A question of authority

That is the most clearly stated reason I have ever seen for baptizing children when they are born.

 

Then it wouldn't be "Believer's Baptism" would it?

It wouldn't be their obedience either would it. After all they haven't even learned the concept of "NO", yet.

if every man dies for his own sin...

Doesn't it, then, make sense that everyone should be baptised for themselves. Ie., with their own understanding of what they are doing and the commitment to Christ they are making?

*IF* Baptism saves, and *IF* you baptise children then how do you keep them "saved" through the teen years, which you'd better do because it clearly states in

Heb 6:6 If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame.

After all without the Grace of

1 John 1:9 If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness.

All it takes is one teen sin, like a link in a chain over the pit of hell, doesn't matter the size, to kill the soul.

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

We won't rely on works in the flesh done by parents or children to save us.

It's Jesus, pure and simply.

Actually Zenas, I really hoped you were joking.

But, couldn't take the chance...

 

I'd like to demonstrate the error of using the thief on the cross as an example of salvation under the New Testament.

Sir, while there is no doubt that the thief on the cross (TTOC) went to Paradise, it should be pointed out that he died under the Old Testament. Jesus Christ is the mediator of the New Testament.

Heb 9:15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

A testament is not in effect until the testator dies.

Heb 9:16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.
Heb 9:17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

Before Jesus' death on the cross, eternal life was His to give to whomever He wanted, under whatever conditions He chose.

Joh 5:26 For as the Father hath life in himself; so hath he given to the Son to have life in himself;

Joh 5:21 For as the Father raiseth up the dead, and quickeneth them; even so the Son quickeneth whom he will.

Allow me to illustrate. Let's say I put into my will that upon my death, preacher4truth was to receive my 1998 Ford Ranger. Preacher would be psyched, 'cause it's an awesome little truck. Anyway, let's say that the next day (while I was yet alive), preacher4truth came to my house, took my keys, and drove away in my truck. I don't think he would actually do that, but roll with it for the sake of illustration.

Now, does this provision being in my will mean he can come get my truck? No! Why not? Because I'm not dead yet, silly! Taking the truck before I die constitutes grand theft auto! My last will and testament is not in effect until after I die. Neither was the Testament of Jesus Christ.

Additionally, while I'm still alive, I could choose to give my truck to DHK for a nickel (which would be a SWEET DEAL). Doesn't violate my will though, since I'm not dead yet. I can just change the will.

However, once I die, nobody can have my 1998 Ranger but preacher4truth, 'cause my death seals the deal.

Something else I'd like to point out is that from the Scriptural record, we cannot ascertain whether or not TTOC had been baptized or not. The Bible tells us that lots of people went out to be baptized by both John the Baptist.

Luk 3:21 Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened,

Mar 1:5 And there went out unto him all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.

Mat 3:5 Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,
Mat 3:6 And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.

Lots of people were baptized by Jesus' disciples, too.

I'm not trying to prove that TTOC was baptized, just pointing out that on top of the fact that he died under the OT, it can't be proven that he hadn't been baptized, either.

Those who want to be saved like the thief are looking to the wrong cross.

Just sayin'...

 

I'd say that the imperative of baptism might explain the urgency of the Phillipian jailer, who was baptized in the middle of the night, or of the Ethiopian eunuch, who earnestly desired of Phillip, "What doth hinder me to be baptized?" as soon as he heard the gospel of Christ. Then there's the insistence of Ananias in Acts 22 when he told Paul, "And now why tarriest thou? Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

I wonder if Paul's statement that he was as one born out of due time (don't recall exactly where that is) might be due to the fact of his baptism, the washing away of his sins, coming three days after he believed in the resurrected Christ. Every other conversion account that I know of has the new believer being baptized at once.

 

On what authority do you make this statement, DHK? Where do you read in the Bible that God looks at baptism as a work? Your implication is that baptism is a work of merit. Where is it ever described as such by the Almighty?

