Reasons Why Water Baptism is not for today

[Tomlane]

What's more needs to be said??? I posted several passages showing that there is zero reason to believe that water baptism isn't for Christians and I received zero responses. There is still much more to be said.

Sorry Free, I either got busy with something or forgot what you posted. Could you be kind enough to find them and enter them here and I'll I promise I'll my best to address them.

Again I'm sorry I didn't catch you. Sometimes I have to neglect my work since I get so many replies and I try to answer as much as I can with scripture and keep a balance with work and here. .

Thanks, Tomlane

 

[Free]

From the top of page 5:

Here is why baptism is for today:

John 4:1-2, “1 Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John 2 (although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples)â€Â

Matt 28:19, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,â€Â

First we see that Jesus' disciples were baptizing people and then we see that Jesus commands his disciples to continue doing it in making disciples of all nations.

Acts 10:47-48, “47 Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have? 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.â€Â

Acts 2:38-41, “38 And Peter said to them, Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself. 40 And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, Save yourselves from this crooked generation. 41 So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.â€Â

Acts 8:12-16, “12 But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. 13 Even Simon himself believed, and after being baptized he continued with Philip. And seeing signs and great miracles performed, he was amazed.
14 Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, 15 who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.â€Â

Acts 8:35-38, “35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning with this Scripture he told him the good news about Jesus. 36 And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized? 38 And he commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him.â€Â

Acts 16:13-15, 30-33, “13 And on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate to the riverside, where we supposed there was a place of prayer, and we sat down and spoke to the women who had come together. 14 One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul. 15 And after she was baptized, and her household as well, she urged us, saying, If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay. And she prevailed upon us.â€Â

30 Then he brought them out and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household. 32 And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family.

Here we see several instances of the Apostles carrying out the command of Christ.

1 Cor 1:13-17, “13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. 16 (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.)
17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.â€Â

Additional evidence that the Apostles continued to baptize believers.

Rom 6:3-4, “3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.â€Â

Col 2:12, “12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.â€Â

In both of these instances Paul uses the analogy of Jesus' death and resurrection for being baptized into Christ. This supports immersion in water.

1Pet 3:20-21, “20 because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.
21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,â€Â

A much more clear analogy referencing baptism and water.


The natural progression is clear--Jesus was baptized, the disciples baptized people, Christ then commanded the disciples to go to all the nations and baptize, and the disciples then continued to baptize both Jews and Gentiles. Baptism was a continuous practice that showed no signs of ceasing since Jesus commanded it. It is something that all believers should do, first and foremost because it is a command of Christ for those who are his disciples.

 

[Tomlane]

Hi Francis, here we go again, lol. You stated:

Tom, that doesn't mean there was only one baptism ever done and all water baptisms from all time are exactly the same...

It means when Ephesians was written, there was only ONE ACCEPTABLE CHRISTIAN BAPTISM. By water and the Spirit - one baptism that visibly portrayed what the Spirit did in the supernatural world. THAT is why we use water, rather than motor oil to baptize.

Obviously, your defense cannot stand, because throughout time, there were many types of baptisms, even during the days following the coming of the Spirit. There was the baptism of John, there was baptisms in only the name of Jesus, and there were baptisms done in the name of the Trinity. In addition, other religions practiced ritual washings, which were not the same as even John's water-only baptism.

Francis correct me if I'm wrong but I get the impression you see water baptism and spiritual baptism as part A and part B of the same baptism. If this is true then we are diffidently on opposite ends of the spectrum. For the bible distinctly states John's water as baptism of repentance.

The verse of scripture I'm going to give, describes 3 separate baptisms.

Matthew 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

Also John's baptism was never connected to salvation and it was also a Jewish baptism for Jews only. Seeing it otherwise is diffidently wrongly dividing the subject of baptism unless you can give scripture to support to your position which you haven't done yet Francis. :naughty

No one would deny that... The problem is that because you have a thought, you automatically presume it is God's Spirit working within you and that you have all understanding. Paul writes on a number of occasions that all Christians are NOT "all-knowing", as some still dine on milk, rather than meat...

This is very clear in the letter to the Hebrews, for example.

Francis, again you have only given your opinion that I automatically presume God's spirit working within me. You for sure don't know wither I assume anything or wither God's spirit has witnessed to my spirit his truth. Also I will be the first to admit I don't have all the answers and never will but what I do know I'm certain of. But I do appreciate where you are coming from since you can't prove your position with scripture.

The good news Francis is when you stated:

Paul writes on a number of occasions that all Christians are NOT "all-knowing", as some still dine on milk, rather than meat...

The reason I agree with you; for I sincerely believe those like yourself that have water on the brain need to be fed with the milk of the word. By the way Francis that is my opinion only just as you take liberty with your opinions about myself. Fair is fair, right Francis?

There was only one acceptable Christian baptism. That is why, when the Apostles discovered that a convert had only received the baptism of John, they were immediately baptized again in water and the Spirit, Christian baptism. It is not because the water was missing, but the Spirit. The same thing when they found that someone was baptized only in the name of Jesus. They were immediately baptized the proper way.

Francis to make any comments on your last statement would be redundant of what we have already covered.

Tom, this rhetoric can backfire on you, because you are indeed a man and have tried to push a particular doctrine, regardless of your idea that "doctrine" is a dirty word. The Scriptures uses "doctrine" in a positive way.

Francis again you have not given any scripture to back up your statements. The only way my rhetoric can backfire on me is if you can give some concrete scriptures to prove me wrong which you haven 't done yet. Most of the scripture you apply to the Church that is Jewish in nature such as John's water which was used to prepare for Christ's promised coming to the Jews as their promised Messiah and you take that as pertaining to the church and I'm not referring to the Catholic Church but to the Church that is Christ's body. No one can be heave out of it {excommunicated} because Christ adds all the members to it Himself. You can't be in it unless He adds you to it.

Acts 2:47 Praising God, and having favour with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.

Again, this can be easily applied to yourself. Bringing up such verses do not show that you are right and everyone else is wrong. Don't you see that? I can use the exact same verses back at you and we would be at an impasse because this proves nothing. ONE of us must be wrong when we contradict each other, and merely SAYING such things doesn't prove anything.

That is why people find such tactics as desperate.

Francis, its not a matter wither I'm right or someone else is right or wrong its a matter for us to rightly divide God's word correctly, that is my only desire and not to win a debate. God is my witness on that on that one.

