Water Baptism, is that ENOUGH?

[Imagican]

fran,

You continually insist that YOUR way is the ONLY way. yet I have offered the TRUTH in that Christ is able to forgive WITHOUT 'water Baptism'. We have the ACTUAL examples offered over and over. Was the leapers 'water Baptism' what HEALED him or was it simply the desire of Chsit that this man be 'cleansed'? And weren't Christ's words that HE WAS FORGIVEN? and all this WITHOUT 'water Baptism'?

I have attempted to mislead NO ONE. I have simply tried to point out to those with the ability to SEE that all is NOT as the churches teach. The tradition of 'water Baptism' as we see it today has NO WAY in order to be PROVEN to be accurate or even the 'same' Baptism that was offered by Christ's deciples.

It is you that has proven that you are unable to 'see' beyond that which you have been TAUGHT. You that chooses NOT to see that what I have offered is NOT biased nor is it inaccurate so far as scripture is concerned.

But answer this question and the rest of this discussion is moot: Is 'water Baptism' ENOUGH. Is that ALL one NEED do in order to receive the gifts offered from above?

Blessings,

MEC

 

[one_lost_coin]

fran,

You continually insist that YOUR way is the ONLY way. yet I have offered the TRUTH in that Christ is able to forgive WITHOUT 'water Baptism'. We have the ACTUAL examples offered over and over. Was the leapers 'water Baptism' what HEALED him or was it simply the desire of Chsit that this man be 'cleansed'? And weren't Christ's words that HE WAS FORGIVEN? and all this WITHOUT 'water Baptism'?

I have attempted to mislead NO ONE. I have simply tried to point out to those with the ability to SEE that all is NOT as the churches teach. The tradition of 'water Baptism' as we see it today has NO WAY in order to be PROVEN to be accurate or even the 'same' Baptism that was offered by Christ's deciples.

It is you that has proven that you are unable to 'see' beyond that which you have been TAUGHT. You that chooses NOT to see that what I have offered is NOT biased nor is it inaccurate so far as scripture is concerned.

But answer this question and the rest of this discussion is moot: Is 'water Baptism' ENOUGH. Is that ALL one NEED do in order to receive the gifts offered from above?

Blessings,

MEC

Jesus way is the only way and he was very explicit and what we have been taught is what we are supposed to see it is the sole focus of our gaze as it comes out of Jesus very mouth as recorded by His Apostles. Water baptism is necessary for you if you haven't been baptized because you reject it you are rejecting Jesus command to baptize and be baptized in the Name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit it was good enough for Him it is necessary for you. If you are teaching others to reject baptism I would take a big step back and get some perspective because it is not cool. Not a single one of your examples denies the need for baptism. If you can't understand why than at least have enough sense to pass it on just as Jesus said to do it. If for no other reason than just because He said so.

None of the Catholics writing here are teaching once saved always saved so you can drop the is water baptism enough bit. Through baptism we are born from above, joined to the life, death and resurrection of Jesus Christ, made free from original sin, forgiven of all sins commited to that point, receive the Holy Spirit, enter in to the communal life of God into His Church and so much more. All of which is explicitly written in the bible no phD or manipulation of the text just flatly stated. How could anyone be opposed to that?

 

[dadof10]

And as far as YOU know it was for the testing of THEIR faith that they were so commissioned.

I would believe this and your contention that water baptism is "symbolic" if you could show where Scripture defines it as such. Can you?

I have no traditions that are 'man-made'

By your own definition, yes you do...unless you can show chapter and verse.

Can Baptism 'save'? I have YET to see scriptural evidence of such.

Again, 1PT 3:20-21- "eight persons, were saved through water.
Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you..."

As long as you keep bringing it up (and then ignoring the verses), I'll keep posting it.

I have simply offered that their teachings are NOT as offered up in scripture and therefore have little if ANY bearing on the truth of 'water Baptism'.

Where is it "offered up in scripture" that water baptism is symbolic? Where are the verses that claim that baptism was commissioned "for the testing of THEIR [the Apostles] faith"? It seems like YOUR teachings are the ones that are un-Scriptural.

Dad, is 'water Baptism' ENOUGH for one to receive Salvation? Is that ALL that one must DO or BE in order to BE SAVED? Answer this question and we can put the issue to rest. Otherwise we go round and round and end up right back where we started from.

Watch carefully. Here is how to answer a direct question. YES. Water baptism is enough to save, but you can lose that salvation through disobedience and sin. I have answered this question more than once. It is you that won't move on.

I just answered your question. As far as I know, I have not ignored one direct question you have asked. Now, I would like the same consideration. Please answer the following questions:

1) Do you think 1 Peter is an inspired work? Has it been "altered"?
2) Is 1PT3:20-21 refering to water baptism?
3) Where does Scripture teach water baptism is symbolic?

Thanks in advance for "doing unto others...."

 

[dadof10]

And dad, the use of deception proves LITTLE in regards to truth. For the words that you have offered are negated by the FACT the IF you read JUST a little further, you RUN INTO these words:

John 4:

[1] When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
[2] (Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

Now, are the words that you offered TRUTH in regards to the REASON that you offered them? Or was this deliberate deception in order to PROVE what you 'believe'? I wonder.............

All I "offered" were the words of Scripture. You can either accept or reject them.

It's amazing to me that when scholars are divided on a point, you take the side that bolsters your position, ignore the other side completely, and claim deception. Did Jesus, Himself, baptize? According to some scholars, yes, early in His career, then the Apostles took over, with His blessing. According to others no, not at all. He only commissioned it.

We will never know. Either way, it points to how important it was to Him.

Even if He never immersed people in the water Himself, He was THERE with the Apostles giving His blessing to WATER BAPTISM and commissioning it DIRECTLY. This is accepted by ALL scholars (that I found, anyway).

You would have at least some credibility if you would answer the questions in the above post and quit looking for something sinister simply because someone disagrees with you.

 

[francisdesales]

fran,

You continually insist that YOUR way is the ONLY way.

