Water Baptism, is that ENOUGH?

[Biblereader]

Catholic Crusader: Please tell me, why the Catholics, and Mormons, and a couple of others, WROTE THEIR OWN EXTRA BIBLICAL BOOKS, and they use them MORE, in their church services, than they do the Bible!
That's idolatry, and putting man's words above the Holy Word of God.

Tell me why THEY wrote, and wrote, and re-wrote.

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Catholic Crusader: Please tell me, why the Catholics, and Mormons, and a couple of others, WROTE THEIR OWN EXTRA BIBLICAL BOOKS

Catholics do not have extra books. If you are referring to the Deutero-Caonicals in the Old Testament, they were part of the Septuigent, the Greek translation of the Old Testament, before Christ was even born, so the Church could hardly have "added" them. Since the Septuigennt is the most quoted version of the OT in the NT, scholars know that the apostles used them, and Church used them universally until your so-called "reformation". As a reaction against the perceived Hellenization of their faith, Rabbis removed the books at the end of the first century at a council held in Jamnia, and that was Martin Luther's rationale for removing them also: He figured the rabbis knew better. We figure the apostles knew better. Go figure. We added nothing: Your reformers removed them, which is why your Bible is corrupted.

...and they use them MORE, in their church services, than they do the Bible!

I can see you have never been to a Catholic Mass, or if you have, you weren't paying attention. At every Mass, there are four readings: A reading from OT, the NT, a Psalm, and one from one of the four Gospels. We read more scripture at Mass then most protestants services do. The readings are on a three year cycle, so that if you go to Mass every Sunday, in three years you will hear the whole Bible.

The only other book we have is the Catechism. This comes from the greek word for "teach": The Catechism is the teachings of the Church, an explanation of the faith. It is not an extra Bible, it is just a piece of systematic theology explaining what we believe. Its online right here: http://www.vatican.va/archive/catechism/ccc_toc.htm

That's idolatry, and putting man's words above the Holy Word of God.
Tell me why THEY wrote, and wrote, and re-wrote.

Good grief. Are you for real? Get your facts straight please.

 

[Vic C.]

Baptism people. Baptism. :-?

 

[gila]

Water Baptism, is that ENOUGH?

No, that is not enough; Jesus says to be faithful to Him until the end.

 

[Imagican]

.....The Church is NOT the 'final authority'. FAR FAR from it. The Church is to BE submissive TO The Spirit.....

I strongly disagree. When Jesus gave the authority to bind and loose to Peter, and to the Apostles as a group, THAT is authority. The Council of Jerusalem in Acts is the proto-council, the first example of binding and loosing. They made a decision on circumcision, and that was the end of the matter - we are "bound" by that decision. THAT is how authority is exercised. If protestants were around then, everybody would have just decided what to do for themselves.

And who are you to say that the Churtch is NOT submissive to the Spirit? I say that everything the Catholic Churtch teaches is true, BECAUSE OF the Holy Spirit, and my submission to that authority IS a submissiopn to the Spirit also..

While I am well aware of the nature of your disagreement, it is DUE to your lack of acceptance of what was offered that brings about your disagreement.

CC, YOU have been taught and believe that the apostolic succession has BROUGHT the CC to it's present position. I, on the other hand, understand WITHOUT a DOUBT in my mind that the apostolic era ENDED with the DEATHS of the apostles. That they were 'for a time'. This is eplained in scripture but denied my many for the sake of their 'beliefs'. I try NOT to let them 'get in the way', IF they run contradictory to scripture, (I know, I know, personal interpretation, etc,,,,,,,,,,,,).

But the scriptures PURELY indicate without ACTUALLY stating that the apostles were empowered for a REASON. And that reason was NOT to 'judge mankind' as you would indicate. Their PURPOSE was to LOOSE and BIND while they were PRESENT in the FLESH, (ALIVE). But there ULTIMATE purpose was NOT to LOOSE or BIND, but to SPREAD the Word. To offer the Gospel in the areas of the world that had NOT heard of the wonderous 'gift' that had been offered OF God.

