What Is Baptism?

[JLB]

Jesus Christ was baptized in order to fulfill the law, not do away with it

Please show us from the Law of Moses where Christ was to be baptized.



Thanks JLB

 

[JLB]

dirtfarmer here

Jesus Christ was baptized in order to fulfill the law, not do away with it. He completed the law and therefore it was obsolete. Today the law, when used lawful, reveals God's righteous requirement and how man cannot keep the law, if you break one you have broken all.

In order for Aaron to put on the high attire he had to bathe(baptize), cleanse, his whole body, then he was worthy to put on the high priest attire. So, even though Christ was sinless, in order to become the high priest to atone for our sin and fulfill the all the law, it was necessary for him to be baptized.

Aaron was indeed a type of Christ, however, Christ's sacrifice takes away our sin, not atone's for our sin.

Atone means to cover, the Blood of Jesus removes our sin.

The blood of bulls and goats does not take away sins, it atones.

For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins. Hebrews 10:4


JLB

 

[Nathan]

I think I understand what your asking, but maybe not.

Let's look at a couple of scriptures, that are unique, in that they take place before Jesus was crucified, raised from the dead, and poured out His Spirit, so we can discuss our view, and understand each other more clearly.


And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples 2 he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”
So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.”
3 And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?”
So they said, “Into John’s baptism.”
4 Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.” 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. 7 Now the men were about twelve in all. Acts 19:1-7

These disciples of John had already been baptized in water, but somehow had never believed in Jesus, even though John had taught them they were to believe on the One who would come after him.

These disciples of John needed to believe and be born again, in which the Holy Spirit would baptize them into Christ.

Then they would be ready to receive the Holy Spirit.

This was unique, in that John's disciples were baptized before Christ had risen and poured out His Spirit.

I see all three Baptism's here:

• Water Baptism: John's Baptism
• Baptized into Christ through believing Paul about Christ
• Baptized with the Holy Spirit: Received the Holy Spirit, through the laying on of hands by Paul.

What do you see?


Also, to me there seems to be a controversy in terms, which conflict with the Acts 10 account, which I hope we can discuss.




JLB

Understanding about baptism from Acts 10 is good. Meaning, we can learn a lot from it.

Personally I find all the different mentioning of baptism to be helpful much in the same way we find so many different accounts of how Jesus healed someone. I think there is an unspoken reason that can be understood from both examples.

 

[LovethroughDove]

What exactly is baptism?

Romans 6:3-4 Or don't you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

We have been born again of the Spirit. We have a new life in Christ. I have been given the Truth of him. Everything about him.

 

[dirtfarmer]

Please show us from the Law of Moses where Christ was to be baptized.



Thanks JLB

Hello JLB, dirtfarmer here

Leviticus 16:4 " He shall put on the holy linen coat, and he shall have linen the linen breeches upon his flesh, and he shall be girded with a linen girdle, and with the linen mitre shall he be attired: these are holy garment: therefore shall he wash his flesh in water, and so put them on.

Aaron was the high priest and in order to function as the "high priest" he had to bathe(baptize) his flesh in water before he could put on the garments of the high priest. This ,"the fulfilling of all righteousness, had to be accomplished before Christ entered into the role of high priest in heaven to offer his blood for the sin of the whole world.

 

[dirtfarmer]

Aaron was indeed a type of Christ, however, Christ's sacrifice takes away our sin, not atone's for our sin.

Atone means to cover, the Blood of Jesus removes our sin.

The blood of bulls and goats does not take away sins, it atones.

For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins. Hebrews 10:4


JLB

hello JLB, dirtfarmer here

How is that you believe that "Christ's sacrifice takes away or sin".? but does not "atone" ,pay the price required by God. In order for our sin to be removed, God has to be propitiated. He said "the soul that sinneth it shall die. That death is not physical death, but spiritual death. Spiritual death is separation from God, of which, we all were born in. Christ paid(atoned) for our sin through the cross of Calvary

Romans 5:11 " And not only so, but we joy also in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement."

 

[JLB]

hello JLB, dirtfarmer here

How is that you believe that "Christ's sacrifice takes away or sin".? but does not "atone" ,pay the price required by God. In order for our sin to be removed, God has to be propitiated. He said "the soul that sinneth it shall die. That death is not physical death, but spiritual death. Spiritual death is separation from God, of which, we all were born in. Christ paid(atoned) for our sin through the cross of Calvary

Romans 5:11 " And not only so, but we joy also in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom we have now received the atonement."