Mike, I have NEVER insisted that it is "my way". You have been told that I am explaining the Catholic view, not my own personal one, although they are the same. The Catholic view preceded mine by hundreds of years. I know you WANT to make this a "you vs. me" battle of scripture interpretations, but I have never made it such. It is a "you vs. the Church".

Even if it wasn't a "you vs. the Church", your point of view makes little sense of what is ACTUALLY in Scriptures, rather than your presumptions that rituals are merely symbolic and can readily be dispensed with. That is an opinion which guides your incorrect interpretations.

And finally, Scriptural interpretation is rarely ONE view. However, your opinion does not take into account what other Scriptures say, so the "symbolic" view is cast aside.

yet I have offered the TRUTH in that Christ is able to forgive WITHOUT 'water Baptism'.

Mike, I never denied that God is unable to forgive sins without water baptism. Perhaps you recall that there is a sacrament called "Reconciliation", which the Church Fathers call the "second baptism" or "the second plank of our salvation"? However, the idea that we are born in the Spirit is meant to be unique. We are only born from above once. We receive an indelible mark only one time. We become heirs of Christ once. We are adopted sons. All this is a result of Baptism.

Now, COULD God bring people into His communion WITHOUT water baptism? Of course. Hear of circumcision? However, I don't see any promise of a "Newer" Covenant that we have been promised. God has told the OT prophets that there would be ONE New Covenant - and Christ is the fulfillment and executor of that Covenant.

Rather than focusing on whether God could make a rock bigger than He could pick up, we should consider what we DO know from Scriptures and Apostolic teachings. Humble yourself to obey the Word, rather than following your desires to bend God's teachings to some hypothetical potential that is not mentioned in Scriptures.

We have the ACTUAL examples offered over and over. Was the leapers 'water Baptism' what HEALED him or was it simply the desire of Chsit that this man be 'cleansed'? And weren't Christ's words that HE WAS FORGIVEN? and all this WITHOUT 'water Baptism'?

I already told you that...

1. No need for sacraments when Christ walked the earth.
2. No Holy Spirit given until AFTER Pentacost.

Baptism in the Christian dispensation INCLUDES the Spirit. There is no evidence that Christ gave the Spirit to anyone whom He forgave before He ascended into heaven. There is no indication that any of these men were now "new creations in Christ" and were "heirs to heaven" or were "sealed with the Holy Spirit". Things that the NT makes clear happens as a result of Baptism and NOTHING else.

I have attempted to mislead NO ONE.

Whether you purposely are misleading people or whether you just do not know the Word of God, I will not judge.

It is you that has proven that you are unable to 'see' beyond that which you have been TAUGHT. You that chooses NOT to see that what I have offered is NOT biased nor is it inaccurate so far as scripture is concerned.

I have heard your arguments and find them unconvincing and Scripturally lacking. They are not about to drag me out of the Church that Christ established and promised to protect. Even today.

: Is 'water Baptism' ENOUGH. Is that ALL one NEED do in order to receive the gifts offered from above?

Is water baptism enough for salvation? Depends on what you mean by salvation. It can mean the initial remission of sins, or it can mean are eternal glory in heaven. The first does not automatically guarantee the second, to the chagrin of my separated brothers who do not see the connection between faith and works.

We are saved by faith - sins are remitted by faith in God's promise to do so. Always, baptism saves.
We are saved by faith and works - God will judge us whether we will enter the Kingdom of heaven. Baptism does not guarantee man will love. Even all the faith in the world is worthless and non-salvific without love. No one will enter heaven without love.

Regards

 

[Imagican]

actually my Bible reads:

[18] For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
[19] By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
[20] Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
[21] The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
[22] Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

And in these words there is NO mention of 'water Baptism' per se. You have NO more 'reason' to believe this refers to 'water Baptism' than I do that it DOESN'T. For it plainly speaks of the Spirit Previous to the mention of Baptism; 'being put to death in the flesh, but QUICKENED by the Spirit',
went and preached unto the spirits in prison............where does it mention Baptism here? And then this: NOT the putting away of the filth of the flesh but a GOOD concience toward God.

there is mention of Baptism OVER AND OVER again througout the 'Word' that has NOTHING to do with literal WATER. Symbolically ALL Baptism is in reference to WATER, but that does NOT make all Baptism THROUGH literal water.

No dad, you will simply not be satisfied UNTIL you somehow get ME to admit that what YOU have been TAUGHT is the 'truth'. And that ain't gonna happen.

I ask; if NOT for the Catholic Church, then WHERE did the method of the tradition of Baptism COME from? And you can't honestly expect me to believe that Peter Baptized in Rome by 'sprinkling' individuals? For ALL 'water Baptism' that is even MENTIONED in the Word is done by eemersion. From John to the apostles we see that those that were Baptized in water were placed IN water, not water placed ON them.

You are so found of the scripture concerning Noah. Now, what does this scripture INDICATE? IN water or water ON someone? And, by the way, YOU brought the Cathlolic Church INTO this conversation NOT I. I have spoken no more or no less in favor of EITHER Catholic tradition or Protestant tradition.

And dad, i have never concerned myself with scholars concerning 'water Baptism' so I had NO idea that some believed that Christ HIMSELF Baptized in water. I thought it was 'common knowledge' that Christ NEVER Baptized ANY that we are aware of in scripture. But, I GUESS we can SUPPOSE ANYTHING.

So far as the scripture that you continue to offer and say that I have NOT answered your question; I believe I have and you just don't want to hear it. Neither YOU nor I am able to SAY with certainty that the words offered are refering to literal 'water Baptism'. Maybe, maybe not. There is a comparison to Baptism and Noah but that is NOT to say that it is made for the REASON that you continue to insist.

So often I have offered that Christ forgave OFTEN the sins of those that He chose and WITHOUT 'water Baptism'. But I can assure you that those that He forgave were exposed to The Spirit. And that this SAME Spirit was able to convict them of Christ's identity and purpose.