Also I find it interesting you only quoted scripture when I gave Romans 16:17.

Romans 16:17 ¶Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

You make comments on God's word as is wrong by not tying me in with the scripture. God's word should stand on its own merit without comment as He should be our finial authority, not some sectarian doctrine or cannon.

Water baptism is not part of the Law. It is not an ordinance of the Torah. Can you provide an OT verse that has Moses baptizing anyone or commanding that people be baptized?

Francis, I don't know how you or why you included the Torah into this discussion. But you are correct, water baptism was not far back as Moses. I will repeat it again for you Francis, water baptism was given much later then Moses and was given to announce the arrival or coming of Christ as the promised Messiah. Since Christ came many years after Mosses, why would it make any since for God to install water baptism long before it was needed? :bigfrown

Repentence IS salvation! Being freed from sin is the definition of salvation.

Francis I'm glad you brought up repentance for salvation. That is not true and I implore you to give me scripture to that effect.

Repentance means a person has a change of heart and wants to turn away from the sin in their life but it is not salvation. If that were true we could save ourselves an that would be by our own works.

Isaiah 64:6 ¶But we are all as an unclean thing, and all our righteousnesses are as filthy rags; and we all do fade as a leaf; and our iniquities, like the wind, have taken us away.

Since our righteousness such as repentance {self righteousness} is filthy rags being repentant won't save us at all.

Its when we put our faith and Trust in Christ when we are aware of our sin and just for believing God for what Christ has done for us we are given salvation as a free gift just for believing God and let him put us into Christ {spiritual baptism an operation of God}.

Romans 5:15 But not as the offence, so also is the free gift. For if through the offence of one many be dead, much more the grace of God, and the gift by grace, which is by one man, Jesus Christ, hath abounded unto many.
Romans 5:16 And not as it was by one that sinned, so is the gift: for the judgment was by one to condemnation, but the free gift is of many offences unto justification.
Romans 5:18 Therefore as by the offence of one judgment came upon all men to condemnation; even so by the righteousness of one the free gift came upon all men unto justification of life.


Colossians 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
13 ¶And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

I hope that will be a help to you Francis, I sure will pray that it will someday.

And by water. Two elements of the same event.

Again Francis thank you again for your opinion since you didn't include any scripture to prove your point. I also showed you three different baptisms in Matthew 3:11.

The immersion is done in water to show what happens in the spiritual realm.

Francis again your opinion is not backed up with any scripture.

Christ destroyed the dividing wall that separates the two.

Francis for once we agree!

Ephesians 2:15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

Francis this verse should prove to you that water baptism is history because it being an ordinance and all ordinances were abolished should tell you it is not for believers in this present time.

Where does the bible say that we worship in spirit ONLY??? Stop adding to God's Word so that you can try to score some debate points.

That's an easy one Francis. By the way, I will state it again I'm not here to gain debate points as I mentioned before. If you are here for that reason then God's truth will escape you.

Here is the proof provided you want to accept it about worshiping in spirit.

John 4:24 God is a Spirit: and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth.

Also if we worship other then in spirit and truth which would have to agree with God's word then it is sin, such as doing one's own good works for salvation. Doing good works for salvation such a repentance would be sin because that is not in God's word.

Romans 14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

And flesh died on the cross, which saves us spiritually. If flesh is of no use, then are you saying Christ's death was of no use???

That is not what the verse is saying at all. However I know how you came to that conclusion. Christ's death was necessary in God's sight as a sacrifice for our sins because God demands blood and death for sin. So Christ was our substitute for our sins and for the whole world.

2 Corinthians 5:21 For he hath made him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

Christian Baptism is not a Jewish ordinance. It is a command by Christ given to the Apostles. I don't know how it can be any plainer than that. Refusal to be baptized as Christ commanded is rejecting Christ, simple as that.

Sorry to disagree with you again Francis for John the Baptist was preaching in the wilderness and doing water baptism before Christ was water baptized or before He had chosen his apostles.

When Christ was water baptized, it was his last act he had to do in order to fulfill all righteousness. Christ couldn't have fulfill all righteousness if it hadn't been an ordinance.

Matthew 3:15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.


Be blessed Francis,

Tomlane

 

[francisdesales]

Francis correct me if I'm wrong but I get the impression you see water baptism and spiritual baptism as part A and part B of the same baptism.

May the Lord be praise. You finally are understanding what I am saying...

If this is true then we are diffidently on opposite ends of the spectrum. For the bible distinctly states John's water as baptism of repentance.

OOPS. Easy come, easy go.

I am not talking about John's Baptism, for about the tenth time, but Jesus' baptism, which includes water AND the Spirit. I am not sure how many times I have had to say this, but Christian baptism is not equal to John's baptism. Christ's baptism is water and the Spirit. It is from above. We are born from above. This birth from above = water AND Spirit.

Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Unless a man is born of water and [of] the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God John 3:5

The verse of scripture I'm going to give, describes 3 separate baptisms.

Red herrings, so I won't bother with them...

Francis, again you have only given your opinion that I automatically presume God's spirit working within me. You for sure don't know wither I assume anything or wither God's spirit has witnessed to my spirit his truth. Also I will be the first to admit I don't have all the answers and never will but what I do know I'm certain of. But I do appreciate where you are coming from since you can't prove your position with scripture.

I have. And it is only by your apparent obstinantcy that you cannot understand my point. For example, I have repeated OVER AND OVER that John's Baptism is different and inferior to Christian water baptisms, and you CONTINUE to post, as above, your red herrings about John's baptism is for repentance only.

Honestly. WHY are you babbling about John's baptisms??? We aren't talking about John's baptisms... Is Jesus' water baptisms that He commanded equal to John's??? Can you give ME some Scriptures that tell me that Christian water baptisms are mere ordinances, equal to John's ordinal baptisms???

No, you prefer to pretend you don't have a clue and continue to post red herrings. You prefer to complain that I do not cut and paste all my past arguments from Scriptures in each of my posts - while simultaneously complaining that my posts are too long...

It is much easier to close your ears to the TRUTH when it requires a transformation, a change, doesn't it...