11 And not only that, but we also rejoice in God through our Lord Jesus Christ, through whom we have now received the reconciliation.
Romans 5:11

The word atonement is found in one place in the King James, and means reconciliation, which is why it is rendered reconciliation in the NKJV.

In the old testament the word atonement, [Strong's H3722 - kaphar] primarily means: to cover over.

to cover, purge, make an atonement, make reconciliation, cover over with pitch

1. (Qal) to coat or cover with pitch
2. (Piel)
   
   1. to cover over, pacify, propitiate
   2. to cover over, atone for sin, make atonement for
   3. to cover over, atone for sin and persons by legal rites
      
3. (Pual)
   
   1. to be covered over
   2. to make atonement for
      
4. (Hithpael) to be covered
   

The difference is, the Blood of Jesus takes away our sin, whereas the blood of bulls and goats does not.

That is the difference.

For it is not possible that the blood of bulls and goats could take away sins. Hebrews 10:4



JLB

 

[Jim Parker]

Baptizing babies is a different discussion but it helps me to understand that baptism in and of itself has no value.

OK, once more:
Rom 6:3-7
Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection, knowing this, that our old man was crucified with Him, that the body of sin might be done away with, that we should no longer be slaves of sin. For he who has died has been freed from sin.

I meant that the baby cannot believe what is being said.

There is nothing in scripture that says the baby has to believe anything.
Notice that, in the OT, the male child was circumcised on the 8th say after he was born. (Gen 17:10-14) He also had no idea what was going on but being circumcised made him a member of the covenant community.

Nathan is saying that there are other types of baptism besides with water. For instance in Acts when a person has already been baptized and then Peter or Paul "baptize" them again to receive the Holy Spirit by laying hands on them

Right that's baptism in water and baptism in the Holy Spirit. They are not interchangeable; both are required to enter the kingdom of God.. Jesus said: "...unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." (Jhn 3:5)

Nathan thinks that maybe in Mathew 28:19 when Jesus tells the Apostles to baptize, He means with the knowledge of the gospel.

That's what I understood him to say. It has absolutely no basis in scripture or in the historical teaching of the church.

In a simple way, when a baby is baptized, they teach that he becomes a child of God and is accepted into the community.

That is pretty much the historical teaching of the church.

But what if he grows up to be a lost person, as we understand it? Will he still go to heaven ONLY BECAUSE he has been baptized? Of course not. So the doctrine had to be corrected.

Of course, if the child does not follow the faith then he/she will not inherit the kingdom.
But that didn't require a "correction." The "correction" is already in the scriptures.
John 3:36 He who believes in the Son has eternal life;
he who does not obey the Son shall not see life, but the wrath of God rests upon him.
John 5:28-29 … the hour is coming in which all who are in the graves will hear His voice and come forth—
those who have done good, to the resurrection of life,
and those who have done evil, to the resurrection of condemnation.

A person MUST, at some point in their life, ACCEPT the baptism. They must, as an adult, understand what it means and accept the implications and live a life accordingly.

OK, I see what you mean.
I would put it that a person must, at some point in their life, decide whether they are going to serve Jesus or not.

Does baptism magically take away O.S. or any other sin since it's supposed to remove all sin up till that point, or is it just symbolic?

There is no connection in Christianity with anything related to "magic." Real magic is a demonic practice.
What happens in baptism is exactly what Paul says happens. (See Ro 6 above)
In baptism we sacramentally die and are buried with Christ. The sins committed up to that point were committed by the one who was just united to Christ in His death and burial. Dead people no longer sin.
The we are raised to new life (born again) in Christ.

You used the word "symbolic." That word is commonly used to refer to something that is not a reality.
Being united to Christ in His death and burial and being raised to new life is a reality.

The word "spiritual" is also commonly used to mean something that is conceptual but not a true reality. That is not how the scriptures use the word. Spirit is just as real as flesh and bone.
So, you may say that, in baptism, we are "spiritually" united with Christ in His death and burial and resurrection. It is a reality.

Anyway, I believe we are not even imputed with O.S. but only with its effects.
What do you think about that??