Can one become Baptized in Spirit at the moment of 'water Baptism'? I won't deny it for a second. But IS one 'born in Spirit at the moment of their 'water Baptism'? Certainly NOT ALWAYS. And even IF, two days after, are they STILL CLEAN?

dad, if there is ONE THING that I HOPE that you can get out of this conversation it is that the rudimentary rituals that WE perform are NO different than WORKS taken in the context that is offered by MOST churches.

And there is NO way that ANYONE can convince me that there are those that are saved that are NEVER Baptized in 'water'. For what is offered over and over, (sometimes along WITH 'water Baptism but MOSTLY WITHOUT), is THEM THAT BELIEVE. When we read the Beatitudes, we find NO Baptism in the words defining them that will inherit the kindom of God. NOT ONCE.

So, find yourself secure in the teachings of your church if you choose. But beware of the potential dangers inherent in accepting that which is 'created by men' in understanding and beware that what YOU BELIEVE is what you are BOUND by. And if those beliefs are in err, then there can be NOTHING of righteousness that comes from them. Remember, Judge NOT lest YE be judged. I am ONLY judging the 'truth' in that what is taught in churches is NOT what is offered up in scripture. You are defending the very NATURE of the 'beast' in that men are able to 'create' whatsoever they choose and teach it to others. We have the PERFECT examples found in the words Christ WARNING that the religious leaders of the Jews had gone BEYOND that which was offered by Moses and the prophets and had been teaching their OWN laws and understanding that was contradictory to the 'truth'. For back then, those like yourself would have been convinced that one MUST wash their hands BEFORE eating or their food would have been UNCLEAN. Yet Christ PLAINLY offered that this was 'created law' by those that had begun to believe that THEY were able to discern those things that were NEVER revealed thus.

I choose to ignore such teachings and believe in what is offered in Word and Spirit. If I am condemned for that at least it's not the foolishness of ANOTHER that is NO DIFFERENT than I so far as ability to KNOW and LOVE God and BE known and LOVED by HIM.

We will be known by our FRUIT and that is NOT what we do in ritual. For the Pharasees and scribes were PERFECT keepers of 'ritual'. And Christ compares these to EMPTY tombs. But what they had FAILED to learn as so many of today have done as well is to LOVE. Love God and Love each other. They allowed their PRIDE to be the guiding factor in their lives for the simple sake of 'greed'. They wanter to 'seem' important to those around them. They wanted to be MORE important than ALL OTHERS, Taking the best seats at gatherings, being known by all as they passed through the markets, and dressing better than those around them. But Christ offered PLAINLY that these have ALREADY received their reward EACH time they are able to recognize that which pleases their FLESH. Beware of 'what' you choose to BE so far as teaching others'.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[Imagican]

Fran,

Much of what you speak rings of truth so far as your belief is concerned. And YES, when I refer to YOUR beliefs, I AM refering to those that you have accepted from your church. I have attempted to show that I recognize this over and over again througout this discussion.

But your offerings are no different in the respect of 'water Baptism' than they are concerning 'trinity'. You would offer that there is NO defined answer to EITHER. It's a matter of MYTERY that we must simply accept. But the word was given FOR purpose and that PURPOSE was/IS understanding. God has NOT left us igorant in myteries that we are unable to comprehend.

What takes place in the heart of one that is 'born again' is NOT something that can be ignored. From all that I have gathered from the veiws of those that follow Catholocism, this is NOT taught aas important, only following the teachings of the 'church'. I find this depressing in ways that you probably can't imagine. For I can think of little MORE depressing than for those that TRULY wish to KNOW God being led in a direction that places their faith in their LEADERS rather than in God and His Son.

For we ARE able to have a PERSONAL relationship with God through Christ. This is stated over and over again. And FOR this relationship to be forged REQUIRES that we BE 'born again' LITERALLY. That our hearts BE circumcised. And WHEN we are able to BE reborn, then The Spirit IS able to guide us INDIVIDUALLY. It is able to convict and to secure us in that which we have been commanded to DO. And I have found that 'water Baptism' as is taught by the churches does NOT by necessity bring about what 'I' would call 'rebirth'. That you believe such is your choice.

Fran, I do not believe in 'magical' wine or bread. So forgive me if I do NOT accept the understanding that you have chosen to believe. I don't believe that a priest is able to BECOME Christ. I don't believe that one can 'sprinkle water' on an innocent child and bring about 'rebirth'. For we have been given the understanding that 'water Baptism' is symbolic of cleansing and a baby has no SINS to be forgiven FOR. While all are born INTO sin, that is not to say that ALL have sinned from birth. For that which is done without the ability to UNDERSTAND can rarely be considered SIN. Adam and Eve were NOT punished for their IGNORANCE. They were punished for their DISOBEDIENCE. And one can ONLY be disobedient towards that which they KNOW.

And Fran, I have NOT attempted to discourage ANYONE from 'being Baptized in water'. Once again, I have simply 'tried' to place it in it's PROPER perspective.

And for dad and others that continue to point out that the apostles commission was to preach and BBaptize; I am NOT an apostle. The apostles died about eighteen hundred years ago. So what was commanded of them is not necessarily pertinent to US.

To believe that one MUST follow a 'certain' ritual is to believe that God is some kind of 'childish' entity that demands that we DO as He says DO regardless of WHY. That is not the aspect of ANY eentity that abounds in LOVE. That tyranical type dictatorship is not the Kingdom of God. For God's Kingdom IS and WILL be one of LOVE and forgiveness. Otherwise we practice in vain. Otherwise we believe in vain. Otherwise we FOLLOW in vain.

I just hope and pray that those that have been led to believe that a particular ritual is able to 'alter' their being will someday SEE that it is their HEART that needs to be altered and not a particular ritual or rite. For our 'fruit is love and compassion' not 'something' that we eat or drink or chant or recite. God WANTS us to KNOW Him as He already KNOWS us. He WANTS to be our father and to be FREE to love and worship Him as such. Nothing more, nothing less since our 'creation'.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[turnorburn]

After 507 posts • Page 34 of 34 • 1 ... 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 the answer is still

 

[one_lost_coin]

Imagician asks Can Baptism 'save'? I have YET to see scriptural evidence of such.


Again, 1PT 3:20-21- "eight persons, were saved through water.
Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you..."