Their powers of 'tongues', 'healing', even RAISING the DEAD were to SHOW enough of the TRUTH so that it COULD be carried on AFTER they were NO LONGER HERE except in WORD, (Gospels, epistles and such). That the CC became the proprietors of such is OBVIOUSLY the WILL of God. But that DOESN'T make them ANY more 'special' than ANY of God's OTHER 'children'. And IF one OFFERS such 'pride', it is 'false pride' for if ANYTHING has been offered, it is a GIFT of God. NOT something 'deserved', but GIVEN REGARDLESS of merit.

I only offered what I offered for the sake of the topic. For we are NOT here to discuss WHO or WHAT has 'decided FOR us' the answer to this question, but what we HAVE in scripture that either supports or refutes this idea of BAPTISM 'being enough'.

I care NOT to discuss 'church' dogma or doctrine. For this is the rudimentary babbling of MEN. What we discuss here is what has been offered through Spirit that CAN be discussed OUTSIDE of ANYONE's particular BELIEFS. And that LEAVES us with The Word.

IF you 'believe' that this is ONLY able to BE interpreted from the perspective of the CC, then you CHOOSE to turn this INTO a 'CATHOLIC TOPIC' which has ALREADY been offered to be AGAINST the rules of the forums. I do not necessarily agree with those rules but am WILLING to abide by them for the sake of those that DO have a 'say in the matter'.

So PLEASE. The ONLY way in which to logically discuss this issue without turning it INTO a debate of denomination is to refer to SCRIPTURE. Otherwise, there is NO way to come to ANY decision of the issue EXCEPT what AN INDIVIDUALS denomination has TAUGHT them to believe. That was NOT the purpose of this thread.

I THINK that the issue has already been decided in favor of Baptism ALONE NOT being ENOUGH. I THINK that there has even been agreement among EVERY denomination when confronted with NOTHING other than THE question that there is MORE to BEING a follower of Christ than simply having water sprinkled in their face or being dunked under water. And I think it a shallow understanding that would BELIEVE that ALL it takes to recieve the gift that has been offered is simply STATING that they BELIEVE that they have RECEIVED It.

David Koresh, Jim Jones, the list is ENDLESS. I would venture to BET that each of these WAS Baptised. But I also would be willing to BET that MOST that I could ask would offer that these were NOT 'true' followers of Christ. So, at least for these, Baptism WASN'T 'enough'. i am NOT judging the HEARTS of these individuals but the FRUIT. And both these were basically MURDERERS that TAUGHT that THEY THEMSELVES were Christ. I do NOT believe that they were and that for them to TEACH such MADE them FALSE teachers. Their Baptism OBVIOUSLY not able to KEEP them from the wiles of the DEVIL. Obviously NOT ENOUGH.

So, by all means, I am MORE than willing to discuss the issue so long as we can DO IT within the confines of the RULES of this forum. But IF one INISISTS upon discussing it based SOLELY AS a 'denominational issue', the rules CANNOT be abided by.

The FINAL authority as offered in scripture was NEVER the apostles, NEVER were they SO EMPOWERED. For even the apostles acknowledged that THEIR power was FROM Christ. That HE was/IS The HEAD of HIS CHURCH. Any doctrine or dogma that denies this is in denial of the Holy Spirit. For each of those apostles that WROTE to us proclaimed to BE LED by The Holy Spirit. NOT a 'church' but parts of THE CHURCH with Christ AS the ULTIMATE authority. Each a memeber of The BODY. NONE claiming to BE the Head for EACH understanding COMPLETELY that they served NOT themselves, but their Savior Jesus Christ AND their BROTHERS and SISTERS IN Christ.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Baptism people. Baptism. :-?

