Baptism

NO! Water baptism is simply an outward sign of an inner grace....The "saved" part better have happened before water baptism.

Cheers,

Jim

 

Here's one:

"Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;" (Titus 3:5)

Baptism is a work of righteousness, which Paul specifically excludes as the way to salvation.

 

Another:

Philip explained Isaiah 53 to the Ethiopian eunuch. The eunuch said, here's some water, what's to keep me from being baptized now. Philip said in Acts 8:37 "If you believe with all your heart."

The eunuch then confessed his believe that Jesus Christ is the son of God. Only then did Philip take him down into the water to baptize him.

Acts 2:41, following Peter's sermon: "Now they that gladly received his word were baptized." Note the order: receiving the word, baptism.

Any verses which seem to suggest baptismal regeneration must be interpreted in the light of clear scriptures, such as I have listed here.

 

Let me first go to Acts 2:38a translated into Portuguese “Arrependei-vos, e seja batizado cada um de vós em nome de Jesus Cristo, para | remissão dos vossos peacados” (DA ERC|DA ERA).

The translation uses the strong imperative for KJV "repent" but the obligatory subjunctive for KJV "be baptized." The verse as translated is best understood as “You-people-repent-you, and-so let-s/he-be-baptized each one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, in-order-for the remission of you-people’s sins." We repent for remission of sins, but that repentance obligates us to be be baptized.

Regarding Noah's Flood, 1 Peter 3:21 says “which also after a true likeness doth now save you, even baptism,| not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a |clear conscience|), by the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (ASV|NASB|RSV 1952|KJV). The actual ceremony involving water is excluded from the saving process, but the verse does indicate that the repentance baptism represents is what saves us.

There is no contradiction with Ephesians 2:8-10 “for by grace you have been saved through faith. And this is not your own doing; it is the gift of God, not a result of works, so that no one may boast. For |in Christ Jesus, God made us new people| for good works, which God prepared beforehand, that we should walk in them” (ESV|ICB|ESV).

We are saved without works -- period. Upon salvation we are made new creatures, and works follow, such as baptism. Galatians 5:6 says “For in Christ Jesus neither circumcision nor uncircumcision means anything, |but only | the kind of faith that works through love” (NASB|ESV|ICB).

Now, Mark 16:16. Have you ever read standard reference works on the actual Greek text of the New Testament? The two oldest manuscripts of the transition of Mark to Luke, as well as some ancient translations, do not have anything after Mark 16:8, and some manuscripts and ancient translation manuscripts also have alternative text after 16:8. What comes after Mark 16:8 is apocryphal material. As for this apocryphal material, verse 16b has "he that believeth not shall be| condemned” (KJ21|DRV). Only those who do not believe will be condemned -- if we accept this apocryphal material.

 

Sportsfreak,

Thanks for the question

.

And the answer is it depends on what you are talking about when you say saved. I am going to assume (bad thing to do and please correct me if I am wrong) that you me do we have to be baptized to be eternally saved.

And the answer to that question is no.

The context of Acts 2:38 and Mark 16:16 are not eternal salvation contexts. If you would like to know more about what I'm talking about please feel free to PM me or email me.

Welcome to the site.

 

Contrary to all those who have already posted, Baptism is not a work of man. Rather, baptism is a work of God. How do we know this? Well if one actually takes the time to look at the words of Christ in Matthew He when charges the disciples with going out into the world we will see that Baptizing is not a command. In Greek, the word for baptizing is in the verb form called a dative participle. Participles do many things but the one thing they do not do is take the form of a command. In this case it is describing the means by which a disciple is made. Knowing that only God can make a disciple we must acknowledge that God is at work in Baptism, particularly when we later read that we are joined to the death and resurrection of Christ in Baptism and that Baptism saves us as a washing of conscience, things that only God can do. Those who say otherwise are caught up in the things of this world and refuse to see pass the mundane and witness the extraordinary.

That said one does not have to be baptized to be saved as Baptism is not the only means by which disciples are made. However, I'd advise anybody who asks to get baptized.

:godisgood:

 

As all early Christians knew and believed

Baptism is the washing of regeneration!

 

Sportsfreak, before replying to the topic at hand, I must ask about your motives: did you come here for a real discussion of the Scriptures, or did you come here for an argument, or even worse, to "convert the Baptists"?

You asked a series of questions that display a few misconceptions that have probably been shoved down your throat in your church. I myself was raised Church of Christ and bought into the theology you're presenting here until just a year or two ago.

So, assuming the best about your motives, let's see about your questions through this thread.

