Baptism prior to the 1520s

DHK is exactly right. All of these passages support the position that one believes first and then gets baptized. It must be this way. A person must first believe else they would have no desire to be baptized in the first place, and if no faith then the baptism is meaningless. If one first has faith, then the baptism by water is a work of obedience which declares the believer's faith in Christ before another or others.

James made this very clear..." show me thy faith without thy works, and I will show thee my faith by my works ". Very simple!

God Bless!

 

====================
Faith alone? Where do you read about faith alone? So, confession is not required? No repentance? No baptism? Demons have faith alone.

Baptism follows salvation? So believe, saved, baptized. Is that your order?

Here is Jesus' order, believe, baptized, saved (Mark 16:16).

 

mman, does God give exceptions for those who cannot get baptized in water for any reason?

God Bless!

 

-----------------------------------------------
All I know is what He has revealed in His word. I know it is impossible for God to lie. I have never personally known of a single case where that has happened. Here I have to step away from scripture and give my opinion, based on biblical principles. God will provide. If we are asking, seeking, and knocking, we will receive, find, and it will be opened. We can all come up with "what ifs". What if a person is dies right before they believe? Will God accept them as unbelievers? What if they are die right before they repent? What if they die before they confess? What if they die right before they are baptized? I believe God will provide an opportunity for those who are seeking to obey Him. How many opportunities may a person squander? I have no idea? I know God is longsuffering, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

An example of God providing is in Acts 8, when the Eunuch was in a deserted place. Philip preached the word of Jesus to him and the next thing out of the Eunuch's mouth was, "Here is water, what doth hinder me from being baptized?" They did not wait 2 day, 2 months, or 2 years. They went down into the water and the Eunuch was baptized and went on his way rejoicing.

 

Yes, but you let out a couple of lines. Philip pressed the issue of faith with the Eunuch before he lead him into the water..." And Philip said, if thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest ." Then the Eunuch confessed Jesus as Lord..." And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God ". Only then did Philip comand the chariot to stop and went down into the water.

So you have a contradidtion in your position because John tells us that..." Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God ".(1 John 4:15)

It is clear by scripture that the Eunuch was IN God and God was IN the Eunuch before the baptism by water took place. The Eunuch had already been born of God through his confession before the water baptism. I don't see how anyone "seeking the truth" (as you say) can come to any other conclusion.

How did the Enuch "believe with all his heart" before a rebirth?

How did the Eunuch confess Jesus is the Son of God without God indwelling him?

The Eunuch was "INTO" Christ as you say before he went into the water. The very scripture you provided to support your position proves this so.

God Bless!

 

"What if a person is dies right before they believe? Will God accept them as unbelievers?"
Scripture says no salvation. There is no what if here.

"What if they are die right before they repent?" Scripture says you must repent from unbelief to belief else you will not be saved. There is no what if here.

"What if they die before they confess?" Scripture says you must confess Jesus is Lord. There is no what if here.

"What if they die right before they are baptized?" Scripture says yes they will still enter into paradise. The thief on the cross did repent and confess but did not get baptized in water.

One can think of numerous situations. How about those who call on Jesus in a fox hole and then moments later are killed by enemy fire. How about those who confess Jesus as Lord behind the bars of a prison in some third world country. Do you think a terrorist is going to allow a convert to Jesus Christ a baptism by water before he executes him? How about those lying in a hospital bed hooked up to a machine that is keeping them alive, maybe waiting for a transplant donor. Should we immerse them with the machine as well?

God created us with the ability to logically apply His Word to life situations. What you have done is determined your doctrine by the surface of the letter without pressing into the spirit behind that letter. It is exactly what the Pharisees did, they lived and preached the letter of the law and ignored the true purpose of the letter which was the spiritual and life application behind that letter.

True or false? " Whosoever shall confess that Jesus is the Son of God, God dwelleth in him, and he in God "(1 John 4:15)

True or false? The Eunuch " believe with all his heart " and " confess Jesus as the Son of God " BEFORE he was baptized with water.

Was God indwelling the Eunuch before or after his baptism by water?

God Bless!