I agree. That is what the Orthodox Church calls "Ancestral Sin." Sin is like a parasite which infected Adam's body when he sinned and that parasite is passed down to every human being except Jesus of Nazareth whose "Father", the Holy Spirit, has no sin and no parasite to transmit.

iakov the fool

 

[Nathan]

wondering
I guess I missed the quote of yours below. I just saw it reading parkers post.

wondering said: ↑
Nathan thinks that maybe in Mathew 28:19 when Jesus tells the Apostles to baptize, He means with the knowledge of the gospel.

I actually do not mean with the knowledge of the Gospel. The knowledge, and subsequent belief, in the Gospel, is what "makes" a disciple.

The "baptism" refers to the truth of who God is, in three distinct persons. That is the truth one needs to be born again into - and comes from the immersion of the truth and power of the Spirit applying that truth in the believers life.

What I'm saying is the spiritual life, including baptism in its correct usage, is the foreshadowing fulfillment of the old way of circumcision.

When we consider baptism in a physical sense being a replacement of circumcision then we have only replaced one representation with another. Many Jews believed they were heirs of Abraham because they were circumcised, and many 'Christians' think their heirs of Christ because their water baptized. Both parties not understanding, or worse yet disregarding, the spiritual truth of both physical examples.

 

[dirtfarmer]

wondering
I guess I missed the quote of yours below. I just saw it reading parkers post.



I actually do not mean with the knowledge of the Gospel. The knowledge, and subsequent belief, in the Gospel, is what "makes" a disciple.

The "baptism" refers to the truth of who God is, in three distinct persons. That is the truth one needs to be born again into - and comes from the immersion of the truth and power of the Spirit applying that truth in the believers life.

What I'm saying is the spiritual life, including baptism in its correct usage, is the foreshadowing fulfillment of the old way of circumcision.

When we consider baptism in a physical sense being a replacement of circumcision then we have only replaced one representation with another. Many Jews believed they were heirs of Abraham because they were circumcised, and many 'Christians' think their heirs of Christ because their water baptized. Both parties not understanding, or worse yet disregarding, the spiritual truth of both physical examples.

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

I like your statement: " the truth that one needs to be born again comes from the immersion of the truth and the power of the Spirit applying that truth in the believers life."

I just had a thought: If circumcision was what made Jews heirs of Abraham, then only men make up the Jews, not women because women could not be circumcised. If baptism is a replacement for circumcision, then how do women that believe become heirs of Christ.

 

[JohnDB]

Holy, Holy, Holy.

There is no way Hebrew to express:
GOOD, BETTER, BEST

So the idea is just repeated 3X.

This is what I learned. Please correct me if I'm wrong...

I already did. It's close but not exactly accurate. It's Hebrew...it's got a different perspective than our Romanized-westernised mindset.
Best of the best of the best is closer than good, better, best.

 

[Nathan]

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

I like your statement: " the truth that one needs to be born again comes from the immersion of the truth and the power of the Spirit applying that truth in the believers life."

I just had a thought: If circumcision was what made Jews heirs of Abraham, then only men make up the Jews, not women because women could not be circumcised. If baptism is a replacement for circumcision, then how do women that believe become heirs of Christ.

Actually, the wording I used is a little different than what you quoted. I don't mean to be picky, but to me it would matter if I was trying to understand what 'I' wrote.

The point I was making is that when a person is born from above, just as a baby needs certain crucial nutrients found in a mothers milk, so to a believer needs certain crucial 'truths' to be 'absorbed', if you will, into their life.

So, the immersion of truth is not what produces the 'new birth', but rather is what is crucial afterwards. The order that we find the commands of Jesus is not inconsequential. First new birth - a disciple is 'made'. Then baptism in truth - a disciple is equipped. Then teaching of Jesus commands - a disciple is focused.

What has happened, and still happens, is a disciple is made, but not nourished/equipped, then tried to be made focused. It is no small wonder that so many 'new' believers are found to walk away from the faith - or be stunted in their growth. And whats so pathetic, angering and saddening, is most of the time they are the ones blamed for not continuing/growing. Would we blame a new born baby for not developing the way a normal child does if we kept vital nutrients from it after birth?

 

[dirtfarmer]

Actually, the wording I used is a little different than what you quoted. I don't mean to be picky, but to me it would matter if I was trying to understand what 'I' wrote.

The point I was making is that when a person is born from above, just as a baby needs certain crucial nutrients found in a mothers milk, so to a believer needs certain crucial 'truths' to be 'absorbed', if you will, into their life.