The Portuguese grammar was inherently closer to the Greek grammar, which, incidentally, does the same thing. In the Greek, grammatically, "repent" and "for the remission of your sins" are connected while "baptism" is disconnected, put in its proper place as a reflection of that repentance. Mark 1:4 illustrates this concept in the baptism of John (which you might've been taught is a totally separate thing from "Christian" baptism; if that becomes relevant, we can discuss that)--it is a baptism of "repentance for the remission of sins." There, even in English, the implication that baptism is a reflection of repentance and repentance is "for the remission of sins" is clear.

Mark 16:16 is debated as to whether it even ought to be in the Bible, as someone else mentioned. However, for argument's sake, let us assume that Mark 16:16 is Scripture. At best, the second clause of that verse leaves it ambiguous for unbaptized believers. The ambiguity is cleared up by so much other Scripture that points to salvation through faith/repentance. In other words, if we were to break down the possible results of a person based on Mark 16:16, we would see it as follows:

Believe and be baptized--saved.
Do not believe and do not be baptized--condemned.
Do not believe and do be baptized--condemned.
Believe and do not be baptized--not stated.

Because that result isn't stated, we have to go to other verses (John 3:16 comes to mind) to see what happens.

Okay, enough on that for now. Moving on.

Well, repenting is not a "work of righteousness." Repentance and faith are flip-sides of the same coin and are both states of the heart. Neither is an act performed to gain salvation. Confession, like baptism, is an expression of the salvation we've received, not a work done to gain it. But, since you brought up James, let's talk for a minute about a couple of interesting points in that passage.

First, James himself mentions the kinds of "works" he means in verses 15 through 17. He means, primarily, works of compassion. Don't confuse that with the kinds of works that don't save us, in Ephesians 2:8-10. However, he does cite the example of Abraham, which brings us to the second interesting point in that passage.

Abraham never actually offered Isaac. He was going to, but God stopped him. Therefore, in the technical sense, he never fulfilled that command. You see, Abraham wasn't declared righteous because of some act that he did, as he didn't complete the command, but rather because of the heart of faith that caused him to act (the very point James is trying to make. Paul emphasizes that point in Romans 4 if you remember, when he cites the same Scripture--"Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness" (Genesis 5:6). Paul drives home the message by pointing out that Abraham hadn't even been circumcised yet when he was declared righteous.

So I hope that cleared up your questions. I look forward to further discussion with you on these matters.

Michael

 

Let me anticipate a possible splitting of words.

What do we do with our bodies that cause salvation? We do NOTHING. Romans 4:5, Ephesians 2:8-10, etc..

What happens on our part that makes us saved Christians. We believe the Gospel -- Acts 10:43, Acts 16:31, Ephesians 2:8-10, Romans 4:5, etc.. This is not believe like `acknowledge the existance of.' This faith is defined in Scripture as a faith that would motivate the believer to act: specifics are in Acts 2:38 as correctly translated and interpreted and Romans 10:9, but the general principle of a faith that would act is specified in Galatians 5:6 and James 2:14-26.

That biblical faith ALONE is the human component of salvation. Under normal circumstances, this faith causes the works of faith and obedience that saved Christians do after regeneration -- Ephesians 2:8-10.

 

You sound a bit like the Philippian Jailor in Acts 16. He asked that same question. Let's look at how that played out:

"And (he) brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house."--Acts 16:30-31

I'll go with Paul and Silas on this one.

Your turn.

Michael

 

Repent!

Repent!

Confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord!

The theif on the cross was not baptized. The eunuch would not have been baptized had the Holy Spirit not provided the water . . .

Wayne

 

So, you are engaging in the games of deception that hard-line Churches of Christ engage in. They look for opportunities to accuse `You mean you don't believe that we have to obey God.' NONSENSE! If you read my posts, you would know that.

Before you engage me, or any other Christian, in a discussion about the Bible with an expectation of convincing me of anything, first get its basics. Ephesians 4:25a "Wherefore, putting away falsehood, speak you truth each one with his neighbor" (ASV).

The post you quoted put repentance with belief when I put Acts 2:38 in there. If we believe the Gospel, we recognize Jesus Christ as Lord, and we act accordingly, which means to turn against our sins = repentance.

Of course we have to be baptized. The question is whether or not it causes salvation. As a Christian, I serve the Lord doing things that I do not have to do in order to be saved; I do not need fear of fire to motivate me to serve the Lord -- I obey and serve because I WANT to please Him.

As for your verse, you should read the whole passage of Acts 16:30-4. At Acts 16:30 Philippian jailer asked Paul and Silas “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?” (ASV) upon which they replied at Acts 16:31 solely “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and all your household” (NASB). Then the jailer’s family was preached to with words unspecified at Acts 16:32. After this, he washed their wounds, and after that he was baptized at Acts 16:33 “And he took them the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, him and all his, immediately” (ASV).