What he said

 

[MarkT]

I. ONE BAPTISM FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF SINS

>977 Our Lord tied the forgiveness of sins to faith and Baptism: "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to the whole creation. He who believes and is baptized will be saved."521 Baptism is the first and chief sacrament of forgiveness of sins because it unites us with Christ, who died for our sins and rose for our justification, so that "we too might walk in newness of life."522

978 "When we made our first profession of faith while receiving the holy Baptism that cleansed us, the forgiveness we received then was so full and complete that there remained in us absolutely nothing left to efface, neither original sin nor offenses committed by our own will, nor was there left any penalty to suffer in order to expiate them. . . . Yet the grace of Baptism delivers no one from all the weakness of nature. On the contrary, we must still combat the movements of concupiscence that never cease leading us into evil "523

Ok. Basically I agree with this part. Water baptism represents the action of water on the inside of the cup; that is, the washing of the inside. And faith comes into it. We believe Jesus Christ has the power to forgive sin, or to put it another way, we believe God forgives us through his name, Jesus Christ. So based on this belief, we can pray something like this; Jesus, I have sinned. I repent. I will go and sin no more. This gives us a clear conscience towards God. You might say, where's the water? Well, we are springs of living water. The water from God wells up from inside us and it washes us. I'm referring to the words I just used; words that come from the heart and wash the heart and mind. But this understanding means you have the Spirit of God.

I think water baptism was a part of our first confession, even if perhaps they (baptism and confession) didn't occur at the same time. I remember my first confession, how I felt cleansed. But after that, it was many years before I read the Bible. That's when my understanding began to take shape. Did I receive the Holy Spirit when I read the Bible? I'm not sure about that. I believed in Jesus before I read the Bible so I think I must have received the Spirit before the actual reading; that is the Spirit must have led me to read it at the appointed time.

So in short, I think everyone is right. Water baptism is sufficient in a sense. It prepares us sufficiently for hearing the words of God. It is from the reading of the Bible and the understanding that comes from the reading of the Bible that we receive the gifts of God; hope and peace and wisdom and love.

979 In this battle against our inclination towards evil, who could be brave and watchful enough to escape every wound of sin? "If the Church has the power to forgive sins, then Baptism cannot be her only means of using the keys of the Kingdom of heaven received from Jesus Christ. The Church must be able to forgive all penitents their offenses, even if they should sin until the last moment of their lives."524

I don't know if we can say that the church has the power to forgive sin. I think this is where the RC church is taking away the power of God and giving itself the power of God; making itself God.

 

[dadof10]

Let us remember WHAT John CONFESSED of HIS Baptism. That it was simply a precursor to that which was TO COME. That, while HE Baptized with WATER, He that would come AFTER who was GREATER than HE would Baptise with FIRE and the HOLY Spirit. Note that this is indicative of a BETTER Baptism. One that is NOT only able to 'wash away sin' but able to offer a communion with God IN SPIRIT.

dad,

I thank you for your honest answer to my question. So this leads us back to the question, Is Water Baptism ENOUGH? Enough for WHAT? Salvation. Can one simply be dunked or sprinkled and THIS alone BE enough for one to RECEIVE eternal life?

While there ARE many that 'believe so', i WONDER if simply 'believing in ANYTHING' is ENOUGH. For we have been offered that 'faith without WORKS is DEAD'. This BEING so, then there are MANY that SAY much, but DO little and through their example we can CLEARLY see that their FAITH is based in WORDS rather than TRUTH. For IF their faith were in TRUTH, then their WORKS would BE apparent. And there are MANY that ARE Baptized in water that offer NO works whatsoever and the ONLY way that they indicate their BELIEF is through WORDS alone.

So, is it ENOUGH. or is there MORE to following Christ than simply BEING Baptized in water?

MEC

MEC,

Sorry I took so long getting back to you. Very busy.

Yes. water baptism is enough to save you, BUT, a person can lose that salvation. That is what "...baptism, which now saves you..." means.

Do you agree with the plain words of Scripture, or not?

 

[Imagican]

dad,

I can only answer like this:

While I recognize that MANY beieve the word Baptism MEANS 'water Baptism', i do NOT. there IS 'water Baptism' and even John who Baptized SUCH offered that one was coming that would Baptise with "the HOLY Ghost and with FIRE".