So, the immersion of truth is not what produces the 'new birth', but rather is what is crucial afterwards. The order that we find the commands of Jesus is not inconsequential. First new birth - a disciple is 'made'. Then baptism in truth - a disciple is equipped. Then teaching of Jesus commands - a disciple is focused.

What has happened, and still happens, is a disciple is made, but not nourished/equipped, then tried to be made focused. It is no small wonder that so many 'new' believers are found to walk away from the faith - or be stunted in their growth. And whats so pathetic, angering and saddening, is most of the time they are the ones blamed for not continuing/growing. Would we blame a new born baby for not developing the way a normal child does if we kept vital nutrients from it after birth?

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

Is it possible to receive "new birth" without being inundated with truth? Scripture states that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word. What is the truth that we are flooded with? the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. After salvation it is the "digesting " of the word of truth that give strength and growth of the new believer.

The problem that I find with most evangelistic churches is that their emphasis is on "soul winning" and not on nurturing after being born into the family of God. You hear them saying "we had 1000 saved yesterday", but never do we hear of them feeding those that need nourishment. It is always a study diet of "win the lost at any cost". It's like after a baby is born we tell them, now get up and go outer and win the lost. They are like a new born colt with wobbly legs, they are not mature enough to stand on their own.

If a 1000 wins a 1000 and teach them maturity then that is 2000 to witness and win and teach which in turn is 4000 that turns into 8000 and then 16,000 and then 32,000. When have you ever heard of 32,000 being saved over, say a 2 year period, by strictly teaching "win the lost at any cost"?

 

[Nathan]

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

Is it possible to receive "new birth" without being inundated with truth? Scripture states that faith comes by hearing and hearing by the word. What is the truth that we are flooded with? the death burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. After salvation it is the "digesting " of the word of truth that give strength and growth of the new believer.

The problem that I find with most evangelistic churches is that their emphasis is on "soul winning" and not on nurturing after being born into the family of God. You hear them saying "we had 1000 saved yesterday", but never do we hear of them feeding those that need nourishment. It is always a study diet of "win the lost at any cost". It's like after a baby is born we tell them, now get up and go outer and win the lost. They are like a new born colt with wobbly legs, they are not mature enough to stand on their own.

If a 1000 wins a 1000 and teach them maturity then that is 2000 to witness and win and teach which in turn is 4000 that turns into 8000 and then 16,000 and then 32,000. When have you ever heard of 32,000 being saved over, say a 2 year period, by strictly teaching "win the lost at any cost"?

Born from above is just that - born.....from above. It is the gift of faith given - apart from works of man. This faith is accepted by us when we hear the Gospel. The Gospel is different than the truth of God revealed in identifying with who God is. The Gospel is truth, but it is the truth that converts a person - the baptism into the Godhead is what changes a person. I would say the "digestion" of the word is the receiving of the teachings of Christ - the third part of the equation.

Your right with the problem that is plaguing the churches today. The reason is they look at baptism into the 'name' of God as a completely physical thing. They preach the Gospel, then baptize in water, then teach Jesus commands. Once you 'think' you have done something correct, then you do not have reason to look back on it. What happens is they miss the whole point about baptism, and continue on into teaching.

Just like there are some babies that do not get that key vital nutrient after birth, rather going straight into receiving just milk, and they do 'live' - so too there are true believers out there that also did not get the key vital nutrient after their new birth and yet are still faithful.

However, it is a proven fact that a child who gets the vital nutrients after birth has a much better chance of survival and health, than one that does not get the nutrients. Colostrum is the key nutrient babies need. The truth of who the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is the key nutrient new believers need.

Digestion is different than transformation. That is why I like the 'pickle' description of what baptism is. A new believer needs to become a pickle rather than staying as a cucumber just constantly being dunked in and out of truth.

 

[dirtfarmer]

Born from above is just that - born.....from above. It is the gift of faith given - apart from works of man. This faith is accepted by us when we hear the Gospel. The Gospel is different than the truth of God revealed in identifying with who God is. The Gospel is truth, but it is the truth that converts a person - the baptism into the Godhead is what changes a person. I would say the "digestion" of the word is the receiving of the teachings of Christ - the third part of the equation.