I have ventured to write over and over to you again, often repeating the same things and the same Scriptures, but it just goes in one ear and out the other. You complain about the length of my posts, and then complain that I don't back up what I am saying EACH AND EVERY time, although a cursory glance of my past posts will show that I have indeed backed up my position with Scriptures. You are plainly in denial, my friend. If you think I have only been giving you my opinion without citing Scriptures, then you plainly haven't a clue on what we have previously said on the subject. I would urge you to go backwards in this thread and re-read what I wrote before making such bald-faced lies.

The good news Francis is when you stated: "Paul writes on a number of occasions that all Christians are NOT "all-knowing", as some still dine on milk, rather than meat..."

The reason I agree with you; for I sincerely believe those like yourself that have water on the brain need to be fed with the milk of the word. By the way Francis that is my opinion only just as you take liberty with your opinions about myself. Fair is fair, right Francis?

Are you sure you know what Scriptures mean when they speak of such things?

Being fed with "milk" refers to a Christian who is just learning the basics of the faith. Being fed with "meat" refers to more sublime teachings, teachings that go beyond the simple literal sense. It is clear that you have absolutely no support for your "Spirit only" baptisms as a basic teaching of the Chrisitan faith, since nowhere do we find Christians writing about it, either within Scriptures or outside of Scriptures. We have quite a few verse that show the OPPOSITE. It appears, Tom, that it is YOU who need some "milk", since you cannot even get BASIC CHRISTIAN TEACHINGS right.

Tom, this rhetoric can backfire on you, because you are indeed a man and have tried to push a particular doctrine, regardless of your idea that "doctrine" is a dirty word. The Scriptures uses "doctrine" in a positive way.

The only way my rhetoric can backfire on me is if you can give some concrete scriptures to prove me wrong which you haven 't done yet.

Again, you misunderstand the point your interlocutor makes. Slow down and take a deep breath. Do what it is you do when you need to try to think about what someone says to you...

Trying to twist Paul's exhortations to your out-of-context insults is not the intent of Scriptures.

For example, when you make a debate point, and then I disagree - you respond with:

For if ye live after the flesh, ye shall die: Romans 8:13

You basically are twisting Paul's words to say that I personally will die because I "follow the flesh and disagree with your false teachings". This is a childish game that, if I was so childish, I could turn on you, as well. I easily could say the same thing to you, which is akin to saying "I know you are but what am I" and you repeating it to me.

Tom, I am an adult, not a child, so I am not going to stoop to this level, since it doesn't advance our conversation, NOR is it God's intent that His Word be used as a hammer to make such childish accusations to anyone who disagrees with THEIR interpretations of Scriptures.

Most of the scripture you apply to the Church that is Jewish in nature such as John's water which was used to prepare for Christ's promised coming to the Jews as their promised Messiah and you take that as pertaining to the church and I'm not referring to the Catholic Church but to the Church that is Christ's body. No one can be heave out of it {excommunicated} because Christ adds all the members to it Himself. You can't be in it unless He adds you to it.

Lots of strange ideas here. First, the Church "Jewish in nature"? How is the Church "Jewish in nature"? Was there a time where Jesus had His Church refrain from eating pork or washing of dishes before eathing? What about circumcision? And was there a time where the Church was meant for ONLY Jews??? Once Christ rose from the dead and He commanded His Church to go into the world and baptize, Christ said to the ENTIRE WORLD!

WHERE does Jesus speak of baptizing people with the baptism of John??? Have you read Acts? Doesn't the Church in each case perform Christian baptism, with water and the Spirit, when a person is found to have not been baptized correctly???

And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples, He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost. And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus. When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Acts 19:1-5

Isn't it obvious that John's Baptism is not the same as Christian baptism? But you continue in your misunderstanding because you do not know the power of the Scriptures nor what it says...

Why? Because you refuse to hear the words of the Church, which Christ instituted for the purpose of continuing His teaching and healing ministry in the world today.

Francis, its not a matter wither I'm right or someone else is right or wrong its a matter for us to rightly divide God's word correctly, that is my only desire and not to win a debate. God is my witness on that on that one.

That says it all. You divide God's Word to make it say what YOU want it to say, rather than hearing what God has to say about it through His teaching Church. ANYONE can twist and divide God's Word to have it say something else. This is why so many people make a shipwreck of their faith. They disregard what has been taught..

Holding faith, and a good conscience; which some having put away concerning faith have made shipwreck: Of whom is Hymenaeus and Alexander; whom I have delivered unto Satan, that they may learn not to blaspheme. 1 Tim 1:19-20

Francis, I don't know how you or why you included the Torah into this discussion.

Because you insist that ALL water baptisms are part of the Jewish Law. Anyone who knows about the Jewish Law knows that it can be found in the commands given by God to Moses in the Torah, the first five books of the Bible. We don't find any mention about "baptisms of repentance" in the Law, so that makes your insinuations false.

John's baptisms were not part of the Jewish Law. They were PREPARATORY for the coming of the Christ. Now, ask yourself why WATER BAPTISMS prepare for the coming of Christ???

Because it is by water and the Spirit that our rebirth comes through.

Francis I'm glad you brought up repentance for salvation. That is not true and I implore you to give me scripture to that effect.

Salvation = the forgiveness of sins. Without repentance, there is no salvation.

As to salvation being the forgiveness of sins:

Thou, child {John the Baptist}, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest: for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare his ways; To give knowledge of salvation unto his people by the remission of their sins Luke 1:77

Why did Jesus come? To save us from our sins. Pretty clear.

I don't see how your verses do anything but prove my point...

Colossians 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

Forgiven you all trespasses - we are saved by the forgiveness of sins.

And by water. Two elements of the same event.

Again Francis thank you again for your opinion since you didn't include any scripture to prove your point. I also showed you three different baptisms in Matthew 3:11.

See above on John 3:5, cited numerous times before, and the red herring discussions of yours on John's baptisms being different than Christian baptisms...

The immersion is done in water to show what happens in the spiritual realm.

Francis again your opinion is not backed up with any scripture.

I have quoted from Acts quite enough, thank you for your opinions.

Francis this verse should prove to you that water baptism is history because it being an ordinance and all ordinances were abolished should tell you it is not for believers in this present time.

Another Red Herring. Christian baptism is not an ordinance.

Or do you claim that Jesus' baptisms are the same as John's?

I will leave you with that question you have yet to answer from the first page of this thread. Answer me that, if you can.

Regards

 

[A-Christian]

It is much easier to close your ears to the TRUTH when it requires a transformation, a change, doesn't it...