Now, is there a 'differnce' in these TWO Baptisms? I BELIEVE that there IS. That there is the SAME 'symbolism' of 'the cleansing' offered in Water Baptism TODAY that was offered by John and the apostles. BUT, there IS a Baptism that goes BEYOND. That to be TRULY Baptized into that which IS able to SAVE IS the Baptism in the HOLY Spirit.

Some may well 'believe' that these TWO are the SAME. i do NOT and I believe that scripture bears out my belief. For the words of John the Baptist STATE that there WILL COME a 'different Baptism'. One that IS Greater.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[turnorburn]

I thought everybody knew this one, and its the most used bible text in the world, from John 3:

16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.
17 For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn the world; but that the world through him might be saved.
18 He that believeth on him is not condemned: but he that believeth not is condemned already, because he hath not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.
19 And this is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, and men loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil.
20 For every one that doeth evil hateth the light, neither cometh to the light, lest his deeds should be reproved.
21 But he that doeth truth cometh to the light, that his deeds may be made manifest, that they are wrought in God.

I'm not much of one to go around doing the Polka when it comes to bible scipture.
Jesus says to keep it simple, easy enough for a child to understand and we all
know that most children know more than we. Say Bobby so come here and show
me how to set up my cell phone, Yikes! :smt100

 

[Catholic Crusader]

.....Jesus says to keep it simple, easy enough for a child to understand and we all know that most children know more than we....

Something struck me about this the other day, and I went over this in another thread: For everyone who says that Jesus completed everything on the cross, then why is it that he commanded the apostles to baptise AFTER His death and resurrection?

Matt 28:19 - "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"

This event, and its companions in the other synoptic Gospels, occurs AFTER His resurrection. So, if He finished everything on the cross and no "rituals" are neccessary, then why does he COMMAND the apostles to go out and do just that, AFTER His resurrection ?!!!

Of course, I know Baptism is NOT just a ritual, and thats why I understand its importance. But think about: Jesus had been through the Passion, death, ressurection, and of all the things he could have said in his last moments on earth, he said to baptise.

 

[turnorburn]

Here is your evidence, he is no longer on the cross, and as for the great commission it is the God given gift to teach and preach the gospel to the four corners of the world. You would be as shocked
as I to hear "Christians?" say Oh! thats somebody else's responsibility not theirs. That is the most selfish Un Christlike attitude I've ever heard. Hiding such a precious gift under a bushel basket, sorry
I'm getting off topic here.. :smt045

 

[Imagican]

turnorburn,

Once again you have shown wisdom and understanding that many would refute for the sake of BELIEF. You have offered scripture that pretty much 'sums it up' nicely. Yet there are STILL those that would choose to ignore what you have offered for the sake 'what they have been TAUGHT of others', (and in others I refer to those that SAY they are inspired regardless of their inspiration REFUTING the Word).

While our WALK is JUST that, we MUST take steps in the RIGHT direction in order to even START in the proper DIRECTION. And JUST as our WALK is to BE progressive in nature, so TOO is our UNDERSTANDING. We were NOT told to simply 'sign up for the race', we were told to RUN it like we MEAN to WIN it. This TOTALLY refutes the IDEA that ALL one MUST do is ONE 'thing'. There are MANY stipulations that we are ABLE to discern in order to KNOW whether we ARE or ARE NOT following in TRUTH.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Catholic Crusader]

Here is your evidence, he is no longer on the cross, and as for the great commission it is the God given gift to teach and preach the gospel to the four corners of the world. You would be as shocked
as I to hear "Christians?" say Oh! thats somebody else's responsibility not theirs. That is the most selfish Un Christlike attitude I've ever heard. Hiding such a precious gift under a bushel basket, sorry
I'm getting off topic here.. :smt045

All that has NOTHING to do with what I said:

....For everyone who says that Jesus completed everything on the cross, then why is it that he commanded the apostles to baptise AFTER His death and resurrection?