 

To pick up on what Steaver said; the difference between those first three situations and the last one, is that if a person dies before believeing, repenting, confessing, we would say that it was they who put it off; and we always warn people in preaching and tracts that tomorrow is never promised, so accept Christ today. Baptism is a physical act, that a person might not be able to undergo at any gven time, for various reasons. Not only the ones Steaver mentioned, but once again, most churches, I belive (unlike Frank) do not baptize people on the spot. They will want to indoctrinate people into the Campbellistic faith first, and you cannot hold off salvation for them until they accept all the doctrines. For then, it is faith in Christ ...PLUS all this other stuff.

"works" is "ergon", which means an act, deed, doing.... Yes, it is "passive" (done to you), but you still have to get up and go and consent to it. IT is still, something you DID. So this IS semantics. Just admit it's a work!

And once again; that's a picture. Noah was physically "saved" by obeying a physical command. We are now spiritually saved by spiritually being baptized into Christ. The water ceremony is just a symbol of that, not what actually saves us.

Once again; you mistake the spiritual baptism those passages you cited is speaking of. 1. Cor. especially shows us this. Even Gal. says nothing about WATER! Water baptism was the symbol of being baptized into Christ, so both meanings of the word could be used together. But it is clearly the spiritual baptism "into one BODY" ("the Church", as you even said; not a literal pool), that saves.

Now you're adding to the text! You assume the Eunuch could have only known about baptism through Philip, but remember, baptism "for the remission of sins" was practiced by the Jews, such as John the Baptist (Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3), before that! So people would naturally expect a baptism from [the disciples of] the One whom John prepared the way for!

Yes, notice: [one act]"be baptized, AND [another act] wash away your sins [how?] CALLING ON THE NAME OF THE LORD!" Once again, the water accompanied this, and was thus associated with it, but it was clearly the "calling" that saved, as 2:21 teaches. He "prayed" for 3 days, but did not yet call on the name of the Lord Jesus!

If baptism is what saves, then once you are baptized, God owes you salvation. (one can try to make a similar argument for "calling on the name", but this is what is contrasted to "works" as purely "faith", and it is an acknowledgment of one's debt to God, so the concept of God's "owing" something is moot. But a work likebaptism would surely be "earning" something!)

Read the context of 1 John; it is not discussing the "waters" of baptism (once again, not even mentioned in the text). verse 6: "He who CAME BY water and blood...". Once again, that is speaking of physical birth. "born of water AND the Spirit", first birth bywater, second birth by the Spirit THROUGH the blood. So yes, "these three agree" in one".

Most of us here have most likely been baptized, and would have nothing to lose if your doctrine were true. But we must get straight what actuallys aves and what does not save.

 

Actually, what you quoted from bmerr was actually also a quote he made of me.
So how is what I am saying popish? The popish doctrine on baptism is basically the same as the Campbellistic doctrine we are opposing here: that the water of baptism saves, or when challeneged on that, they shuffle it around, and say it is not the water, but rather the "obedience"--"in faith". I am merely acknowledging that faith is evidenced by obedeince (James), but that clearly, it is the faith that saves, not the works of obedience, because we do no obey perfectly enough to even be saved by works. This point is ignored by both the Catholists and the Campbellites, so I don't see how what I am saying is like what they are saying.

 

Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, he that believeth not shall be condemned."

This verse tells what it takes to be saved and what it takes to be lost.

When were Sauls sins washed away according to Acts 22:16?

I John chapter 2 starting in verse 3 also says, "Now by this we know that we know Him, if we keep His commandments.
4 He who says, "I know Him," and does not keep His commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
5 But whoever keeps His word, truly the love of God is perfected in him. By this we know that we are in Him."

Matt 7:21 states that on the day of judgment, that it is going to take more than just believing and calling him Lord. We have to DO the will of the Father. Here are sincere people who call Jesus Lord and are arguing with Jesus on the last day. They couldn't understand why they were lost. They believed on him, they worked for him, yet they were lost.

In the scriptures, salvation never preceeds baptism. If your argument includes the thief on the cross, you obviously don't understand the new covenant or when it went into effect.

Now lets compare what God said with what I have seen here:

God - MK 16:16 - He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.

