements, all who have taken the mark of the beast are specifically targeted and scorched with fire.

Then the fourth angel poured out his bowl on the sun, and power was given to him to scorch men with fire. And men were scorched with great heat, and they blasphemed the name of God who has power over these plagues; and they did not repent and give Him glory. (Rev. 16:8-9)

 

[Hopeful 2]

I do think that it is significant that actual names are used. No other parable has ever done this.

Why then, wasn't the rich man named ?

Don't want to take this thread there, but it is part of the bigger context of this discussion, that is "hades", had the "paradise" side,

Hades, with a paradise side...can't say I ever heard that before.

otherwise known as "Abraham's bosom" and the holding cell side for non believers. Unbelievers today are still sent there. Waiting for the great white thrown judgment. It's not hell.

"Flames of torment", sounds like hell. (Luke 16:24)

I know the 'KJV onlyism' doesn't like to hear that. Don't know if you are or not, just saying...I believe it was a translation error in the KJV in many places.
Dave

What was the point of the story/parable ?
Wasn't it that men have only one chance at salvation ?
One life time to convert ?

I agree, lets not derail the thread.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Baptized with what? By who?

As Jesus had yet to depart so He could send back the gift of the Holy Ghost, water baptism would be the gist of Mark's baptism.
None of the apostles knew of a baptism of the Holy Spirit yet.
Even they had not been baptized that way.

Your POV is contrary to Matt. 3:11 - “indeed I (John the Baptist) baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and Fire.”

Though Jesus adds two more baptisms, He never deletes what is already in place.
In fact, He commands the apostles to baptize, in the end of both Matt. and Luke.
Men use water, in Jesus' name for the remission of past sins.
No man can be commanded to baptize with the Holy Spirit.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

As Jesus had yet to depart so He could send back the gift of the Holy Ghost, water baptism would be the gist of Mark's baptism.
None of the apostles knew of a baptism of the Holy Spirit yet.
Even they had not been baptized that way.

Water baptism is not sufficient, it's a baptism of repentance in John the Baptist's name. The baptism of salvation requires the Holy Spirit. Jesus was most postively taking about baptism of the Holy Spirit, not water.

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. (Matt. 28:13)

Though Jesus adds two more baptisms, He never deletes what is already in place.
In fact, He commands the apostles to baptize, in the end of both Matt. and Luke.
Men use water, in Jesus' name for the remission of past sins.
No man can be commanded to baptize with the Holy Spirit.

Mark's account of the great commission doesn't contradict Matthew's. Regardless of the apostles' understanding, they were commissioned to baptize in the name of the holy trinity, which includes the Holy Spirit. Paul faithfully performed it in the passage of Acts 19:1-7 below. None of those men were truly saved until Paul baptized them with the Holy Spirit.

And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”
So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.”
And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?”
So they said, “Into John’s baptism.”
Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.”
When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. Now the men were about twelve in all. (Acts 19:1-7)

 

[Hopeful 2]

Water baptism is not sufficient, it's a baptism of repentance in John the Baptist's name.

Where did you get the idea that it was in John's name ?

The baptism of salvation requires the Holy Spirit. Jesus was most postively taking about baptism of the Holy Spirit, not water.

As per Peter in Acts 2:38, the gift of the Holy Ghost follows a true repentance from sin and baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sin.
Jesus never commanded men to baptize with a gift only God can give.

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. (Matt. 28:13)

Jesus never commanded men to baptize with a gift only God can give.

Mark's account of the great commission doesn't contradict Matthew's. Regardless of the apostles' understanding, they were commissioned to baptize in the name of the holy trinity, which includes the Holy Spirit.

"In the name of" and in the Spirit itself are two different things.

Paul faithfully performed it in the passage of Acts 19:1-7 below.
When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. Now the men were about twelve in all. (Acts 19:1-7)

Two events occurred there.
Paul baptized them in the name of the Lord Jesus, using water, and then laid hands on them, bridging the gap between God to man through Paul.
Two different baptisms occurred in Acts 19.

None of those men were truly saved until Paul baptized them with the Holy Spirit.

I agree.
And even then, they must endure faithfully until the end, to be saved.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

Where did you get the idea that it was in John's name ?

"And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?”
So they said, “Into John’s baptism.”

Jesus never commanded men to baptize with a gift only God can give.

Then why did he say that, and why did Paul do that?

 

[Hopeful 2]

"And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?”
So they said, “Into John’s baptism.”

That is different than "in John's name".
Besides, what power was there in John's name ?

Then why did he say that,

Who say 'that' ?
Say what ?

and why did Paul do that?