And there you have it. People should ponder this statement made by Francisdesales. A person should ask themselves if "their truth" is in harmony with the views of the earliest Christians. Don't say yes unless you have read the writings of the earliest Christians. Tomlane's views are not in accord with Christian history and even though there is a written history of Francisdesales’ view that spans 2000 years, Tomlane bases his baptism beliefs on "how he deciphers" the scriptures. Such thinking has given the world tens of thousands of Christian denominations; each thinking they are the ones that interpret scripture rightly. It’s even more amazing that this troublesome fact is ignored. It's not hard to see, if you are being honest, that those who deny the teaching authority of the Holy Church of history and have not researched Christian history or even ignore it, could never even know how radical their own “personal truths" really are. When a person limits their understanding of Christianity to personal interpretation of scripture without the guidance of those that gave them that canon of documents, they cheat themselves of more than they can imagine. How can one find the full meaning of truth using the Church's book while closing their ears to the Church? It's obvious that the implications of acceptance are too much for that person to bear.

 

[Tomlane]

Now I understand where you get your two in one doctrine that is in error and that goes for A-Christian as well.

John 3:2  The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
3  Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4  Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
5  Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
6  That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7  Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8  The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.


These references are not talking directly about baptism but about being born again spiritually. Just like it says in verse 6, that which is born of the flesh, {a woman's water breaks} that is the first birth. You can't have a spiritual birth without having a physical birth first.} Look at verse 4 proves that and even Nicodemus understood stood Christ but you two can't seem to. Just as Nicodemus understood a physical birth so he asks, how can a man be born again when He is old and how can he can enter his mother's womb a second time? Again this whole section is about birth not baptism. And Christ answered and said, you have to be born again. Christ goes on to explain in verse 6, that which is born of flesh is flesh and that which is born of the spirit is spirit. Notthing in these verses mentions water baptism but is only speaking of being born again of the spirit.

Its amazing how so many people twist this around to be water baptism. Indeed this is the milk of the word and not the meat at all.

Tomlane

 

[Imagican]

It is much easier to close your ears to the TRUTH when it requires a transformation, a change, doesn't it...

And there you have it. People should ponder this statement made by Francisdesales. A person should ask themselves if "their truth" is in harmony with the views of the earliest Christians. Don't say yes unless you have read the writings of the earliest Christians. Tomlane's views are not in accord with Christian history and even though there is a written history of Francisdesales’ view that spans 2000 years, Tomlane bases his baptism beliefs on "how he deciphers" the scriptures. Such thinking has given the world tens of thousands of Christian denominations; each thinking they are the ones that interpret scripture rightly. It’s even more amazing that this troublesome fact is ignored. It's not hard to see, if you are being honest, that those who deny the teaching authority of the Holy Church of history and have not researched Christian history or even ignore it, could never even know how radical their own “personal truths" really are. When a person limits their understanding of Christianity to personal interpretation of scripture without the guidance of those that gave them that canon of documents, they cheat themselves of more than they can imagine. How can one find the full meaning of truth using the Church's book while closing their ears to the Church? It's obvious that the implications of acceptance are too much for that person to bear.

Since the ONLY true evidence we HAVE concerning the 'first Christians' IS The Word, then it is NOT merely a matter of 'asking oneself' ANYTHING. For if we simply rely on OUR OWN understanding, (that of man's), then we are reliant upon MEN to 'teach us' what we know.

Fortunately for us, God has allowed The Word to be relatively preserved so that IT is our guide into truth and knowledge.

While there ARE many that would choose to follow 'particular interpretations' is TRUTH, that doesn't negate that WE ARE able to discern something 'beyond OUR mere understanding' and through the 'guidance OF The Spirit' be LED in TRUTH.

The allusion to the 'early Christians' is veiled and deceptive. For ALL that we HAVE in reference TO the FIRST TRUE CHRISTIANS is The Word. Man's history is fraught with falsity and therefore of LITTLE value in regards to Spirit. Therefore it IS The Word that holds truth far above that offered by men.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[francisdesales]

Since the ONLY true evidence we HAVE concerning the 'first Christians' IS The Word, then it is NOT merely a matter of 'asking oneself' ANYTHING.

That is patently false. We have LOTS of things concerning the first Christians that are outside of what we NOW call "Sacred Scripture", or, as you term it, "the Word".

We have writings of Christians to other Christians. We have writings of bishops to other communities, in the same vein as Paul. We have archeological evidence of the practices of Christians. We have hostile witnesses (the Roman empire) that details Christian practices - and the Christians who refute them.

To say "the ONLY true evidence we HAVE concerning the "first Christians" is the Word" is false and shows a total avoidance of the truth of the matter.

For if we simply rely on OUR OWN understanding, (that of man's), then we are reliant upon MEN to 'teach us' what we know.

Just as the Jews relied on Moses, right? Just as the Christians relied on Paul and Peter and James? Yes, mere men teaching the doctrines of God.

Fortunately for us, God has allowed The Word to be relatively preserved so that IT is our guide into truth and knowledge.

How do you know that? What circular argument will you rely on, without reference to the Church???

While there ARE many that would choose to follow 'particular interpretations' is TRUTH, that doesn't negate that WE ARE able to discern something 'beyond OUR mere understanding' and through the 'guidance OF The Spirit' be LED in TRUTH.

We can discern God's will for us in our particular lives. THAT is NOT to be equated with knowing the doctrines and teachings of God about Himself or His plan of salvation. Man has ALWAYS relied on other men to teach what God has done in our history. You are confusing discerning God'w will for us in our own personal lives with God infusing within you a degree in Theology...
Not all have been given the gift of interpertation of Scriptures.

The allusion to the 'early Christians' is veiled and deceptive. For ALL that we HAVE in reference TO the FIRST TRUE CHRISTIANS is The Word. Man's history is fraught with falsity and therefore of LITTLE value in regards to Spirit. Therefore it IS The Word that holds truth far above that offered by men.

Your comments are veiled and deceptive, since anyone who has knowledge of early Christianity can vouch for the fact that we have TONS of material from early Christians that is not found in Sacred Scriptures. You just choose to pretend it doesn't exist for your own personal reasons. Remember, the New Testament was not always considered Sacred Scriptures THEMSELVES...

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

Now I understand where you get your two in one doctrine that is in error and that goes for A-Christian as well.

These references are not talking directly about baptism but about being born again spiritually.