The matter of baptism was not of such urgency that it precluded medical treatment; the wounds of Paul and Silas were washed which would have been a matter of mortal health, and then baptism was done. All would have had a perspective on the eternal life of the soul which certainly would have been viewed as a more weighty matter than physical health, yet medical treatment was done before baptism.

However, baptism was considered extremely important. At Acts 16:34 it was only after baptisms were finished that food was put out for all. On this conversion experience, completed baptisms were taken care of before eating. The comfort of food was delayed to address the priority of new converts being baptized. However, there is no nullification of the answer given at Acts 16:31.

 

The thief was not saved under the old covenant.

At Luke 22:50 we read Jesus saying “This cup is the new covenant in my blood” (ASV). Here, Jesus institutes a New Covenant that is to be based upon His blood. Starting at Hebrews 7:22b we see “Jesus has become the guarantee of a better covenant” (NASB) and the train of thought continues to Hebrews 8:6-7: “But now hath he obtained a ministry the more excellent, by so much as he is also the mediator of a better covenant, which hath been enacted upon better promises. For if that first covenant had been faultless, then would no place have been sought for a second” (ASV). The New Testament acknowledges between Judaism and Christianity only two covenants: an Old Covenant and a “second covenant” = “New Covenant” based upon Jesus Christ.

At Matthew 27:50-1a we read “And when Jesus had cried out again in a loud voice, he gave up his spirit. At that moment the curtain of the temple was torn from top to bottom” (TNIV). The temple curtain separated the rest of the temple from the innermost part of the temple, which had the presence of God and could only be entered by one certain priest on stringent conditions. When that temple curtain tore, that signified the end of the Old Covenant; God ripped that barrier apart Himself from Heaven’s direction down. This is important, because it says much about the relevance of one of the first people saved under the New Covenant.

Originally, the thief was a party to mocking the Lord Jesus on the cross per Matthew 27:44 “And the robbers who were crucified with him also reviled him in the same way” (ESV). The end of the thief’s account is as follows from Luke 23:41-3 starting with his words “`And we indeed are suffering justly, for we are receiving what we deserve for our deeds, but this man has done nothing wrong.’ And he was saying, `Jesus, remember me when You come into Your Kingdom!’ And He said to him, `Truly, I say to you, today you shall be with me in Paradise’” (NASB). Although this thief was originally antagonistic to Jesus, upon this thief’s repentance, Jesus assured the man of being in the same place as righteous Jesus Himself after death!

At Luke 23:42, of seven Greek manuscripts from before 500 C.E., only three have the reading rendered in the King James Version “And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me…”; the three oldest manuscripts and a fourth have the ancient reading which is followed in the NASB "And he was saying, `Jesus, remember me...."
--Scrivener, Bezae Codex, page 257; Hodges, Farstad, The Greek New Testament According to the Majority Text, pages xvii, 283; Aland et al, Novum Testamentum Graece, page 240.

Back to the account. When we turn over to the continuation of the crucifixion after Jesus’ death, we find out that after Jesus had died, those hung on crosses next to Him remained alive:

• At John 19:30 Jesus Christ dies
• At John 19:31 the Jewish leaders asked that those on the crosses would have their legs broken to speed up their deaths so that the crosses would be vacant the next day, and
• At John 19:32 both of Jesus’ neighbors had their legs broken.

​

Recall that at the very moment of Jesus’ death, the Old Covenant was literally ripped from top to bottom, but the penitent thief was still alive. Jesus knows all things per John 16:30-3. Jesus knew when the penitent thief would die. The penitent thief, however, was promised a place with righteous Jesus by Jesus Himself. Hence, when the penitent thief died after Jesus’ death, he was not saved by anything other than the New Covenant that all Christians are saved under, and Jesus expected this.

This event gives valuable insights into how we are saved. Romans 4:5 says “And to the one who does not work but trusts him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is counted as righteousness” (ESV). The penitent thief had no opportunity to do anything to confirm his faith. While Romans 10:9 requires willingness to confess Jesus as Lord, Luke 23:41-3 as originally written -- see manuscript note above -- shows not even this action; the thief recognized Jesus’ authority over a kingdom, so no doubt would have confessed Him as Lord. The only recorded things the thief did here was show realization that his sins deserved punishment and call on Jesus to treat him with mercy -- and Jesus gave him salvation.

Because the thief died after Jesus died and the curtain of the Holiest of Holies was torn, the thief was saved under the New Covenant, as we are.