After the twelve were baptized into Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, (Rom 6:3-7), Paul must have felt it necessary to manifest that, through the laying on of hands, the gift of the Holy Ghost could be transferred.
Where or how he learned that, is not written about.

The doctrine of the laying on of hands is mentioned in Heb.6, but not in depth.

 

[Carry_Your_Name]

"In the name of" and in the Spirit itself are two different things.

How different, and what's the point of arguing these semantics?

Two events occurred there.
Paul baptized them in the name of the Lord Jesus, using water, and then laid hands on them, bridging the gap between God to man through Paul.
Two different baptisms occurred in Acts 19.

Then why didn't the Holy Spirit descend upon them the first time when they were baptized in John's baptism? What makes Paul's different?

That is different than "in John's name".

How different? These disciples had never heard of the Holy Spirit, all they'd known and experienced was John's baptism.

Besides, what power was there in John's name ?

The power of repentance, as John called upon the Pharisees in Matthew 3.

Who say 'that' ?
Say what ?

To baptize in the name of the holy trinity.

After the twelve were baptized into Christ's death, burial, and resurrection, (Rom 6:3-7), Paul must have felt it necessary to manifest that, through the laying on of hands, the gift of the Holy Ghost could be transferred.
Where or how he learned that, is not written about.

The doctrine of the laying on of hands is mentioned in Heb.6, but not in depth.

Or he just did exactly what Jesus commissioned the apostles to do, it's the same as the baptism of the holy spirit in Acts 8:14-17. and please notice that there was no water baptism, only laying of hands by Peter and John.

Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. (Acts 8:14-17)

 

[Corinth77777]

Water baptism is not sufficient, it's a baptism of

repentance in John the Baptist's name.

Hi I missed the conversation before but looking at what you wrote you do sound like you know what you are speaking about.

Maybe you can help me to understand better.
I noted in earlier post that the poet of Ancient times in his writing may have defined the meaning of Baptism, as to Identify with.

so I am not sure how they broke up bapto and baptisma but the first meaning to dip, while the second to immerse.

Immerse takes on a different process and effect - forthwith a permanent change.

As I wrote earlier I got water Baptize and nothing happen to me.
But later as I did repent of sins and walked doing things unto God and not unto men. He revived me with peace and Joy and I knew my sins were forgiven.

So while I am with you that Identification with Life is important through being immersed in the presence of God as Jesus when He came out the water was Identified by and with God- seeing His father announced: this is my son in whom I am well pleased,

It still happened through water.
While my baptism of awakening to life was through faith, that does not mean that also by faith God could not have used water to cleanse people. For It was something He said to the people in the Old who were perishing that if they looked up to the snake they would stop perishing. Numbers 21:9

But looking at what Happened to Jesus the heavens opened. If im not mistaken He was endowed with power to work the works of the kingdom.

Rather Jesus was demonstrating life under the heavens, the rule of God vs life in the flesh it seemed to be the presence of God was surrounding Him. So it may just be the ultimate baptism is immersed in the presence of God.

Correct me where you think I've strayed.

The baptism of salvation requires the Holy Spirit. Jesus was most postively taking about baptism of the Holy Spirit, not water.

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. (Matt. 28:13)


Mark's account of the great commission doesn't contradict Matthew's. Regardless of the apostles' understanding, they were commissioned to baptize in the name of the holy trinity, which includes the Holy Spirit. Paul faithfully performed it in the passage of Acts 19:1-7 below. None of those men were truly saved until Paul baptized them with the Holy Spirit.

And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”
So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.”
And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?”
So they said, “Into John’s baptism.”
Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.”
When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. Now the men were about twelve in all. (Acts 19:1-7)

 

[Dave...]

Please explain why mk 16:16 say faith and baptism

Thks

Even if it was speaking of water baptism, it does not prove water baptism saves. It's just part of the process of new believers to publicly claim their faith. I would sight the same verse as proof of the opposite. It only says one must not believe to be condemned. Why doesn't it say 'one who does not believe and is not baptized'? Keep in mind also that there are some who question whether or not the end of the book of Mark was added at a later date. I would not build doctrines from those passages, especially if they contradict the rest of the Bible.

Dave

 

[Dave...]

Jn 3:5
Whats the water for?

Jn 3:5 cannot enter the kingdom until born into it by baptism
Born again or baptismal regeneration


Thks

Keep in mind the context. In verse 18 of that same chapter, no mention is made of baptism with regards to salvation.

18 He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

We are saved by grace, through faith, in Jesus. The text is pretty clear about this many times.

 

[Dave...]

Acts 22:16 baptism

Thks

Read it like this

16 And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized,

and

wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.'