I will concede however, that it is an act of obedience. I believe somewhere around Romans 6:17 Paul rejoices that they had "...obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered" them. It was at this point that they had become the servants of righteousness. Earlier in the chapter he speaks explicitly of baptism, which is a form (picture) of the doctrine of the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ in which the dead, sinful man is buried and the new man is raised to walk in newness of life.

But in your mind, you're burying live men, right? What's the point of burying live men?

 

I'm with SMM on this one (hope he doesn't mind :smilewinkgrin:). I heard a story once about a gospel preacher walking up on a Methodist preacher who was about to baptize a baby in a creek. The Methodist congregation was gathered around and watched as the Methodist minister carried the screaming infant toward the water. But the gospel preacher intervened, and after returning the child to his mother, started dragging the Methodist preacher toward the creek.

"What are you doing?!" the Methodist preacher cried.

"I'm going to baptize you", said the gospel preacher.

"But I don't want you to baptize me! It won't do any good!" the Methodist protested.

The gospel preacher stopped and said to the assembled crowd, "You heard him, folks! He doesn't want to be baptized, so it won't do any good to force him. Same goes for that baby! Remember that, people!"

Belief is prerequisite to baptism. Baptizing infants only gets them angry and wet.

 

By simple definition. Do you need a dictionary? It is an act that man does. Has God ever baptized you? NO. Man does the WORK of baptizing and no one else. It is a work of man, and you can't say anything to the contrary without lying about it.

That is a false accusation. Quote me where I ever said or even implied such.

It is described as a work after salvation, and never before.
And they that were saved were baptized. It is a work. After salvation the saved person obeys and submits himself to the act/work of baptism. What part of this do you not get? English is a simple language.

Yes it is, but not a requirement of salvation; and only after salvation takes place.
So tell me was I saved for the two years between the time I trusted Christ and the time that I was baptized?
You don't believe I was do you?
Do you believe I am saved now?
You don't think so do you?

Yes, a picture of their salvation--nothing to do with their baptism per se. The baptism was a picture of their salvation. Baptism is not a picture of baptism. That doesn't make sense does it?

That's hogwash, and isn't worth the value of an ounce of goat's milk.

 

The question was, "Where do you read in the Bible that God looks at baptism as a work?" I was not asking for a definition of work, but for a scripture reference for God calling baptism a work. Do you need a Bible?

I apologize. I seem to have mistaken your objection to baptism as a requirement for salvation as being based on a supposed meritorious benefit, or that one would be earning his salvation by being baptized.

Again, I'd like to know what your Scripture reference is for baptism being described as a work - ever - in the Bible.

On the other hand, John 6:29 states plainly in English that to believe on Jesus is a work.

Jon 6:28 Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God?
Jon 6:29 Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent.

To believe is something that we must DO. It takes effort, not physical, but mental, to discard old beliefs for believing in Christ. I'd submit that the mental effort is far more difficult than the physical lengths many are willing to go to in their efforts to make themselves "good enough" for God.

Not to mention, it is plainly stated to be a work by Jesus Himself as shown in the SCRIPTURE REFERENCE I have provided. Still waiting on yours, DHK.

Be right back...

 

All one need do is read in Hebrews 6:1-2 where some, immature in faith, reverted to works, using baptisms...laying on of hands...other things versus faith in the work of Christ alone. "...of the doctrine" of baptisms means either the act of it or the matter of it, thus the act of it, again, is a work. It's definitely not a "faith", nor is it efficacious. I understand the implication of the baptisms of the Hebrews in worship. This just further illustrates it as being a work. The writer is telling these Hebrews to quit relying on these works.

Simply put, instead of maturing in faith, they reverted back to works and things they could do as works based salvationisms.

Water baptism is man following the command of God, and is a work of man to do so. Salvation on the other hand is a work of God alone, that no man can administer, nor do. Man only believes in order to receive it. That is the difference between the work of man in obedience of following in baptism, and the work of God wherein he does all the work because we believed.

 

First off, Jesus said baptism comes before salvation.

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Peter said baptism saves us.

1Pet 3:20 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.