We are not "born again" spiritually. The correct interpretation is "born from above". The Greek CAN man either "born again" or "born from above", but the context does not allow the former, as Jesus quickly excludes natural birth when Nicodemus asks that very question.

Just like it says in verse 6, that which is born of the flesh, {a woman's water breaks} that is the first birth.

LOL! Jesus is not so redundant that He has to make mention of our physical birth! Secondly, a woman's water breaking does not "symbolize" our physical birth. The water breaking is NEVER mentioned as a sign of natural birth in Scriptures. That is a contrived attempt to twist Christ's words around. He very clearly ignores your implications by His reaction to Nicodemus.

Ever witness a live birth? The water doesn't break during childbirth, my friend.

There is no "second birth". Jesus is speaking of only ONE birth - a spiritual birth. It is entirely ridiculous to mention that one must be physically born "FIRST"...

Does Jesus ever make such connections to being physically born first before ANYTHING we do?

Does Jesus say "unless you are born physically and repent, you cannot be saved"?
Does Jesus say "Amen, Amen, I say to you, unless you are physically born and eat my flesh, you shall not have life within you"?
Does Jesus say "He who is physically born and perseveres until the end shall be saved"?

What a ridiculously redundant thing to consider. WHO even talks like that?

Do you, at your work, say "Hey, Fred, unless you are physically born and get that report done, we'll be late to give the presentation".
Do you, talking to your child, say "unless you are physically born and eat all your green beans, you are not leaving the dinner table"???

This is about the silliest notion I have heard...

You can't have a spiritual birth without having a physical birth first.} Look at verse 4 proves that and even Nicodemus understood stood Christ but you two can't seem to.

Wrong! He did NOT understand Christ! He thinks Christ is talking about a physical rebirth, to which Jesus denies... He is speaking of a spiritual birth, to which He tells Nicodemus that HE should KNOW about such matters, being a teacher of the Law. Unless one is born from above, there is no spiritual life within, since only GOD can provide that birth. It is not something man can manufacture...

Just as Nicodemus understood a physical birth so he asks, how can a man be born again when He is old and how can he can enter his mother's womb a second time? Again this whole section is about birth not baptism.

It's about birth from above. Jesus denies the first interpretion of "being born again", and focuses on being born from above, from God, a spiritual birth that is affected by water AND the Spirit. Nicodemus, like you, have your mind focused on things of the flesh, when Christ is speaking of things spiritual, things that Nicodemus SHOULD know about.

Its amazing how so many people twist this around to be water baptism. Indeed this is the milk of the word and not the meat at all.

What is amazing that you think Christ needs to make the ridiculous statement that someone has to be physically born to do anything at all...

That is the biggest case of "no freakin foolin'" that I have ever heard. THIS is your "profound teaching"? That I cannot do something unless I am physically born???

Wow... :biglol Amazing.

Regards

 

[A-Christian]

Since the ONLY true evidence we HAVE concerning the 'first Christians' IS The Word, then it is NOT merely a matter of 'asking oneself' ANYTHING.

Not true. Come out of your shell and study.

For if we simply rely on OUR OWN understanding, (that of man's), then we are reliant upon MEN to 'teach us' what we know.

You are "simply" relying on your own limited understanding of baptism when you ignore Christian history, and that is fine with me as long as you don't claim any authority for your personal interpretations; for the junk-bin of personal interpretation is already bulging at its seams and about to pop its rivets from all the differnet personal interpretations of baptism, each claimed by bible scholars such as yourself.

Fortunately for us, God has allowed The Word to be relatively preserved so that IT is our guide into truth and knowledge.

Where again, does scripture say it is your sole authority in these matters? That's right...it doesn't. Funny isn't it how the guide to truth and knowledge gives every other bible scholar a different take on baptism. It's even stranger that your personal opinion on baptism, the opinion that you forged from your intensive scholarly bible reading, is differnet from men that were not so removed from the times of the apostles as we are today. It's also interesting that you admit God relatively preserved the sacred documents of the Church without elaborating how. Read the writings of the early Christians and you may gain insight as to how; After all, a scholar would never limit his sources when trying to arrive at truth.

While there ARE many that would choose to follow 'particular interpretations' is TRUTH, that doesn't negate that WE ARE able to discern something 'beyond OUR mere understanding' and through the 'guidance OF The Spirit' be LED in TRUTH.

Once you have more than one interpretaion of truth, you no longer have the full truth. You say that YOU have the full truth about baptism yet it is different from the next fellow's. Scary how the Holy Spirit confuses everyone isn't it? But it's nice to know that after 2000+ years of Christianity, someone (you) was finally led to the correct truth concerning baptism while men that hung around the apostles and entrusted personally to continue what they had started, were decieved by the Holy Spirit and thus totally ignored by you. Congratulations!

The allusion to the 'early Christians' is veiled and deceptive. For ALL that we HAVE in reference TO the FIRST TRUE CHRISTIANS is The Word. Man's history is fraught with falsity and therefore of LITTLE value in regards to Spirit.

Logic just broke the glass again on its way out the window. We have plenty of writings that reference the first true Christians; Writings that predate the choosing of the books that would even be included in your New Testament. Those writings have plenty of value, just not to people with thinking patterns like yourself. The Church that assembled your bible and then preserved it also gives us the preserved writings of the early Christians concerning baptism as well as other things. Picking and choosing from the Church, using your own "MEC-Made" standard will not lead to anything sturdy. I still stand by what I said earlier; The implications of historical Christian teaching concerning baptism call upon you in ways that you may not be prepared to deal with. As a former self-interpreter, I know you understand what I mean by that.

peace

 

[Veritas]

Since the ONLY true evidence we HAVE concerning the 'first Christians' IS The Word, then it is NOT merely a matter of 'asking oneself' ANYTHING.

I disagree as well. I just wanted to clarify this point, since I've studied this lately.

We can put together the entire gospel simply from quotations of writings from the 'first Christians' to each other.

That's a pretty awesome thing.

 

[Tomlane]

Since the ONLY true evidence we HAVE concerning the 'first Christians' IS The Word, then it is NOT merely a matter of 'asking oneself' ANYTHING.

I disagree as well. I just wanted to clarify this point, since I've studied this lately.

We can put together the entire gospel simply from quotations of writings from the 'first Christians' to each other.

That's a pretty awesome thing.

