How Does Peter Tie Into Timing For water baptism?

Discussion in 'General Baptist Discussions' started by JesusFan, Dec 31, 2011.

  1. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    1 Peter 3:21
    Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you— not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience—through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
    1 Peter 3:20-22

    Doesn't that appear that the convert had some understanding of what baptism signified?
     
  2. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    I've never seen nor baptized a believer who didn't understand this basic truth. You're using this as proof of what, that you (or another) don't/didn't administer baptism until a person went through a class?

    This text doesn't support your theory, which is what it is, a theory, not Scripture. You've also been given several passages showing that baptism was immediate upon belief.
     
  3. freeatlast

    freeatlast
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    10,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    Peter is not trying to instruct people about baptism. He is instructing them about the efficiency of Christ to save. He saves totally. Peter is using the Greek word "baptisma" that we transliterate into baptism which means to be totally covered, or be submerged, to show that Christ totally covers us when we have a clear conscience towards God. It is not instruction on Baptism.
     
  4. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Those are ALL in Acts though!
    Transistional Book, recording switch from age of law unto Age of grace!
    Jewish converts, porpose for the immediate baptism...

    What about timing in rest of NT?
     
  5. freeatlast

    freeatlast
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    10,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    How about you showing a timing difference?
     
  6. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    Of course it's in Acts. They were baptized immediately, and not because they were Jews, it was because they were believers. And this wasn't only restricted to Jews, so in this you are incorrect and your basis is faulty. The Acts also show some who were baptized immediately who were not Jews. I gave that to you also.

    Nowhere in the epistles is timing referred to again, and you know it, so you're using this invalid reasoning as an argument. Yours is the same method CoC uses for no instruments. Bottom line is that doctrine and your doctrine here both fall back to and are only supported by your reason, not Scripture.

    It's assumed they understood it was immediate since this was the method they practiced.

    Let's see, Acts records what the Apostles did, who in turn wrote the epistles, who full well knew baptism to be immediate, as this is what they practiced, and they never said otherwise in their epistles. It was established; they followed the command to baptize believers when they believe, and this they did.

    Keep searching for proof that this changed, you'll never find it.
     
  7. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    What jesusfans weak unfounded argument is here, is that; 1) Peter is mentioning baptism; 2) Therefore Peter should be telling us how long after salvation it is to take place; 3) Since he doesn't then jesusfan is correct and it's not to be ministered immediately any longer.

    Basically he doesn't grasp what and why he is using this example. Hint; it's not an exhaustive discourse on baptism, and it's not even given as an example nor as instruction on how or when to administer this.

    Therefore, his is a poorly chosen proof-text to support his theory which would never stand up in a debate, as it doesn't here.
     
  8. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    Well, there would be the NT support for baptism to be made after decision was made for Christ to save one, baptism is an ordinance given to us to practice by jesus, BUT....

    can we assume that non jewish peoples who have little to no understanding of the OT messianic passages, the coming Messiah, would have just be dunked without explanation to them of what getting saved was all about, and just what baptism meant from the stand point of "appealing to good in a good conscience?"
     
  9. freeatlast

    freeatlast
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    10,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    Stop assuming, formulating doctrine on assumption contrary to the examples given which is rebellion, and be obedient to those examples given. It is called faith.
     
  10. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    There is NT support for baptism. you've been given this, and you've been proven incorrect that it was for the "jews only." Your reasonings were laid out and proven invalid in my previous post.

    I'm certain they knew what being saved is all about. They believed, they were changed, just like it happens today, then they were baptized at this time.

    Somehow you don't like this, and you want to place more weight upon persons by having them take lessons on theological truth so you can judge their wool.

    How much did you understand at salvation? Are you any less saved because your knowledge was incomplete? Understanding you were saved is all you need, and it takes one minute to tell someone about being baptized and what it means.

    You're attempting to equate mental theological assent to truth with regeneration. They're not the same, but this is what you're doing. People don't need to be yanked off into a class to examine how much they know theologically. Knowledge didn't save them, Christ did.

    You're making salvation seem to others as a work and based upon how much one knows and what answers they can give. It's utterly ridiculous to place this upon people. If a person simply has trusted in the work of Christ alone, and are stating this, that is all they need. Your class adds nothing to this experience but doubt upon the work of God in their hearts in regeneration. Baptize this person, and then teach them.
     
  11. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    You and I agree on everything regarding this issue save for the latitude to extend the time between the salvation time and time to be baptised!

    We both see it as being believers immersion as mode, the purpose of it, etc

    just honestly believe that the Bible allows some latitude reagarding timing, to be based upon each local churches understanding from thescripturs!
     
  12. freeatlast

    freeatlast
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    10,295
    Likes Received:
    0

    Are you using scriptures to base that belief or are you making it all up and hoping God will approve? If you are basing this on scripture please show us all where the local church has the right to change the examples of baptism at conversion given in scrpture to fit their own schedules. Scripture verses please!
     
  13. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    can the local church decide how often and when Communion should be practiced?
     
  14. Old Union Brother

    Old Union Brother
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Oct 24, 2010
    Messages:
    740
    Likes Received:
    0
    Derailing your own thread????????????:laugh:
     
  15. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    You've based nothing on the Scriptures bro!
     
  16. preacher4truth

    preacher4truth
    Expand Collapse
    Banned

    Joined:
    Nov 18, 2010
    Messages:
    8,121
    Likes Received:
    0
    :thumbsup:

    "Uh, I been proven wrong, can we switch to communion now?" :laugh:
     
  17. JesusFan

    JesusFan
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Jan 4, 2011
    Messages:
    6,356
    Likes Received:
    0
    On the contrarary, the scriptures allow for lattitude in this, as its not a command to its timing, but an ordinance to who gets it done!

    Local church freely determines how both ordinances of Communion/Baptism gets applied and done....

    Just say that you and I agree on evrything about Baptism save for IF timing is involved!
     
    #17 JesusFan, Dec 31, 2011
    Last edited by a moderator: Dec 31, 2011
  18. freeatlast

    freeatlast
    Expand Collapse
    New Member

    Joined:
    Mar 1, 2004
    Messages:
    10,295
    Likes Received:
    0
    Yes because that is part of the command, but Baptism has no such allowance. Baptism has examples and baptism is always done at conversion unless impossible.
    1Cor 11:15
    After the same manner also [he took] the cup, when he had supped, saying, This cup is the new testament in my blood: this do ye, as oft as ye drink [it], in remembrance of me.
     

Share This Page

Loading...