As long as you keep bringing it up (and then ignoring the verses), I'll keep posting it.

At some point this becomes comical and that is roughly after it has passed through tears, sadness, tragedy, the surreal. Oh my mistake it just went back to sad.

 

[francisdesales]

Much of what you speak rings of truth so far as your belief is concerned. And YES, when I refer to YOUR beliefs, I AM refering to those that you have accepted from your church. I have attempted to show that I recognize this over and over again througout this discussion.

When I give a personal opinion, I will let you know. However, I am speaking for the Church's teaching. If I incorrectly teach them, then I will humbly retreat. That is not your stance. You are the last word in your mind. I am not.

But your offerings are no different in the respect of 'water Baptism' than they are concerning 'trinity'. You would offer that there is NO defined answer to EITHER. It's a matter of MYTERY that we must simply accept. But the word was given FOR purpose and that PURPOSE was/IS understanding. God has NOT left us igorant in myteries that we are unable to comprehend.

What do you mean there is no "defined" answer? I gave it and continue to give it. Certainly there is mystery to the work of God, how God works behind and through the ritual, since He works on our souls. But that doesn't it make it unknoweable. This is why sacraments are BASED ON FAITH. We trust that God is working through the ritual because we have been taught this by the Apostles who received this teaching from Christ.

What takes place in the heart of one that is 'born again' is NOT something that can be ignored. From all that I have gathered from the veiws of those that follow Catholocism, this is NOT taught aas important, only following the teachings of the 'church'.

The subject, when necessary, can address that. We are not talking about the "theology of love", or inner spirituality. Trust me, we have an incredibly diverse tradition of spirituality to draw from. However, we are speaking about doctrine and belief, more objective items. Any Catholic who is active in his faith will admit that he also considers the relationship with Christ as important. The teachings of the Church aid us in that walk. Otherwise, we are susceptible to all kinds of strange things, like pantheism or unitarianism, based on our "feelings", very subjective things that are very often flat out WRONG.

For we ARE able to have a PERSONAL relationship with God through Christ. This is stated over and over again. And FOR this relationship to be forged REQUIRES that we BE 'born again' LITERALLY. That our hearts BE circumcised. And WHEN we are able to BE reborn, then The Spirit IS able to guide us INDIVIDUALLY.

Are you trying to say one must be perfect before they have a relationship with God? That man must be "full grown in Christ" before your idea of baptism takes place??? The Bible is full of people who were not walking the walk very well. I presume you have read some of the writings of Paul? The Corinthians, do they strike you as men who have had their hearts entirely circumcised and were mature Christians in all aspects? Paul himself tells them they are not and warns them to beware of falling into their past lifes, as such will not inherit the Kingdom - their inheritance taken away - NOT never given in the first place.

One doesn't have to be perfect to call upon God and BEG for forgiveness, seeking salvation in the waters of the Baptismal font. Here, the Spirit comes and a new man is born. But even Paul admits that the Christian continues to struggle against the "old man" that refuses to go away so easily. The Spirit guides us individually, but it is a journey. We grow as we learn the ways of Christ.

It is able to convict and to secure us in that which we have been commanded to DO. And I have found that 'water Baptism' as is taught by the churches does NOT by necessity bring about what 'I' would call 'rebirth'. That you believe such is your choice.

Man has free will, even after regeneration. I told you once, I'll tell you again. Baptism does not make love grow in the heart of man. The Spirit does. And we still can grieve the Spirit by refusing to follow Him.

Fran, I do not believe in 'magical' wine or bread. So forgive me if I do NOT accept the understanding that you have chosen to believe. I don't believe that a priest is able to BECOME Christ.

I, nor the Church does, either. Why the non-sequitar? Another strawman?

I don't believe that one can 'sprinkle water' on an innocent child and bring about 'rebirth'.

You don't believe God can do it? Do you have a problem with circumcising infants, as well?

For we have been given the understanding that 'water Baptism' is symbolic of cleansing and a baby has no SINS to be forgiven FOR.

I am not going to go into the subject of original sin here. It may be a pleasant diversion for some, but it is off topic. The water symbolizes and makes visible what is happening in the spiritual realm. You are confused with a symbol having no true meaning in of itself. You have gotten rid of the transcendental meaning of symbols and sacraments. Your rationale religion has divested itself of the mysterious and the divine. Unless Mike can see and feel it, it just isn't happening. Faith, Mike. God says it is so, even if you only see the symbol...

And Fran, I have NOT attempted to discourage ANYONE from 'being Baptized in water'. Once again, I have simply 'tried' to place it in it's PROPER perspective.

No, you only berate anyone who would be so silly as to hold onto such rituals from 2000 years ago... "How quaint, but we don't have use of such things anymore..." Your lecturing would indicate otherwise.

To believe that one MUST follow a 'certain' ritual is to believe that God is some kind of 'childish' entity that demands that we DO as He says DO regardless of WHY. That is not the aspect of ANY eentity that abounds in LOVE. That tyranical type dictatorship is not the Kingdom of God. For God's Kingdom IS and WILL be one of LOVE and forgiveness. Otherwise we practice in vain. Otherwise we believe in vain. Otherwise we FOLLOW in vain.

AH, "MUST". I don't remember using that word. I said that Baptism is ALWAYS salvific, but I never said the God MUST base who will enter the Kingdom based on whether they were baptized or not. Ordinarily, one must be baptized, but absolutely speaking, God is not bound by HIS sacraments. He can do what He desires.

Ordinarily it is necessary - and those such as yourself who try to point to "God can do whatever He wants, so He will save me if I don't obey Him" is bound to fail.

I just hope and pray that those that have been led to believe that a particular ritual is able to 'alter' their being will someday SEE that it is their HEART that needs to be altered and not a particular ritual or rite.

False dichotomy alert. The Church teaches that an inner conversion must take place. The Spirit, acting within the rite, begins the transformation of the inner self. Since we still have free will, we can choose to allow the fruit to rot, or we can allow God to work within us.