Sorry Veritas, I don't remember writing what you quoted, perhaps you could show me where I stated that? I'm very curious, thanks.

Tomlane

 

[Veritas]

Since the ONLY true evidence we HAVE concerning the 'first Christians' IS The Word, then it is NOT merely a matter of 'asking oneself' ANYTHING.

I disagree as well. I just wanted to clarify this point, since I've studied this lately.

We can put together the entire gospel simply from quotations of writings from the 'first Christians' to each other.

That's a pretty awesome thing.

Sorry Veritas, I don't remember writing what you quoted, perhaps you could show me where I stated that? I'm very curious, thanks.

Tomlane

That's because you didn't write that. Sorry, my mistake. I think Imagican stated that.

 

[Free]

Tomlane,

I cannot help but notice that despite my posting several passages from Scripture, twice, and several attempts to get you to respond to those passages, and despite your posting in several threads, you have yet to reply.

 

[Tomlane]

From the top of page 5:

Here is why baptism is for today:

John 4:1-2, “1 Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John 2 (although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples)â€Â

Matt 28:19, “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,â€Â

First we see that Jesus' disciples were baptizing people and then we see that Jesus commands his disciples to continue doing it in making disciples of all nations.

Acts 10:47-48, “47 Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have? 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to remain for some days.â€Â

Acts 2:38-41, “38 And Peter said to them, Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. 39 For the promise is for you and for your children and for all who are far off, everyone whom the Lord our God calls to himself. 40 And with many other words he bore witness and continued to exhort them, saying, Save yourselves from this crooked generation. 41 So those who received his word were baptized, and there were added that day about three thousand souls.â€Â

Acts 8:12-16, “12 But when they believed Philip as he preached good news about the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women. 13 Even Simon himself believed, and after being baptized he continued with Philip. And seeing signs and great miracles performed, he was amazed.
14 Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, 15 who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.â€Â

Acts 8:35-38, “35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning with this Scripture he told him the good news about Jesus. 36 And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized? 38 And he commanded the chariot to stop, and they both went down into the water, Philip and the eunuch, and he baptized him.â€Â

Acts 16:13-15, 30-33, “13 And on the Sabbath day we went outside the gate to the riverside, where we supposed there was a place of prayer, and we sat down and spoke to the women who had come together. 14 One who heard us was a woman named Lydia, from the city of Thyatira, a seller of purple goods, who was a worshiper of God. The Lord opened her heart to pay attention to what was said by Paul. 15 And after she was baptized, and her household as well, she urged us, saying, If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay. And she prevailed upon us.â€Â

30 Then he brought them out and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? 31 And they said, Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household. 32 And they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their wounds; and he was baptized at once, he and all his family.

Here we see several instances of the Apostles carrying out the command of Christ.

1 Cor 1:13-17, “13 Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so that no one may say that you were baptized in my name. 16 (I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. Beyond that, I do not know whether I baptized anyone else.)
17 For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, and not with words of eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.â€Â

Additional evidence that the Apostles continued to baptize believers.

Rom 6:3-4, “3 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? 4 We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.â€Â

Col 2:12, “12 having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through faith in the powerful working of God, who raised him from the dead.â€Â

In both of these instances Paul uses the analogy of Jesus' death and resurrection for being baptized into Christ. This supports immersion in water.

1Pet 3:20-21, “20 because they formerly did not obey, when God's patience waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through water.
21 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,â€Â

A much more clear analogy referencing baptism and water.


The natural progression is clear--Jesus was baptized, the disciples baptized people, Christ then commanded the disciples to go to all the nations and baptize, and the disciples then continued to baptize both Jews and Gentiles. Baptism was a continuous practice that showed no signs of ceasing since Jesus commanded it. It is something that all believers should do, first and foremost because it is a command of Christ for those who are his disciples.

Free, thank you for your patience. I only have time to reply to one person a day at a time because of my work.

To quote you: John 4:1-2, “1 Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John 2 (although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples)â€Â

You quoted this verse and have applied it to water baptism as if it is meant for today. You have taken that completely out of context and is not meant for the Church that is Christ's body. I'm even wondering if you understand correctly what the Body of Christ is? I hope you will explain that to me sometime.

Now I will repeat, water baptism was a baptism of repentance for Jews only and was never meant for the Church and I'm not referring to the Roman Catholic Church or any Protestant denomination.

Acts 2:14

It was foretold in Isaiah of a voice of him that will cry in the wilderness preparing you {Jews only} the way of the Lord {Christ}. You will never find anywhere in any of the prophesies concerning John that his baptism of repentance was ever meant for Gentiles unless they embraced the whole law of Judaism and became a proselyte. Proselytize means to convert from one faith to another. That is why the Gentile eunuch was water baptized.

I don't see any so called baptist being converted to Judaism do you, yet they want to burden themselves down like most Protestants and Catholics by clinging on to some of the Jewish ordinances such a water baptism. I have only included the Isaiah's prophecy concerning why John's water baptism was meant for and why. It would do you well to read the whole chapter.

Isaiah 40:3 ¶The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
4 Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain:
5 And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.

Free if you are so determined to observe a Jewish ceremonial baptism why don't you keep the rest of the law? That is a legitimate question but you and I both know you won't do that any more then you will will observe Joel 2:14 for example.

Joel 2:14 Who knoweth if he will return and repent, and leave a blessing behind him; even a meat offering and a drink offering unto the LORD your God?

This would be a good example of symbolism by making a meat and drink offering to the Lord Free. How come I never hear anyone here state they do that? Actually its ludicrous isn't it Free in this age of Grace? You can't mix grace and works anymore than you can do it in God's sight with water baptism.

Either you are under grace or under the law not both. That is why Christ never water baptized anyone for he only baptizes with the Holy Ghost and Fire. So why do you want to put yourself under a false work of water baptism, a dead Jewish ordinance when Christ's spiritual baptism is the only one that will save you.

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
11 ¶Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14 ¶For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

I want to explain the above verses to you in the places that I have underlined and see if you can figure the rest out for yourself that way I won't get it so involved you won't understand it.

First all please notice nowhere in the above scripture has any of them ever once mentioned water baptism as being symbolic of salvation that is a myth perpetrated by a false church that has been around for most of 2 thousand years but is not biblical in the lest and this myth was past onto the watered down versions of it to the Protestant system of religion.