Your right with the problem that is plaguing the churches today. The reason is they look at baptism into the 'name' of God as a completely physical thing. They preach the Gospel, then baptize in water, then teach Jesus commands. Once you 'think' you have done something correct, then you do not have reason to look back on it. What happens is they miss the whole point about baptism, and continue on into teaching.

Just like there are some babies that do not get that key vital nutrient after birth, rather going straight into receiving just milk, and they do 'live' - so too there are true believers out there that also did not get the key vital nutrient after their new birth and yet are still faithful.

However, it is a proven fact that a child who gets the vital nutrients after birth has a much better chance of survival and health, than one that does not get the nutrients. Colostrum is the key nutrient babies need. The truth of who the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is the key nutrient new believers need.

Digestion is different than transformation. That is why I like the 'pickle' description of what baptism is. A new believer needs to become a pickle rather than staying as a cucumber just constantly being dunked in and out of truth.

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

I do not buy "the gospel is different than the truth of God revealed in identifying with who God is." The gospel is identifying the Son as God. Man doesn't have the ability to pay for his debt of sin and still have relationship with God. The price required is eternal separation from God. Only God has the ability to meet that requirement and it takes a triune revelation of God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to accomplish our salvation and growth as children of God.

The Father gave the Son in his incarnation as man to be the payment for our sin debt. It is the Spirit that reveals this to us. God said in Leviticus 17:11 " For the life of the flesh is in the blood." What was it that the resurrected Christ gave for us? was it not his blood(life)? Yes, it was his blood( the life of his flesh).It is because Christ lived without sin that he could pay our sin debt This is why Jesus Christ could not have an earthly father. Hebrews 9:12 says, " by his own blood he entered once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us."
Hebrews 9:14 ," How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God."

What is it that causes a transformation in man? It is not the remodeling of the human, but a death of the old man and being made alive in Christ. Salvation hinges on this death and so does our being in Christ as a new man. It is that new man that the gospel reveals.

 

[Nathan]

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

I do not buy "the gospel is different than the truth of God revealed in identifying with who God is." The gospel is identifying the Son as God. Man doesn't have the ability to pay for his debt of sin and still have relationship with God. The price required is eternal separation from God. Only God has the ability to meet that requirement and it takes a triune revelation of God as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit to accomplish our salvation and growth as children of God.

The Father gave the Son in his incarnation as man to be the payment for our sin debt. It is the Spirit that reveals this to us. God said in Leviticus 17:11 " For the life of the flesh is in the blood." What was it that the resurrected Christ gave for us? was it not his blood(life)? Yes, it was his blood( the life of his flesh).It is because Christ lived without sin that he could pay our sin debt This is why Jesus Christ could not have an earthly father. Hebrews 9:12 says, " by his own blood he entered once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us."
Hebrews 9:14 ," How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God."

What is it that causes a transformation in man? It is not the remodeling of the human, but a death of the old man and being made alive in Christ. Salvation hinges on this death and so does our being in Christ as a new man. It is that new man that the gospel reveals.

The Gospel message, is the Gospel message. Yes, it is apart of the same truth's we find in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - but it is the Gospel message. There is a distinction made and a person does not have to know and fully understand the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in order to receive the Gospel message by faith. However, once a person does receive the Gospel message, then the baptism into the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is what gives the essential truths of eternal life for that person to grown in. It is what brings about the transformation that the Gospel message started. This is why it is said that the Jews have an advantage over the Gentiles.

Here is what Jesus said;

Jhn 17:1-3
When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.

Then He ends His prayer with this;

Jhn 17:26
I made known to them your name, and I will continue to make it known, that the love with which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them.

The same way you cannot just dunk a cucumber into a vinegar solution and it become instantly a pickle, so too you cannot just expose a person to truth for an instant and they become like that truth. Yes, faith is an instantaneous reception. But the transformation does take time. If the transformation was immediate then anyone who has faith would not need truth constantly taught them.

The obedience to the commands of Christ is what sanctification is all about. We cannot confuse faith with transformation or sanctification. Three separate and distinct things that happen(or should) in the heart of a born from above person.

 

[dirtfarmer]

The Gospel message, is the Gospel message. Yes, it is apart of the same truth's we find in the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit - but it is the Gospel message. There is a distinction made and a person does not have to know and fully understand the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit in order to receive the Gospel message by faith. However, once a person does receive the Gospel message, then the baptism into the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit is what gives the essential truths of eternal life for that person to grown in. It is what brings about the transformation that the Gospel message started. This is why it is said that the Jews have an advantage over the Gentiles.