Man - He that believeth and is saved shall be baptized

God - Acts 2:38 - Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins

Man - Repent for the remission of sins and be baptized

God - Acts 22:16 - And why tarriest thou, arise and be baptized and wash away your sins calling on the name of the Lord.

Man - And why tarriest thou, arise and call on the name of the Lord and wash away yours sins, and then be baptized

God - Rom 6:3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 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.

Man - Or do you not know that when you believed you were put into Christ and then later baptized to show you were already saved....

God - Ga 3:26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Man - For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus and baptism is just a symbol because baptism is not part of faith, it is a work.

God - 1Pe 3:21 There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ

Man - There is also an antitype which DOES NOT now saves us--baptism because all that baptism does is get you wet (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ


Didn't Saul called Jesus Lord on the road to Damascus, yet he still had sins to be washed away?

What would have been your instructions to Saul? What did Ananias tell him (Acts 22:16)?

 

He did not call on the name on the road. He was blinded by Christ, and responded to Him and went where He told him, but he was not regenerated until he arrived to Ananias, and then his eyes were opened, and THEN he was baptized. (read the original account in ch.9)

And if that's because of works, then that's going to be ALL of us! Pretty scary, isn't it?
Jesus was speaking to the Jews who were rejecting Him and, trusting on what else, but their own works. Notice, verse 22 where they begin listing their works, all of which were good things commanded by God. So there is something else missing in this "will of God". None of you "works" advocates ever notice 1 John 3:23 "And THIS is His commandment; that we believe on the name of His Son Jesus Christ". That is the "will" me must do first to be saved; before we even think of ANY other work.

NOW lets compare what God said with what I have seen here:

God - MK 16:16 - He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.

Man - He that is baptized is believing

God - Acts 2:38 - Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins

Man - be baptized in order to Repent for the remission of sins

God - Acts 22:16 - And why tarriest thou, arise and be baptized and wash away your sins calling on the name of the Lord.

Man - And why tarriest thou, arise and be baptized to call on the name of the Lord and thus wash away yours sins.

God - Rom 6:3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? 4 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.

Man -Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into watrer were baptized into Christ's death? 4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into water, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also will be saved whan we rise out of the pool.

God - Ga 3:26 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. 27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Man - For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus which is baptism.

God - 1Pe 3:21 There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ

Man - There is also an antitype which DOES NOT now saves us--faith; because it is really baptism that is the filth of the soul.

 

mman
Read Acts 26. It is Paul's testimony of his salvation as he relates it to King Agrippa. He devotes the entire chapter to his testimony. There is obvious omission in his testimony. There is no mention of baptism anywhere in that chapter. In a testimony of his salvation there is no mention of baptism because to Paul baptism was not important to salvation. If it was important to his salvation he would have mentioned it. But it wasn't.
DHK

 

--------------------
How many times does it have to be recorded for you to believe it? How many times does it have to be recorded to make it true? I agree it is not recorded in Acts 26 but it is recorded in Acts 22 and Acts 9. If all he told Agrippa is recorded in Acts 26, I don't know. Regardless, when we put all three accounts together we get a good idea of what happened. He had different audiences so he was emphasizing different aspects of his conversion. By your logic, confession is not important since it is not mentioned. Belief is not important either because he was never told to believe. He did say he was not disobedient. He obeyed what God told him, which was go into the city and it will be told what you must do (Acts 9:6). The first thing he was told to DO was to arise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

That is always my approach, to see all God has said on any subject. One verse never negates another, but is always a compliment. Truth lies in parallel and never in contradiction.

After reading all three together, when were Sauls sins washed away?

 

Obviously Saul's sins were washed away when he called upon the name of the Lord. He was not disobedient to the heavenly vision he told King Agrippa. He said nothing to the king about baptism. It wasn't important to his salvation. The King did not have the other accounts of the Book of Acts, so those don't count in this case--only what he said to the King. That was his testimony to the king of his salvation. No baptism. It wasn't important. What he heard in his vision was important. How he responded was important. "Lord what will thou have me to do?" For the first time in his life he called on Christ, and addressed him Lord. He recognized him as the Messiah for the first time in his life. That is when his sins were washed away. Baptism was totally irrelevant.
DHK

 

Eric B.