The first part of Ephesians 2:8 states: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves Since some preach you have to be water baptized to be saved and some think you have to get wet to symbolize an out would sign of an in would work by being water baptized. All the scriptures I will give will tell you why neither of these premises correct.

It says very plainly we are saved by grace through faith. Now I'll show you what God considers faith.

Hebrews 11:1 ¶Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

If scripture doesn't support water baptism for today then God says its sin.

Romans 14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

Ephesians 2:9 states:Not of works, lest any man should boas.

Water baptism is a work done by two individuals. Strictly a work of the flesh.

Philippians 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh


Also in order to accomplish water baptism, you have to have a intercessor or mediator and that would be the dunker either officiating by sprinkling, or immersing the dunkee. Yet God says, there is [b]only one mediator[/b].

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Ephesians 2:14 states, For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us.

During the time of Christ's ministry and before that God was dealing only with Israel and not with directly with a Gentile unless they were converted to Judaism. Now as verse 14 states, God has made peace, [that is accomplished that in the death and resurrection for the sins of all who believe by faith} and broke down the middle of partition between Jew and Gentile. In other words the law was fulfilled by Christ for everyone so God nailed it to Christ's cross. Also see Colossians 2:14.

That brings us to Ephesians 2:15 that states, Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace.

That states the same thing as Colossians 2:14 states that God abolished in his flesh or nailed to His cross the law of commandments contained in ordinances and that makes both Jew and Gentile a new creation in Christ, not in the letter of the old as you are so ardently advocating.

Romans 7:6  But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and [u]not in the oldness of the lette[/u]r.

Water baptism was a Jewish ordinance under Jewish law now we worship God in truth {correctly understanding God's word} and in spirit, {not physical water}.

Philippians 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

I don't expect many or probably any to understand the above I have given you, unless their hearts are right with the Lord and desire to know his truth for it will take the Holy Spirit to convince anyone of His marvelous truth.

There is ton more on baptism that I have yet to give you but for the sake of time and confusing you I will stop here and if you should have any more questions please feel free to ask. I just hope your replies won't be ones of wanting to win a debate but to glorify Christ and for your own knowledge. Today I only addressed the first Verse of Scripture you gave tomorrow or the next day as time permits I'll go to your next reference.

I hope the above may be a blessing to you,

tomlane

 

[francisdesales]

To quote you: John 4:1-2, “1 Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John 2 (although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples)â€Â

You quoted this verse and have applied it to water baptism as if it is meant for today. You have taken that completely out of context and is not meant for the Church that is Christ's body. I'm even wondering if you understand correctly what the Body of Christ is? I hope you will explain that to me sometime.

Now I will repeat, water baptism was a baptism of repentance for Jews only and was never meant for the Church and I'm not referring to the Roman Catholic Church or any Protestant denomination.

Acts 2:14

It was foretold in Isaiah of a voice of him that will cry in the wilderness preparing you {Jews only} the way of the Lord {Christ}. You will never find anywhere in any of the prophesies concerning John that his baptism of repentance was ever meant for Gentiles unless they embraced the whole law of Judaism and became a proselyte. Proselytize means to convert from one faith to another. That is why the Gentile eunuch was water baptized.

I don't see any so called baptist being converted to Judaism do you, yet they want to burden themselves down like most Protestants and Catholics by clinging on to some of the Jewish ordinances such a water baptism. I have only included the Isaiah's prophecy concerning why John's water baptism was meant for and why. It would do you well to read the whole chapter.

Isaiah 40:3 ¶The voice of him that crieth in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the LORD, make straight in the desert a highway for our God.
4 Every valley shall be exalted, and every mountain and hill shall be made low: and the crooked shall be made straight, and the rough places plain:
5 And the glory of the LORD shall be revealed, and all flesh shall see it together: for the mouth of the LORD hath spoken it.

Free if you are so determined to observe a Jewish ceremonial baptism why don't you keep the rest of the law? That is a legitimate question but you and I both know you won't do that any more then you will will observe Joel 2:14 for example.

Joel 2:14 Who knoweth if he will return and repent, and leave a blessing behind him; even a meat offering and a drink offering unto the LORD your God?

This would be a good example of symbolism by making a meat and drink offering to the Lord Free. How come I never hear anyone here state they do that? Actually its ludicrous isn't it Free in this age of Grace? You can't mix grace and works anymore than you can do it in God's sight with water baptism.

Either you are under grace or under the law not both. That is why Christ never water baptized anyone for he only baptizes with the Holy Ghost and Fire. So why do you want to put yourself under a false work of water baptism, a dead Jewish ordinance when Christ's spiritual baptism is the only one that will save you.

Ephesians 2:8 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.
10 For we are his workmanship, created in Christ Jesus unto good works, which God hath before ordained that we should walk in them.
11 ¶Wherefore remember, that ye being in time past Gentiles in the flesh, who are called Uncircumcision by that which is called the Circumcision in the flesh made by hands;
12 That at that time ye were without Christ, being aliens from the commonwealth of Israel, and strangers from the covenants of promise, having no hope, and without God in the world:
13 But now in Christ Jesus ye who sometimes were far off are made nigh by the blood of Christ.
14 ¶For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us;
15 Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances; for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace;

I want to explain the above verses to you in the places that I have underlined and see if you can figure the rest out for yourself that way I won't get it so involved you won't understand it.

First all please notice nowhere in the above scripture has any of them ever once mentioned water baptism as being symbolic of salvation that is a myth perpetrated by a false church that has been around for most of 2 thousand years but is not biblical in the lest and this myth was past onto the watered down versions of it to the Protestant system of religion.

The first part of Ephesians 2:8 states: For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves Since some preach you have to be water baptized to be saved and some think you have to get wet to symbolize an out would sign of an in would work by being water baptized. All the scriptures I will give will tell you why neither of these premises correct.

It says very plainly we are saved by grace through faith. Now I'll show you what God considers faith.

Hebrews 11:1 ¶Now faith is the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen.

Romans 10:17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

If scripture doesn't support water baptism for today then God says its sin.

Romans 14:23 And he that doubteth is damned if he eat, because he eateth not of faith: for whatsoever is not of faith is sin.

Ephesians 2:9 states:Not of works, lest any man should boas.

Water baptism is a work done by two individuals. Strictly a work of the flesh.

Philippians 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh


Also in order to accomplish water baptism, you have to have a intercessor or mediator and that would be the dunker either officiating by sprinkling, or immersing the dunkee. Yet God says, there is [b]only one mediator[/b].