According to those read and write the original languages, this is the correct way to read this verse. "Wash away your sins" is connected to "calling on the name of the Lord.".

If also fits with the rest of scripture

Dave

 

[Hopeful 2]

How different, and what's the point of arguing these semantics?

You really can't see a difference between "in the name of", and "in" ?

Then why didn't the Holy Spirit descend upon them the first time when they were baptized in John's baptism? What makes Paul's different?

John's was only unto repentance.
Paul's is in the name of Jesus Christ, and actually into Jesus Christ, His death, burial, and resurrection. (Rom 6:3-6)
It provides for the rebirth of the repentant. (Rom 6:4)
And the destruction of the old man. (Rom 6:6)

How different?

For starters, nobody baptized in John's name.

These disciples had never heard of the Holy Spirit, all they'd known and experienced was John's baptism.

That being said, those disciples had never been "immersed" into Christ.
They had ever been "immersed" into His death, burial, or resurrection.
They had never had the old man crucified and been raised with Christ to walk in newness of life.

The power of repentance, as John called upon the Pharisees in Matthew 3.

John didn't baptize using his own name.

To baptize in the name of the holy trinity.

It wasn't until after Jesus' resurrection that one could be baptized using Jesus' name, or in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit....which is the same as Jesus' name.

Or he just did exactly what Jesus commissioned the apostles to do,

What Jesus commanded the apostles to do was baptize in His name.
The twelve at Ephesus had not done that until Paul met and baptized them.

it's the same as the baptism of the holy spirit in Acts 8:14-17.

Baptism with water in the name of the Lord precedes the giving of the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:38)

and please notice that there was no water baptism, only laying of hands by Peter and John.
Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. (Acts 8:14-17)

The Samarians had already been baptized with water, in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of past sins, by Philip.

 

[Corinth77777]

How different, and what's the point of arguing these semantics?

Then why didn't the Holy Spirit descend upon them the first time when they were baptized in John's baptism? What makes Paul's different?

How different? These disciples had never heard of the Holy Spirit, all they'd known and experienced was John's baptism.

The power of repentance, as John called upon the Pharisees in Matthew 3.

To baptize in the name of the holy trinity.

Or he just did exactly what Jesus commissioned the apostles to do, it's the same as the baptism of the holy spirit in Acts 8:14-17. and please notice that there was no water baptism, only laying of hands by Peter and John.

Now when the apostles who were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent Peter and John to them, who, when they had come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit. For as yet He had fallen upon none of them. They had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Then they laid hands on them, and they received the Holy Spirit. (Acts 8:14-17)

This was so good I know I have to read it a couple of times to get it down.

I was trying to study 1 Peter 3:21
With so many versions I chose the Net version.
But depending on what version you use one can get so many different interpretations.

But look at this for me please in the Net version..
NETBible: 1 Peter 3:21

NETBible: 1 Peter 3:21

classic.net.bible.org

I don't want read in it my biases...but I do wonder if baptism here means what one is immersed into - for example- life. For recall the passage in Ephesians 2 on being "quickened together with Christ"

So them if baptism takes on the meaning of Identification or union, with the idea to be proven, could that be what baptism means in 1 peter21
Beyond my first thought of how one answers to God through their committment. My second thought is identification by who or what one is immersed into that the process of being immersed is life.



So I hinted of this earlier, saying it is something to look into.

So going to Net translation:


1 In the same way, wives, be subject to your own husbands. Then, even if some are disobedient to the word, they will be won over without a word by the way you live, 2 when they see your pure and reverent coconduct.3 Let your beauty not be external – the braiding of hair and wearing of gold jewelry or fine clothes – 4but the inner person of the heart, the lasting beauty of a gentle and tranquil spirit, which is precious in God’s sisight5  For in the same way the holy women who hoped in God long ago adorned themselves by being subject to their husbands, 6 like Sarah who obeyed Abraham, calling him lord. You become her children when you do what is good and have no fear in doing so. 7 Husbands, in the same way, treat your wives with consideration as the weaker partners and show them honor as fellow heirs of the grace of life. In this way nothing will hinder your prayers.
Suffering for Doing Good
8Finally, all of you be harmonious, sympathetic, affectionate, compassionate, and humble. 9 Do not return evil for evil or insult for insult, but instead bless others because you were called to inherit a blessing. 10 For
the one who wants to love life and see good days must keep his tongue from evil and his lips from uttering deceit.
11And he must turn away from evil and do good;
he must seek peace and pursue it.
12 For the eyes of the Lord are upon the righteous and his ears are open to their prayer.
But the Lord’s face is against those who do evil.
13 For who is going to harm you if you are devoted to what is good? 3:14 But in fact, if you happen to suffer for doing what is right, you are blessed. But do not be terrified of them or be shaken. 15 But set Christ 24 apart as Lord in your hearts and always be ready to give an answer to anyone who asks about the hope you possess. 16 Yet do it with courtesy and respect, keeping a good conscience, so that those who slander your good conduct in Christ may be put to shame when they accuse you. 16For it is better to suffer for doing good, if God wills it, than for doing evil.
18 Because Christ also suffered 31 once for sins,
the just for the unjust,
to bring you to God,
by being put to death in the flesh
but by being made alive in the spirit.
[My notes in yellow]
Was He made alive in the Spirit (as the place)
Or made alive >by< the Spirit
or was His Spirit made Alive?
Because after this statement im seeing prepositional phrases to help explain what type of " Alive" He is speaking about.