Do you recall the parable of the Sower and the Seed? Does the Sower only place seed on good ground? Think of the seed as the initial planting of the Word within us, Baptism by water and the Spirit - being born from above. Where the seed falls, fruit does not necessarily grow. And yet, all ground received the same seed... Some seed will not grow - so please keep that in mind as you ponder God's Word. The Church has been doing it much longer and is indeed guided by the Spirit of God.

Regards

 

[dadof10]

actually my Bible reads:

[18] For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:
[19] By which also he went and preached unto the spirits in prison;
[20] Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
[21] The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:
[22] Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him.

And in these words there is NO mention of 'water Baptism' per se. You have NO more 'reason' to believe this refers to 'water Baptism' than I do that it DOESN'T. For it plainly speaks of the Spirit Previous to the mention of Baptism; 'being put to death in the flesh, but QUICKENED by the Spirit',
went and preached unto the spirits in prison............where does it mention Baptism here? And then this: NOT the putting away of the filth of the flesh but a GOOD concience toward God.

MEC, this is so convoluted I don't know where to start. I guess I'll take a couple of lines at a time.

And in these words there is NO mention of 'water Baptism' per se. You have NO more 'reason' to believe this refers to 'water Baptism' than I do that it DOESN'T.

Yes, I do. My gosh, it says "eight souls were SAVED BY WATER." Then the very next verse "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us..." If the text says "also" it must be refering to something said previously that SAVED. If this is looked at without your apriori predjudice, you could see it. You are bringing your non-scriptural, man-made tradition (e.i. baptism is symbolic) into Scripture and trying, very unsuccesfully, to make it fit.

For it plainly speaks of the Spirit Previous to the mention of Baptism; 'being put to death in the flesh, but QUICKENED by the Spirit', went and preached unto the spirits in prison...where does it mention Baptism here?

It doesn't because Peter is NOT speaking of baptism of the Spirit. If he was talking about that he would have mentioned it in conjunction with being "QUICKENED by the Spirit", which he didn't.

And then this: NOT the putting away of the filth of the flesh but a GOOD concience toward God.

Right. Another reference to WASHING...WATER, since the Holy Spirit is not usually associated with washing but Fire, it's not refering to Him. How much clearer could it be?

It is not just the Catholic Church (which I have not quoted in this discussion ON PURPOSE) who thinks this refers to water baptism, Thayer's has this to say about the words "the like figure":

antitypos:

1) a thing formed after some pattern
2) a thing resembling another, its counterpart
a) something in the Messianic times which answers to the type, prefiguring it in the O.T.,as baptism corresponds to the deluge (1 Pet 3:21)

Another instance of the word "antitypos" in the N.T. is Heb 9:24:

"For Christ is not entered into the holy places made with hands, which are the figures [antitypos] of the true; but into heaven itself, now to appear in the presence of God for us:"

http://cf.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm?Strongs=G499&t=kjv

I don't need to rely on the authority of the Catholic Church to prove the BIBLICAL doctrine of salvific water baptism\, so stop attacking Her and start attacking Scripture. Maybe you could just call 1 Peter "altered" and be done with this whole discussion.

there is mention of Baptism OVER AND OVER again througout the 'Word' that has NOTHING to do with literal WATER. Symbolically ALL Baptism is in reference to WATER, but that does NOT make all Baptism THROUGH literal water.

Well, you finally got around to interpreting 1PT, now maybe you could show in Scripture where water baptism is symbolic of anything.

And dad, i have never concerned myself with scholars concerning 'water Baptism' so I had NO idea that some believed that Christ HIMSELF Baptized in water.

MEC, sadly, I don't think you concern yourself with scholars pertaining to any topic.

 

[dadof10]

After 507 posts • Page 34 of 34 • 1 ... 30, 31, 32, 33, 34 the answer is still

After 507 posts • Page 34 of 34 • 1 ... 30, 31, 32, 33, 34...you have still not added one substantive comment to this discussion. Are you interested in defending your position or merely trolling?

 

[Imagican]

Eureka!!!!

dad, fran, cc,

I have offered much prayer in regards to this discussion. In an attempt to be able to covey my understanding, it is obvious my message has been misunderstood over and over again.

I awoke this morning with THIS on my heart:

I am on my death bed. I have lived a life of sin. A friend ask me if I know Jesus. He begins to tell me of our Savior and at one point my eyes and heart are opened up and I accept Christ INTO MY HEART as MY Savior. But, alas, there is NO water for me to Be Baptized with. I DIE.

Now, I do NOT believe there is a SINGLE individual that would DOUBT for a second that this scenario is POSSIBLE. And that under these circumstances that I COULD indeed receive forgiveness and Salvation WITHOUT 'water Baptism'.

Here's the EUREKA part: Due to the importance placed on 'water Baptism' by the churches. And due to the unnatural emphasis placed upon it. it becomes apparent that due to such circumstances as the one above, SOMEONE decided that ANY water would do and that emersion was NOT needed.That in a 'pinch', water could simply be 'sprinkled' on one in order to SYMBOLICALLY duplicate that which was 'traditionally' done through emersion. It became accepted and 'adopted INTO Christianity' regardless of it's VALIDITY.

Yet we KNOW that Christ died for sin. And IF we BELIEVE this, He died for OUR sins. Regardless of ANY 'act' that WE can perform, THE ACT was completed BY Christ. HE died for OUR sins. No amount of water, no physical 'act' that WE are able to DO is able to replicate that performed BY Chrust. That is the WHOLE reason that Christ HAD to come to start with. It is simply up to US to accept it.

Now, this innordinate belief in 'water Baptism' PLAINLY offers that WE believe that WE can DO something that is able to PERFORM that which ONLY Christ was able to. Can't you SEE that this is folly. That WE are NOT able to DO anything that is able to 'save ourselves'? No matter HOW much we would LIKE to be able to, there is NOTHING that WE are able to DO. The ACT was performed and completed BY Christ. Our acceptance of and BELIEF in this is what is able to BRING us TO Christ.

dad, fran, cc,

I HAVE BEEN Baptized with water. For in the beginning, I TOO was 'caught up' in the churches teaching that it was NEEDED. But since, I have been led to discover that MUCH of what the churches teach are simply THEIR 'traditions' that THEY created and that these have LITTLE bearing on the 'TRUTH'.