1 Timothy 2:5 For there is one God, and one mediator between God and men, the man Christ Jesus;

Ephesians 2:14 states, For he is our peace, who hath made both one, and hath broken down the middle wall of partition between us.

During the time of Christ's ministry and before that God was dealing only with Israel and not with directly with a Gentile unless they were converted to Judaism. Now as verse 14 states, God has made peace, [that is accomplished that in the death and resurrection for the sins of all who believe by faith} and broke down the middle of partition between Jew and Gentile. In other words the law was fulfilled by Christ for everyone so God nailed it to Christ's cross. Also see Colossians 2:14.

That brings us to Ephesians 2:15 that states, Having abolished in his flesh the enmity, even the law of commandments contained in ordinances for to make in himself of twain one new man, so making peace.

That states the same thing as Colossians 2:14 states that God abolished in his flesh or nailed to His cross the law of commandments contained in ordinances and that makes both Jew and Gentile a new creation in Christ, not in the letter of the old as you are so ardently advocating.

Romans 7:6  But now we are delivered from the law, that being dead wherein we were held; that we should serve in newness of spirit, and [u]not in the oldness of the lette[/u]r.

Water baptism was a Jewish ordinance under Jewish law now we worship God in truth {correctly understanding God's word} and in spirit, {not physical water}.

Philippians 3:3 For we are the circumcision, which worship God in the spirit, and rejoice in Christ Jesus, and have no confidence in the flesh.

I don't expect many or probably any to understand the above I have given you, unless their hearts are right with the Lord and desire to know his truth for it will take the Holy Spirit to convince anyone of His marvelous truth.

There is ton more on baptism that I have yet to give you but for the sake of time and confusing you I will stop here and if you should have any more questions please feel free to ask. I just hope your replies won't be ones of wanting to win a debate but to glorify Christ and for your own knowledge. Today I only addressed the first Verse of Scripture you gave tomorrow or the next day as time permits I'll go to your next reference.

What an amazing Red Herring you have landed, brother Free!!!

The vast majority of this response from Tomlane PRESUMES that water baptism has something to do with the Mosaic Law or that Christian works have something to do with a "work of the flesh", which was refuted over and over again already...

By now, Tom should know that water baptisms are not part of the Mosaic Law and should stop referencing baptisms to Scriptures that speak of the abrogation of the Old Law. It is a misapplication of God's Word. Again...

By now, Tom should know that a "work of the flesh" is indicative of one's inner motivation for doing an outward work. ALL of man's works are literally done "in the flesh", since we cannot do ANYTHING solely of the "spirit". The Scriptures call "works of the flesh" things of worldly stature or motive.

By now, Tom should know that the Acts of the Apostles records people who were given only the "Jewish ordinance", (as he inaccurately calls it since it is NOWHERE ORDAINED!!!), and were subsequently "RE-baptized", in water and the SPIRIT, meaning that there is some deeper meaning behind Christian baptisms that continues to escape Tom despite very clear wording in John 3:5.

By now, Tom should konw that John's Baptisms are INFERIOR to Jesus' baptisms, and thus, Christian baptisms are SUPERIOR to John's baptisms. By now, Tom should know this is why the Church in Acts baptized people in the name of Christ, to include Paul himself...

By now, Tom should know that NO ONE in Scriptures baptizes themselves. The Church is ALWAYS involved. Does Tom ask himself WHY??? Of course not.

By now, Tom should know that his obstinancy is duly noted.

Regards

 

[follower of Christ]

Water Baptism...just do it
By Wm Tipton

Instead of discussing whether water baptism 'saves' a person...an issue we personally believe is conditional seeing that some folks repent of their sins yet are unable for whatever reason to be baptised...Id like to discuss whether water baptism was practiced AFTER Jesus had ascended and after Pentecost and the coming of the Holy Spirit.

Some seem to think that after a time that water baptism was removed from our faith or something, but I personally do not believe that is the case.

The day of Pentecost and the coming of the Holy Spirit is recorded in Acts 2, as we well know, so do we see any water baptisms going on after this baptism of 'fire' spoken of in Gods word?

6 entire chapters later we have a very clear baptism in water being practiced still. If Spirit baptism is all that is *required* or expected at this point, then why is this even occurring? (of course we expect some to come up with illogical reasoning's and excuses, but read it for yourself and take no ones word for anything. Does it make sense to YOU that this water baptism is taking place *IF* it is no longer of any issue? )

Act 8:36-39
And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? (37) And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. (38) And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him
And when they were come up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord caught away Philip, that the eunuch saw him no more: and he went on his way rejoicing.

This next passage is quite clear. These HAD already recieved the Holy Spirit and yet WERE going to be baptized in WATER as well.

Act 10:44-48 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. (45) And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. (46)
For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God.
Then answered Peter, (47) Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? (48) And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

Now, dear reader, is there any doubt in your mind about what is clearly shown there?
These who HAD already received the Holy Spirit were commanded to be baptized in water. we know its water since they had ALREADY received the Holy Spirit.

Here is yet more evidence that water baptism is practiced in the church

Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," and "I of Apollos," and "I of Cephas," and "I of Christ."
Has Christ been divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?
I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name.
Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other.
For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in eloquent wisdom, lest the cross of Christ should be deprived of its power.
(1Co 1:12-17 EMTV)

Are we to believe that Christ did not send Paul to baptize men into His name and Spirit ?
Paul shows us here that he did not baptize men himself, nor was he called to, and this conclusively shows us that he is referring to water baptism as it would be absurd for Paul to claim that Jesus did not call him to 'baptize' men into the Spirit.

These who argue against water baptism do so with their own personal agendas.
Do not let these who teach falsely rob you of the blessing of water baptism...

 

[francisdesales]

6 entire chapters later we have a very clear baptism in water being practiced still. If Spirit baptism is all that is *required* or expected at this point, then why is this even occurring? (of course we expect some to come up with illogical reasoning's and excuses, but read it for yourself and take no ones word for anything. Does it make sense to YOU that this water baptism is taking place *IF* it is no longer of any issue? )...

These who argue against water baptism do so with their own personal agendas.
Do not let these who teach falsely rob you of the blessing of water baptism...

Perhaps after 14 pages, some of this MIGHT start to sink in???

One can only hope and pray that it does.

Regards