So exactly when were Saul's sins washed away? If you read all the accounts, you will have a good understanding of the events that took place.

Saul was told that he was to go into the city and there it would be told to him what he MUST DO? (Acts 9:6).

What was the first thing he was told to DO?

 

Gerhard,

bmerr here. I don't think you quoted this from me. It sounds more like one of the other members. You might want to check that out.

In Christ,

bmerr

 

EricB,

bmerr here. You're going against DHK now. A while back, he said Saul called on the name of the Lord back in 9:6, "Lord, what wilt thou have me to do?"

It looks like one of you guys has got it wrong.

Actually, BOTH of you have it wrong.

You cited Acts 2:21, where Peter told the crowd that whosoever calleth on the name of the Lord shall be saved.

On down in 2:37, the crowd says by implication, that they didn't know HOW to call on the name of the Lord. They already believed the gospel that Peter preached to them, so they weren't told to believe.

Of course, you know what Peter told them in 2:38, right?

Now Saul, by the time Ananias showed up already believed in the risen Christ, and had repented, so what was he told to do to call on the name (authority) of the Lord? Arise, and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

The washing away of sins was accomplished by Sauls' calling on the name of the Lord by submitting to baptism for the remission of sins, just like Peter had preached, and like he preached afterward.

What could one possibly EARN by being baptized? It'd be like an old rich uncle leaving you a 5 million dollar inheritance, which you could only recieve if you had held down at least a minimum wage job for one month.

If you went out and worked for minimum wage (at least) for a month, you would then be eligible to recieve the 5 million dollar inheritance from your old, rich, dead uncle's estate.

Now, would you EARN 5 million dollars by working one month for minimum wage? Does it really need answering?

But there you'd be, after a month of flipping burgers or whatever, recieving your check for 5 million dollars. You wouldn't turn down an offer like that, would you?

With God, the stakes are way higher. All He asks of us is to obey the gospel, and to live faithfully for the remainder of our short lives, and Heaven will be our eternal home. Nothing asked of us in this life could ever compare or equate to "earning salvation".

In Christ,

bmerr

 

And that is your heretical false gospel of works which Paul condemns in Gal.1.
You stess salvation is by obedience, obedience, obedience. It is not.
Salvation is by faith. Obedience to Christ's commands results because of faith put in the sacrifial blood of Christ.

You "gospel" so-called goes directly contrary to Eph.2:8,9

Ephesians 2:8-9 For by grace are ye saved through faith; and that not of yourselves: it is the gift of God:
9 Not of works, lest any man should boast.

#1. Salvation is of grace, not of baptism. It is of grace not of obedience. It is of the free gift of God. That is what grace is. The very fact that salvation is of grace automatically excludes any kind of acts of obedience, otherwise it wouldn't be grace. That would negate the definition of grace. Grace is all from God, nothing from man.
Paul puts it this way.

Romans 11:6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then is it no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.
--With that definition it would be impossible to include baptism in the plan of salvation. For salvation is by grace. It is all of the grace of God. Baptism is not grace.

#2. "ye are saved through faith" It doesn't say faith alone, it implies it. One is saved by faith and faith alone. There are no works involved in faith. Faith is the one thing that is not a work. It is belief or trust. That is not a work. It is the confidence that you put in an individual. It is not a work. We are saved by the faith that we put in the sacfificial work of Jesus Christ that he provided for us by the grace of God. Salvation is the work, the only work. It is accomplished all by Christ on the cross, and all by His grace.

#3. "And that not of yourselves" This makes it even more emphatic that baptism could not possibly involved in salvation. Salvation is a work of man. Man does it; man receives. It is of "yourself." Every work you do is "of yourself." Salvarion is not of yourself; it is all of God. Christ said on the cross "It is finished." (John 19:30) There is nothing man can do. YOU cannot do anything. Christ paid the entire penalty. It is not of yourself. It is of the grace of God.

#4. "it is a gift of God" A gift is something that is given; nothing that is worked for. You cannot work for a gift. A gift is never earned. Baptism is not a gift. Baptism is a work. Salvation is a gift already provided for by Christ. Like any gift one only has to receive it by faith. You don't have to do anything for it (like being baptized.) That is a work. All that is needed for salvation, like any other gift, is to reach out and take it. You do that by faith. One receives a gift by faith.