Alive then being a place as to person/ place or thing a noun??

19In it
In what? the alive Spirit [Maybe God the Father] he went and preached to the spirits in prison,
20 after they were disobedient long ago when God patiently waited in the days of Noah as an ark was being constructed. In the ark a few, that is eight souls, were delivered through water. 21 And this prefigured baptism,
what was prefigured Jesus identification with God the father??? Seeing all that which is in gray are prepositional.


which now saves you

Look how this says "now" saves
As in continues to save- seeing He was already speaking to those who were called to inherit a blessing.

"Now save", in accordance to how they were previously saved??? VS. Other baptisms under the law.????

– not the washing off of physical dirt
Notes- could the above have been under the law??

but the pledge of a good conscience to God
so here could it be speaking not of our baptism but of
Christ's Identification with the Father. For somewhere it said, and don't quote me: but soon you will know that I am in the father and the Father is in Me.



– through the resurrection of Jesus Christ
So if this above in yellow is correct then its the location of where Jesus is that is our Baptism..whic is Christ's Baptism His place in/with the Father

, 22who went into heaven and is at the right hand of God with angels and authorities and powers subject to him.

We see it explains who He is with

 

[Corinth77777]

I'm thinking that in the name of Jesus Christ means the father, son, and Holyghost. But I'm sure I could learn from this.
For it beggs the question of the difference between Jesus Christ and Christ Jesus.

 

[Hopeful 2]

Keep in mind the context. In verse 18 of that same chapter, no mention is made of baptism with regards to salvation.

18 He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

If they have not been baptized into Him, (Rom 6:3), they can't believe, in Him.
Their belief is from outside of Him !

We are saved by grace, through faith, in Jesus. The text is pretty clear about this many times.

Why not use that faith to have your past sins remitted, at your baptism in v.18's "the name of the Lord" ?

I'm thinking that in the name of Jesus Christ means the father, son, and Holyghost. But I'm sure I could learn from this.
For it beggs the question of the difference between Jesus Christ and Christ Jesus.

They are all One.

 

[Corinth77777]

When Baptism takes on the meaning Identification I believe it may just be talking about the Living God.

For there is one Lord - Jesus
One Faith-Jesus
One Baptism- Jesus

Correct me if Im wrong

That may just be why when He says Baptize them in The name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit that the Name is Lord Jesus

Before Abraham was, I am

1Jesus answered, “Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up again.”

SO YES in my thoughts I believe BAPTISM BY MEANING TO Identify with is necessary
But bapto a temporary dipping without the process of permnant change is not.
For you can go down a dry sinner and come up a wet one. It's all about faith.

 

[donadams]

Even if it was speaking of water baptism, it does not prove water baptism saves. It's just part of the process of new believers to publicly claim their faith. I would sight the same verse as proof of the opposite. It only says one must not believe to be condemned. Why doesn't it say 'one who does not believe and is not baptized'? Keep in mind also that there are some who question whether or not the end of the book of Mark was added at a later date. I would not build doctrines from those passages, especially if they contradict the rest of the Bible.

Dave

Mark 16:16 The requirements for those who are being saved cannot be undone by the requirements for those not being saved! He who believes and is baptized is still required for salvation? Heaven and earth may pass away but my words shall not pass away!

It is Reasonable that if one rejects faith why bother mentioning the second requirement?

It does not say he who believes is saved as you want it to say.

Can one part of a verse erase another?

Are the words of Christ eternal?
Is it the inspired word of God?
The gospel?

So please don’t negate the word of God or the eternal words of Jesus by trying to delete one verse with another.

Thks

 

[donadams]

Keep in mind the context. In verse 18 of that same chapter, no mention is made of baptism with regards to salvation.

18 He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

We are saved by grace, through faith, in Jesus. The text is pretty clear about this many times.

Same as Jn 3:16 but that not a simple act of faith but everything we must believe including baptism

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