The command to Baptise was given to the apostles. They were commanded to Baptise with water. I find NO such COMMANDMENTS towards THE PEOPLE. I find NO command that one MUST be 'Baptized in water' in order to BE saved. That the churches TEACH this is without doubt. But the validity of the teaching is what I question.

I have attempted to offer NOTHING that is UN Biblical. If anything, I have simply tried to 'get BACK' to the Word and sort through the baggage that has been adopted and added into tradition that may or may NOT have any valid value whatsoever.

Baptism is NOT a 'bad thing'. Under the PROPER circumstances it can be a great and glorious thing. Any time one commits themselves to God through His Son it IS a 'good thing'. But that can be done OUTSIDE of physical 'water Baptism'. And 'water Baptism' can be a 'bad thing'. If one's heart is NOT in the proper PLACE, then making such a committment that one has no intention of actually FOLLOWING, they have performed nothing short of a monumental LIE. A lie that they will certainly be held responsible for. For it is better to have NEVER known the truth than to learn it and IGNORE it or turn away from it.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[francisdesales]

dad, fran, cc,

I have offered much prayer in regards to this discussion. In an attempt to be able to covey my understanding, it is obvious my message has been misunderstood over and over again.

I awoke this morning with THIS on my heart:

I am on my death bed. I have lived a life of sin. A friend ask me if I know Jesus. He begins to tell me of our Savior and at one point my eyes and heart are opened up and I accept Christ INTO MY HEART as MY Savior. But, alas, there is NO water for me to Be Baptized with. I DIE.

Baptism by desire. The Church teaches that if a person WOULD have desired baptism if he was aware of it and what it meant, then we believe that the person has received the Spirit. God is not bound by the sacrament itself. Otherwise, are we to believe that EVERY Jew before Christ, EVERY person in the Western Hemispher before 1492, millions of Asians before the missionaries went there - are all in hell because of being born at the wrong time and place???

This is what I meant by "ordinarily". Ordinarily, if one is aware of baptism, he MUST receive baptism. It is naturally a requirement because it is a command. However, God does not condemn the ignorant. Only those who reject him.

Here's the EUREKA part: Due to the importance placed on 'water Baptism' by the churches. And due to the unnatural emphasis placed upon it. it becomes apparent that due to such circumstances as the one above, SOMEONE decided that ANY water would do and that emersion was NOT needed.That in a 'pinch', water could simply be 'sprinkled' on one in order to SYMBOLICALLY duplicate that which was 'traditionally' done through emersion. It became accepted and 'adopted INTO Christianity' regardless of it's VALIDITY.

You are confusing what is absolutely possible with what is required if we know about something. You think that your knowledge of the existence of baptism now makes it optional for you? Refusing it after knowledge of it is rejecting Christ, since rejecting Apostolic teachings is rejecting Christ Himself, no matter how many times you say "I believe in God"... They are just words.

And nowhere do we see that Christian baptism is merely "symbolic" in the Scriptures. I would suggest you read up on what the first Christians believed and see how baptism developed, esp. for the idea of baptism by desire. Consider when the New World was discovered. The Church had to wrestle with that question in the 1500's. Read what the Church taught.

Yet we KNOW that Christ died for sin. And IF we BELIEVE this, He died for OUR sins. Regardless of ANY 'act' that WE can perform, THE ACT was completed BY Christ. HE died for OUR sins. No amount of water, no physical 'act' that WE are able to DO is able to replicate that performed BY Chrust. That is the WHOLE reason that Christ HAD to come to start with. It is simply up to US to accept it.

[/quote]

You simply have no concept of obedience to God, do you... Rejecting His teachings is rejecting Him. We do not find any teachings of Christ that make baptism "unnecessary". Otherwise, it makes His final command to the apostles a ridiculous and useless command.

Kind of like telling them to eat cake, too...

Regards

 

[one_lost_coin]

Eureka!!!!

dad, fran, cc,

I have offered much prayer in regards to this discussion. In an attempt to be able to covey my understanding, it is obvious my message has been misunderstood over and over again.

I awoke this morning with THIS on my heart:

It funny because I woke up this morning with an epiphany also this morning. I am not kidding I did I logged in to write about it and see I wasn't the first. If I doubted God was working through this thread I do not doubt it now.

I came to a deeper understanding of baptism through a kind of picturing a sort of antibaptism in that say I could be antibaptized in Mugabe's Mozambique I would be born into a new life surrounded by a new set of conditions to exist with. In this case they would be of fear, starvation and the real possibility of a horrific death. That I would be living in an environment of waring factions who's hearts are ruled by hate and the need for power and control bearing the fruits of fear and intimidation, neglect for their fellow man and his needs. An environment of starvation illness, suffering and slavery, that breads more of the same. a perpetual hell.

When I then compared that to the world that I actually entered in through baptism I found I have entered into new life surrounded by a communion of saints access to the sacraments that maintains this communion and heals it until it is perfected. Spiritual and physical food in abundance, freedom to love and obey God and others from my heart. Trinitarian life, Peace, Hope, Love. Everything I need to grow and freely love others as God intended. The support of everyone in this community to continue on to life to preserver. True humility, the life of the beatitudes and if I stay in this Grace Life Eternal with our Lord.

This is what I have found baptism brings at least in a way that makes sense to me. So in one sense "yes" baptism is all you need because because with it God gives forgiveness, supporting community, Grace, Holy Spirit...everything you need to become a Saint but in a sense "no" if you walk away and do not preserver in it to the end.

Those who on that final day that hear the Master say "Enter into my Peace" will say yes baptism was enough and those that hear "I never knew you" but were baptized will say no it wasn't (this last part was theology according to OLC and may not be accurate this opinion if it contains error may not be attributed to the Church. I still thinking it throuh. I will say it is a variation of CS lewis concept of life on earth as viewed from heaven or hell in "The Great Divorce")

Thanks for everything everyone has shared.