#5. "Not of works" Plain and simple isn't it? It can't get any clearer. It is not of works!! Baptism is a work. It is something that man does. God doesn't baptize you; man does. It is a work. Salvation is not of works.

#6. "Lest any man should boast." Do you really expect to see all the COC people in heaven boasting and glorying in their baptism. Christ paid 90% of the penalty of their sin, and they paid the other 10% by their baptism. You are going to boast in heaven because your baptism got you there? Right? That is precisely why Paul stresses it is not of works--not of baptism. It is all of the grace of God.

To believe that salvation is by baptism is a pagan supersition. Baptism doesn't wash away sins. It simply gets you wet.
DHK

 

We are not saved by grace alone, faith alone, baptism alone, or anything alone.

If grace alone were enough to save then all men would be saved. Titus 2:11 - For the grace of God has appeared, bringing salvation to all men,

But, from Matt 7:13-14 we see that most men are lost and only a few find the narrow way. Titus 2:12 states that His grace provides teaching or instructions.

Faith alone (belief) is not enough to save. Even the demons believe and tremble (Jas 2:19). The rulers believed yet would not confess (John 12:42). In Acts 8, Simon believed and was baptized, yet because of his actions, statements such as these were made: "May your silver perish with you", "for your heart is not right before God", "Therefore repent of this wickedness of yours, and pray the Lord that, if possible, the intention of your heart may be forgiven you. For I see that you are in the gall of bitterness and in the bondage of iniquity."

Baptism alone will not save. If that were the case, then everyone who ever went swimming or was submerged under the water would be saved. Why would anyone ever be re-baptized if baptism alone saved. Acts 19:1-6 shows that baptism must be for the right reason.

Eph 2:8-9, "For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God; not as a result of works, so that no one may boast."

Gal3:26-27 For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus. For all of you who were baptized into Christ have clothed yourselves with Christ.

Col2:12 having been buried with Him in baptism, in which you were also raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead.

I Pet 3:20-21, ...in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. 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,

Truth never contradicts itself. These passages are in perfect harmony.

 

I thought I saw him earlier say that it wa when he called on the name after ancountering Ananias.
Anyway, trying to pit us against each other will do no good. Whether he was saved right then on the road when he said "Lord", or whether it was another instance of calling on the Lord before Ananias; it was still the CALLING, which was a SEPARATE act from the Baptism.

Oh, no you don't! You're reading your own ideas ("implication") into the text again. IT does NOT say they believe and wanted to call on the namebut didn;t know how. They were CONVICTED by their sin in their part in the Crucifixion. So then, they asked "What shall we do" (to escape the obvious judgment for that sin). They are told REPENT, and be baptized. Once again; baptism is always accompanied by a spiritual act, which does the saving, and baptism is just the outward symbol of it.

DHK may see it differently; but to me, this looks like the same thing as in the above example. For one thing; "Lord" also meant "sir". Before I realized this; I always wondered why the blind man He had healed called him "Lord" in the same sentence as asking who He was (John 9:35-38).
So Saul was now obeying what the the Lord told him, and addressing Him with a title of respect; but it does not say that he really accepted him at that point. So once again, it was "repent ["call on the name"] and be baptized", with one washing away the sins, and the other symbolizing this spiritual occurrence.

Sorry, it is only by your stretched "implication" that you can make being baptized = "Calling on the name". They were two separate acts that were to accompany one another; not one act with two names.
Once again; God says "And why tarriest thou, arise and be baptized AND wash away your sins calling on the name of the Lord", and man says "And why tarriest thou, arise and be baptized TO call on the name of the Lord and thus wash away yours sins".

Yes, that would be "Earning" it! "If you do this; then I'll give you this". When the person does it; then he can say "OK; I did this; now you give me what you promised". Nice try; you try to suggest that "he did not earn 5 million from a minimum wage job". In this case, there are basically TWO earnings, from two different people. He earns a minimum wage from his employer, and he earns the 5 million from his uncle just for keeping a job (whatever that job was).