Matt 28:19 - "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit"

This event, and its companions in the other synoptic Gospels, occurs AFTER His resurrection. So, if He finished everything on the cross and no "rituals" are neccessary, then why does he COMMAND the apostles to go out and do just that, AFTER His resurrection ?!!!

Of course, I know Baptism is NOT just a ritual, and thats why I understand its importance. But think about: Jesus had been through the Passion, death, ressurection, and of all the things he could have said in his last moments on earth, he said to baptise.

 

[Imagican]

actually CC, here are the last recorded words of Jesus in EACH of the Gospels:

Mark:

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Please note here that BELIEVETH comes FIRST. And in the second statement it SHOWS the importace of BELIEVING compared to Baptism. And i can ASSURE you that there CAN be those Baptised that DO NOT BELIEVE. Why would be a pertinent question but I CANNOT answer that one. People do MANY things that I am UNABLE to answer.
Matthew:

[19] Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
[20] Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

Note here as well that the TEACHING takes precident over Baptism.

Luke:

[44] And he said unto them, These are the words which I spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the psalms, concerning me.
[45] Then opened he their understanding, that they might understand the scriptures,
[46] And said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day:
[47] And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
[48] And ye are witnesses of these things.
[49] And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.
[50] And he led them out as far as to Bethany, and he lifted up his hands, and blessed them.
[51] And it came to pass, while he blessed them, he was parted from them, and carried up into heaven.
[52] And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with great joy:
[53] And were continually in the temple, praising and blessing God. Amen.

Nothing here about Baptism.

John:

[22] Jesus saith unto him, If I will that he tarry till I come, what is that to thee? follow thou me.

Nothing here EITHER concerning Baptism.

So, while there is MENTION of Baptism. We can SEE from scripture that there are those THINGS that are MORE important than the RITUAL. For FIRST one MUST BELIEVE for Baptism to have ANY effect. And that effect is simply submission to and confirmation of BELIEF.

While some certainly believe and teach that Baptism is ALL IMPORTANT, that is NOT offered in The Word as TAUGHT by MEN. These words offered HERE prove that Baptism ALONE is NOT enough. For each time that it is MENTIONED, it is offered AFTER BELIEF.

So, infant Baptism has NONE effect except in the minds and hearts of the PARENTS. The CHILD could receive NO benefit PREVIOUS to UNDERSTANDING and BELIEF.

For IF what YOU offer is truth, then I could have YOU hold someone down and sprinkle water in their face and bring to them Salvation. And I believe that even YOU would be 'hard-pressed' to state that THIS is possible.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Catholic Crusader]

actually CC, here are the last recorded words of Jesus in EACH of the Gospels:

Mark:

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.....

Are you saying Jesus is contradicting himself? Jesus COMMANDED the Apostles to baptise. Why would he do that if baptism werre not necessary?

 

[turnorburn]

That's easy my friend #1 Jesus never contradicts himself, you being a believer should know that.
He meant #2 baptized in the spirit, the holy spirit, you remember the day you were :smt045

actually CC, here are the last recorded words of Jesus in EACH of the Gospels:

Mark:

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.....

Are you saying Jesus is contradicting himself? Jesus COMMANDED the Apostles to baptise. Why would he do that if baptism werre not necessary?

 

[Imagican]

CC,

I was simply pointing out the LAST words offered to the apostles by Christ. I have NEVER said that Baptism is USELESS. Only that it is NOT ENOUGH. For we DO HAVE the words of Christ HIMSELF offering FIRST one MUST BE a 'believer'. That does NOT offer JUST belief, but TRUE belief.

And as turn has offered; John who Baptized with WATER offered HIMSELF that there was ONE COMING that would have a 'greater Baptism' than that which HE offered. Now WHAT Baptism did JOHN offer?