 

[Imagican]

fran,

If one is convicted in their hearts to BE Baptized, they should surely BE Baptized. But I believe that they should listen with their hearts to God and His Son instead of PEOPLE.

Many churches INSIST that one MUST be Baptized into THEIR faith or their 'church' in order to BE a 'member'. Can't you SEE that this is done in order to FORM an allegiance to A particular denomination?

And there are many that upon leaving ONE church and joining another feel compelled to be Baptized AGAIN. Now HOW does this make ANY sense in 'truth'? These people are trying to DO to get to heaven. For IF 'water Baptism' has ANY validity to begin with, then ONCE would BE enough. if not, then what makes ONE Baptism 'better' or 'different' than ANOTHER? Is it really possible for us to crucify Christ over and over again? Or was ONCE enough?

And when He died and ROSE again, wasn't THAT enough for US to die to sin in HIS name and be born again in Spirit THROUGH Christ Himself? And doesn't it FIRST Start with hearing, and THEN believing.

Not; 'JUST words', my friend. For God is able to KNOW what is IN one's heart regardless of what comes out of their mouth. Being Baptized in water has NO bearing on what is IN one's heart. For I can assure you that many have BEEN Baptized in water that have NO love in their hearts or true love towards God or Christ or their fellow man. Do you truly believe that 'water Baptism' is able to 'BRING' love into one's heart? And if this is so, is it able to bring love into ALL hearts?

Fran, can I not truly find forgivness for my sins through an open and honest admission that I AM a sinner and NEED forgiveness? In an honest and sincere BELIEF that Christ lived and died and now lives again so that I do NOT have to die? And can't I BELIEVE these things SINCERELY without 'water Baptism'? And isn't THAT in itself ENOUGH for me to MAKE a commitment to God through His Son and LIVE FOR and THROUGH Them?

Now, so far as ignoring what has been offered inscripture: Christ speaks of MANY 'things' that define those that love God and Love their neighbors. I have not found that 'water Baptism' is ONE of these. Christ speaks of many that will inherit the Kingdom of God, I have failed to find the part where He states that 'water Baptism' is ONE of these. Regardless of the commission TO the apostles to Baptize IN His name, I have found scarce evidence that Christ commanded ANYONE that they MUST be Baptized in water to RECEIVE Him. Just the opposite in fact. Read His APPEALS to all and SEE if 'water Baptism' is ONE of the requirements that Christ HIMSELF offers to us in order to BE 'saved'.

I do NOT attempt to 'downplay' 'water Baptism' by ANY sense of it's PURPOSE. I simply do not attempt to teach that it is the 'mystical, and all powerful' means to an end as the churches do.

The question that we began to discuss was NOT the 'validity' of 'water Baptism' so much as 'Is water Baptism ENOUGH'. And I can think of ONLY ONE 'thing' that IS enough: submission to the Spirit of God through Christ. Not 'pretended submission' but TRUE submission. Is Baptism an act of submission? Of course it CAN be. But is it REQUIRED? I do NOT 'think' so. For there is MUCH more that we ARE able to do in the love that we offer both heavenward and right here on earth that is able to please both Father and Son MUCH more than a simple act of being dampened by 'water'.

Blessings,

MEC

 

[dadof10]

I am on my death bed. I have lived a life of sin. A friend ask me if I know Jesus. He begins to tell me of our Savior and at one point my eyes and heart are opened up and I accept Christ INTO MY HEART as MY Savior. But, alas, there is NO water for me to Be Baptized with. I DIE.

Now, I do NOT believe there is a SINGLE individual that would DOUBT for a second that this scenario is POSSIBLE. And that under these circumstances that I COULD indeed receive forgiveness and Salvation WITHOUT 'water Baptism'.

This is like the third time you've given an example of someone saved by EXTRAORDINARY MEANS. YES, people can be saved without water baptism. Whether they are on a desert island, kept in a box, or converted on their deathbeds, they can be saved, but this is not the ordinary way of salvation, as Fran explained above..

It might help you if you answered a question. We all agree that Jesus is the way to Heaven and the only way to get there is by the merits of Jesus. Do you think there are people in Heaven who have NOT accepted Jesus as lord and savior? Any OT prophets? Jewish people? People who have never heard of Jesus, then died? If so, then this would be an EXTRAORDINARY way that the merits of Christ are applied to a person. Make sense?

 

[Catholic Crusader]

I am on my death bed. I have lived a life of sin. A friend ask me if I know Jesus. He begins to tell me of our Savior and at one point my eyes and heart are opened up and I accept Christ INTO MY HEART as MY Savior. But, alas, there is NO water for me to Be Baptized with. I DIE.

Now, I do NOT believe there is a SINGLE individual that would DOUBT for a second that this scenario is POSSIBLE. And that under these circumstances that I COULD indeed receive forgiveness and Salvation WITHOUT 'water Baptism'.

This is like the third time you've given an example of someone saved by EXTRAORDINARY MEANS. YES, people can be saved without water baptism. Whether they are on a desert island, kept in a box, or converted on their deathbeds, they can be saved, but this is not the ordinary way of salvation, as Fran explained above..

It might help you if you answered a question. We all agree that Jesus is the way to Heaven and the only way to get there is by the merits of Jesus. Do you think there are people in Heaven who have NOT accepted Jesus as lord and savior? Any OT prophets? Jewish people? People who have never heard of Jesus, then died? If so, then this would be an EXTRAORDINARY way that the merits of Christ are applied to a person. Make sense?

LOL. I answered that question a million times too, pages ago. The merry-go-round never stops around here, does it

 

[francisdesales]

fran,

If one is convicted in their hearts to BE Baptized, they should surely BE Baptized. But I believe that they should listen with their hearts to God and His Son instead of PEOPLE.

That is a good slogan for what a lot of people think today...

"If I think it, then it is so..." Or "My perception is my reality".

I guess murders and rapists can also convince themselves they are holy and righteous, as well. All they have to do is "believe it in their hearts". Thus, along with your modern adherents, subjective opinions are reality. Nothing objective anymore... Everyone's opinion of God is equally correct.