Here is what Jesus said;

Jhn 17:1-3
When Jesus had spoken these words, he lifted up his eyes to heaven, and said, “Father, the hour has come; glorify your Son that the Son may glorify you, since you have given him authority over all flesh, to give eternal life to all whom you have given him. And this is eternal life, that they know you the only true God, and Jesus Christ whom you have sent.

Then He ends His prayer with this;

Jhn 17:26
I made known to them your name, and I will continue to make it known, that the love with which you have loved me may be in them, and I in them.

The same way you cannot just dunk a cucumber into a vinegar solution and it become instantly a pickle, so too you cannot just expose a person to truth for an instant and they become like that truth. Yes, faith is an instantaneous reception. But the transformation does take time. If the transformation was immediate then anyone who has faith would not need truth constantly taught them.

The obedience to the commands of Christ is what sanctification is all about. We cannot confuse faith with transformation or sanctification. Three separate and distinct things that happen(or should) in the heart of a born from above person.

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

How you become a believer is by the "whole" revelation of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The Father sent the Son into the world as a sacrifice, in the form of Jesus, God in the form of the Son shed his blood(life) on the cross, and the Holy Spirit revealed this through the written word by inspiration to those who wrote scripture. You cannot separate the 3, they are one.

I understand you analogy of a cucumber being change into a pickle, but the fallacy is that pickling a cucumber works from the outside of the pickle to the inside and then the change. Salvation changes the inside, heart, and works it way to the outside. The change happens at a moment, justification, then sanctification begins to work it way out of the heart.

How do you interpret John 17:17 : " Sanctify them through thy truth: thy word is truth." It is the indwelling Spirit that brings about our understanding of God's word.

 

[Nathan]

I think we may be on different wave lengths here. What I'm speaking about is baptism, what you are speaking about is faith.

I assure you that a person does not have to have understand or become immersed in the Godhead in order to receive faith. The baptism that follows it is just that - it follows the reception of faith.

As far as John 17, it is quite plain. The sanctification of a believer comes through the truth of Gods word. There is little doubt that this is a process and why Jesus said to teach the disciples made, after baptism, of the commands He taught.

Just like you would not feed a baby adult food right after birth, so too a new believer needs to feed on Christ in a certain order.

 

[dirtfarmer]

I think we may be on different wave lengths here. What I'm speaking about is baptism, what you are speaking about is faith.

I assure you that a person does not have to have understand or become immersed in the Godhead in order to receive faith. The baptism that follows it is just that - it follows the reception of faith.

As far as John 17, it is quite plain. The sanctification of a believer comes through the truth of Gods word. There is little doubt that this is a process and why Jesus said to teach the disciples made, after baptism, of the commands He taught.

Just like you would not feed a baby adult food right after birth, so too a new believer needs to feed on Christ in a certain order.

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

Scripture states there is one baptism. It is not water baptism, but Spirit baptism. Ephesians 4:5, " One Lord, one faith, one baptism." 1 Corinthians 12:13, " For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body," I know that you have read this before, but, if, we are baptized by the Spirit where is water baptism?

1 Corinthians 6:11, " And such were some of you: but ye are washed , but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by the Spirit of our God." Being justified in the name of Jesus is being justified by his authority. To do anything in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is not a formula but by His authority.

 

[Nathan]

hello Nathan, dirtfarmer here

Scripture states there is one baptism. It is not water baptism, but Spirit baptism. Ephesians 4:5, " One Lord, one faith, one baptism." 1 Corinthians 12:13, " For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body," I know that you have read this before, but, if, we are baptized by the Spirit where is water baptism?

1 Corinthians 6:11, " And such were some of you: but ye are washed , but ye are sanctified, but ye are justified in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ, and by the Spirit of our God." Being justified in the name of Jesus is being justified by his authority. To do anything in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit is not a formula but by His authority.

I agree with you really. Water baptism is definitely something we find done however. I maintain it is us outwardly confirming the faith in us.

Translations of the text is where we mistake what Jesus said. He did not tell the disciples to baptize in the authority of the Three, rather, He told them to baptize into the name of the three.

Difference being, one is primarily directed at what the disciples were to do - the other is what it does to the ones being baptized. We must realize the difference between "in" and "into".