John offered WATER Baptism. But HE stated that one was COMING in which those who encountered would be Baptized with the HOLY Spirit and FIRE. Now, I don't know HOW you have come to YOUR understanding of Baptism. If you have SIMPLY accepted what OTHERS would TEACH you concerning this then it becomes apparent that IF someone that YOU trusted TOLD you that 'water Baptism' IS enough, then I CAN see where you COULD come to this understanding and defend it. But IF you take scripture into consideration; that which has ACTUALLY been offered in TRUTH, then it becomes APPARENT that BELIEF is paramont to Baptism, and then there is the issue of understanding that to BE 'born again' IS to BE 'born in Spirit'. That IS Spiritual Baptism which YOUR faith seems to ignore COMPLETELY.

I can only offer you understanding if you are willing to accept it. MANY will be sprinkled with water or dunked under it that will NEVER know Christ OR His Father. For the sake of RELIGION over an ACTUAL relationship with God through His Son, MANY will simply find and hang on to FALSE religions that offer NO Salvation for they don't EVEN offer a RELATIONSHIP.

Those that HEAR these words and KNOW their Father and His Son KNOW that what I speak I speak in Spirit and NOT in flesh. For IF I WERE to speak in flesh, then ALL would know what I speak of. Since MANY don't SEE what I offer, then I can ONLY assume that they follow in FLESH to this day and refuse to accept the Spirit.

Not accusation for I know NOT the hearts of others. But the UNDERSTANDING is there for ALL willing to SUBMIT to the Spirit. And IF this understanding does NOT exist in the hearts of those that argue such, it is simply a matter of the Spirit NOT being present in their lives. this certainly CAN BE a symtom caused of FOLLOWING men rather than God through His Son. For MEN cannot OFFER Spirit. That is ONLY able to BE given BY God. And IF one submits their allegiance to MEN rather than God, then there can BE no offering of Spirit.

And IF those that wish to argue WITHOUT The Spirit BEING manifest in their hearts, then the argument can ONLY BE achedemic and without TRUE merit.

I can sit and talk politics all day and NEVER come to agreement on HOW it actually works IF I discuss it with someone who ONLY has a rudimentary knowledge that they have obtained through the words of OTHERS. it's when I am able to discuss in the context of HAVING been there that I CAN offer TRUTH instead of that which OTHERS have TOLD me.

It's NO different with God. I COULD just sit back and LISTEN to what others would TELL me of God and NEVER even SEEK to KNOW Him. But when I come to God through His Son and HAVE a PERSONAL relationship WITH Him. TRUST Him. LOVE Him as HE loves ME, at this point NOTHING anyone else TELLS me can COMPARE to the TRUTH offered through SPIRIT.

And those that do NOT know these words COULD NOT have a personal relationship WITH their FATHER. That is NOT only achedemic, that is SPIRITUAL truth that CANNOT BE denied by those that KNOW God.

Reading alone will not bring it about. Praying alone will NOT bring it about. Ritual ALONE will NOT bring it about. LIstening to others alone will not 'bring it about'. It is when we are ABLE to submit ourselves TO The Spirit, RECOGNIZE it AS our guide and convictor that we are ABLE to COME to the truth and KNOW our Father and His Son. Otherwise our belief is NOTHING other than WORDS. Words that can be manipulated at will in which ever direction WE choose.

But ONCE we COME to the Spirit, (ARE born again), at this point our hearts and eyes ARE opened and we can BEGIN to SEE. Otherwise, those that do NOT understand this are doomed to be LISTENERS ONLY and NOT hearers. Or even at BEST 'hearers ONLY' and NOT doers.

So, that SEEMS to BE the BIGGEST obstacle that we deal with in this thread. UNDERSTANDING the question TAKES an UNDERSTANDING of WHAT 'being born again IS'. And understanding WHAT being 'born again IS' CANNOT be offered in words alone. It is SOMETHING that MUST be experienced to UNDERSTAND. And I find that MANY would refute my testimony concerning BEING 'born again'. REFUTE the FACT that we CAN know God and His Son PERSONALLY.