Problem with that is it is very easy to believe a lie you establish. The more you think it, the more it becomes your reality.

Wishful thinking is not presented in Scriptures as a viable alternative for the rituals and teachings of the Church, whether during OT or NT covenants...

Many churches INSIST that one MUST be Baptized into THEIR faith or their 'church' in order to BE a 'member'. Can't you SEE that this is done in order to FORM an allegiance to A particular denomination?

Are you familiar with the concept "people of God"? It is a visible structure, not some invisible and etherally imaginitive people who have some wishy-washy affiliation with each other because they also believe that God speaks to them whenever they have a cognitive thought?

And there are many that upon leaving ONE church and joining another feel compelled to be Baptized AGAIN. Now HOW does this make ANY sense in 'truth'?

There is only one baptism. A person is not necessarily baptized because they once took a bath in a river. Unitarian baptism is not a Christian baptism. Also, there are a number of Christians who believe that infant baptism isn't good enough - making "correct" faith a work of man that must come before the GIFT OF GOD, freely given.

For IF 'water Baptism' has ANY validity to begin with, then ONCE would BE enough. if not, then what makes ONE Baptism 'better' or 'different' than ANOTHER? Is it really possible for us to crucify Christ over and over again? Or was ONCE enough?

Yep. Once is enough, if done as the Church intends and God had commanded. Don't complain to me that other denominations want to rebaptize legitimately baptized Christians because they weren't perfect enough. To me, that is putting the wagon before the horse...

For God is able to KNOW what is IN one's heart regardless of what comes out of their mouth. Being Baptized in water has NO bearing on what is IN one's heart. For I can assure you that many have BEEN Baptized in water that have NO love in their hearts or true love towards God or Christ or their fellow man. Do you truly believe that 'water Baptism' is able to 'BRING' love into one's heart? And if this is so, is it able to bring love into ALL hearts?

It is not YOUR job to judge the level of love in one's heart when they are baptized, so why do YOU worry about whether it "took" or not??? Why can't you just accept someone's witness and leave it at that, rather than looking at someone with your microscope to see whether his heart was REALLY pure enough... Furthermore, baptism does not FOLLOW love. Love comes AFTER baptism, since we receive Christ's Spirit - and THEN we are able to love.

Now, so far as ignoring what has been offered inscripture: Christ speaks of MANY 'things' that define those that love God and Love their neighbors. I have not found that 'water Baptism' is ONE of these.

I am not sure whether you just don't read posts or have forgotten what I wrote, but I clearly have said that Baptism does not make people love others.

God's Holy Spirit "makes" people love. Baptism is the rite through which a person has received the imprint of the Spirit, has joined the Body of Christ. It is given for the remission of sins. Does that mean God must wait for men to baptize before He is "allowed" to work His will? Certainly not. However, your stubborn refusal is a rejection, not out of ignorance. This is just more rationalization.

Christ speaks of many that will inherit the Kingdom of God, I have failed to find the part where He states that 'water Baptism' is ONE of these. Regardless of the commission TO the apostles to Baptize IN His name, I have found scarce evidence that Christ commanded ANYONE that they MUST be Baptized in water to RECEIVE Him.

That's not what Peter said a few days after the ascension. Nor is the actions of the Apostles in Acts. Even those who had received the Spirit were promptly baptized - practically making it the same action. Apparently, Peter and the apostles were so dumb that they completely twisted the Gospel AFTER receiving the Spirit...

Or is this just another subtle attempt to undermine the Apostolic teachings by pushing your own agenda?

Read His APPEALS to all and SEE if 'water Baptism' is ONE of the requirements that Christ HIMSELF offers to us in order to BE 'saved'.

Water baptism BEFORE the Spirit would have just been a baptism similar to John's Baptism. Again and again, you ignore what has been said before. Your rationalizations are not taking into account what was said, and to maintain your "self-revelation", you totally ignore anything that destroys your argument, as if no one said anything.

Only being baptized in water AND THE SPIRIT, Christian baptism, could unite one to Christ, according to Scriptures. No other way is given ORDINARILY for one to join with Christ's Passion and Death, no matter how often you choose to ignore that.

The question that we began to discuss was NOT the 'validity' of 'water Baptism' so much as 'Is water Baptism ENOUGH'. And I can think of ONLY ONE 'thing' that IS enough: submission to the Spirit of God through Christ.

Yes, is baptism sufficient for what??? Again, I brought this up and answered the question. Water baptism in the Trinity ALWAYS saves. The questin was NOT is that the ONLY thing that saves, but whether IT saves...

Here is what you ignore...

No water baptism before Pentacost gave the Holy Spirit. Yet, Jesus promises the Holy Spirit THROUGH water baptism, a being "born from above". Something that was considered CRITICAL by Christ JUST BEFORE He ascended to heaven. Naturally, this was not the first time He mentioned this...

Secondly, no other way is given but baptism when we are speaking with union with Christ. No one comes into union with the Passion and Death of Christ EXCEPT through baptism. While God is not bound by this baptism, that is no reason to deny its effect or its importance for one who has actually received the Word of God through the Church.

Not 'pretended submission' but TRUE submission. Is Baptism an act of submission? Of course it CAN be. But is it REQUIRED? I do NOT 'think' so.

Again, true submission does not have to come at baptism. You are resurrecting the age-old heresy of "one must be perfect to be a true Christian". We are not sanctified BEFORE Baptism.

You are confusing salvation to heaven with salvation by the forgiveness of sins. Baptism ALWAYS provides the latter - although God can enact is extraordinarily due to ignorance of the person. Baptism only provides the first step for the former. Naturally, submission to God comes from the Spirit - which comes to man ordinarily after baptism.

Regards

 

[one_lost_coin]

Imagician,

regardless of extrodinary means may be possible for some these means do not apply to you or me or anyone we encounter with the Good News. We are not in a position to appeal to those means.

Rather we would be rejecting God by rejecting baptism. We would be teaching against the will of God if we teach anything other than Jesus command to go and baptize all in the Name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

This aspect of this thread is a most serious matter.