And I can offer this; so LONG as one CLINGS to the teachings of those that would deny the POWER of God, then there can BE none manifest in their lives to the extent that it is ABLE to bring them TO a 'personal relationship'.


MEC

 

[Scott1]

I have NEVER said that Baptism is USELESS. Only that it is NOT ENOUGH.

Amen my friend.

 

[Imagican]

CC,

Once again the scenario of the 'man on the deserted island' offers that Baptism IS NOT EVEN NECESSARY for a MAN to develope a relationship with God through His Son. I don't believe ANYONE faced with this question would offer that the 'man' would HAVE to BE a part of ANY denominational church NOR would he NEED a 'man' to sprinkle water or dunk him under it for GOD to shed His LOVE on this man.

I just hope and pray that those that SO believe in the NEED for Baptism are NOT judged as HARSHLY upon that 'day' as they CHOOSE to attempt judgment of ME for these words of WISDOM. For it is NOT our rudimentary RITUALS that DETERMINE God's love usward, but the LOVE itself.

That we MAY be able to come 'closer' to God through obedience to HIS will is without DOUBT. But the words of the Bible were meant as an offering IN GENERAL and CANNOT pertain TO EVERY SITUATION; 'the man on the deserted island' is BUT ONE EXAMPLE. Another would be to offer countries such as Russia durring the time of the Christian persecution. There would necessitate LIES in order to protect one's family and friends from cruel punishment or death. Do you HONEST believe that God would hold such 'untruth' against an indivual that OFFERED such deciet OUT OF LOVE? Or the mother that HAD to 'steal food' for her BABY. Do you HONESTLY THINK for one SECOND that God would HOLD the woman responsible for HER LOVE?

Think on these 'things' my friends and YOU WILL find that we DON'T live in the CUT AND DRY world that YOU SOMETIMES seem to THINK that we do. For HOW are ANY able to JUDGE a man UNTIL they have WALKED in HIS SHOES. Beware of the judgement that you would PLACE upon another, for this IS how WE will be judged.

I can SEE that Scot is able to recognize that what I offer are NOT just 'idle words'. ALL I have attempted to offer is that Baptism IN ITSELF is unable to SAVE or do ANYTHING but 'get one WET'. There must FIRST be TRUE belief and a sense of DEVOTION. And even then, it took MANY years after becoming Baptized by water for ME to be Baptized in Spirit. Was this 'water' a FIRST STEP? Perhaps. And for the FIRST week or so I felt that I had DONE something SPECIAL. But AFTER that first week, I was RIGHT back where I had started from. So I can offer PERSONAL testimony that MY 'water Baptism' was of LITTLE effect. Compare a WEEK to 40 years and you will PLAINLY see that the water was WEAK in comparison TO The Spirit.

Ignore these words if you wish. But this is TRUTH as offered IN truth. I have told NOTHING that is FALSE. Maybe for OTHERS there IS a 'difference', I CANNOT say that their WALK is the SAME as mine. But I CAN Offer that I KNOW that MY God would NOT forske ME for the simple rituals that MANY BELIEVE are ABLE to DO anything. A DEEPER psychological conviction through Baptism? MAYBE. An outright example of OBEDIENCE to The Word? Again, MAYBE. And MAYBE something even deeper. But we are NOT confined to the WORDS of those that would INSIST upon those things that they have NO right nor knowledge that would ALLOW them to MAKE offerings as if THEY are God.

The Commandments offered to the JEWS are NO LONGER able to 'condemn to death'. And NEITHER are the WORDS of those that would IGNORE the implications of Christ's DEATH being ONCE and for all. that UPON that moment, we were NO LONGER bound to the punishment that once condemned up to a 'blood sacrifice'. It was OFFERED UP and for those that ACCEPT it, they ARE free indeed of the BINDS of sin.

And IF you are ABLE to come to reallization of what I have offered here, THEN you will be ABLE to SEE that Baptism is NOT able to DO anything Without THE KNOWLEDGE AND COMMITMENT that conviction OF The Holy Spirit is ABLE to bring.

Blessings,

MEC