1 Pet 3:21 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:

Pete said baptism was for (in order to) the remission of sins.

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Can one be saved and still be in his sins? Paul believed in the resurrected Christ for three days...fasted and prayed the whole time, even...yet he was still in his sins, unsaved.

Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Paul told the church at Rome that those who had been buried with Christ (in baptism) would be raised in the likeness of His resurrection (of the righteous).

Rom 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also [in the likeness] of [his] resurrection:

It doesn't matter what I think. What does the Bible say?

 

Where do you read that it is not a work. Words have meanings. It is a work, an act, something that is done, something that is done by one man to another man or woman. Is that not correct? If it is not correct then what is it? If it is not an act then what is it? You said it was an act of obedience did you not? An act is still an act which is a work. It is something you do. That makes it a work. Look up the words in the dictionary. They are synonymous with each other.

The statement you made above is the basic belief of the COC, correct? Without the act of baptism one cannot be saved you say. That makes baptism meritorious on your part. It is not I that believes that; it is you. It is you that believes you must earn your salvation through baptism plus four other works that you add to it. Am I not correct? What are the five works you must do in order to be saved? You have a works-based salvation.

Where is it not described as a work--ever!!
Where is praying not described as a work?
Where is witnessing not described as a work?
Where is the study of God's Word not described as a work?
Where is the breaking of bread (The Lord's Table) not described as a work?
--These are all works, every last one of them. They are all commanded by Christ to the believer, and never to the unsaved. None are ever commanded as a requirement to the unsaved. Never.

Your English skills need improvement.
Work is an act done.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/work?show=0&t=1291570745
--As you can see the above is from the Merriam-Webster dictionary.
Baptism is a work.
The work of a pastor is to baptize those who come to Christ; to disciple them, to teach them, etc. It is one of the many works that he does. It is a part of the work of carrying out the Great Commission.




Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? Jesus answered and said unto them,
20 This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent. (John 6:28-29)
Jesus was using a play on words here. Like most people who believed that one gets to heaven by their works, these people thought the same thing and also asked Jesus what they could do or accomplish to get to heaven. Of course there is nothing one can do. The price has already been paid; it has been paid with the blood of Christ. It is only through Christ that one can be saved; not through any good works at all. Jesus taught this message consistently.
He taught them the same message here. The only thing (ie "work") that you can do is to "believe" and that isn't really a work is it? In other words you cannot work your way to heaven. Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be saved. Salvation is not of works, lest any man should boast. This is simply a play on words. Jesus is teaching the exact opposite--faith is not a work; faith is the only thing that can save--faith in Jesus Christ and his atoning work. If you put faith in baptism as well then you have slapped Christ insultingly in the face telling him that his blood was not sufficient to pay the penalty for your sins, but you had to help him along by paying part of the price in your baptism. How arrogant you are!

 

No he didn't. He submitted to John's baptism. Did Jesus have to get saved first? If baptism was necessary for salvation then Jesus couldn't have been saved.
Who did John the Baptist baptize, and why?
Who did the disciples of Jesus baptize and why?
Your statement is false.

This does not teach that baptism saves since the lost are condemned for their unbelief without being baptized.

Not the water...but the answer of a good conscience toward God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ--that is what saves. Molecules of water didn't save anyone. In fact if you read the context it is the water that destroyed; it destroyed the whole earth--all mankind except for Noah and the 8 that entered the ark. The water did not save them. The ark did. The ARK is a picture of Christ; not the water. It is Christ that saves; not the water. It is a picture.
Verse 21 starts off--"The like figure whereunto"
Noah was baptized in the ark which wholly surrounded him.
When I get saved I am baptized into Christ and wholly indwelt by him.
He abides in me and I in him. It is the Ark, Christ that saves, not water--not baptism. Correct exegesis of the passage here would do you some good. Furthermore Peter says it is not that water that washes away filth that saves (physical water). But rather the answer of a good conscience toward God by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. It is faith in the gospel that saves; nothing to do with baptism.

Wrong again.
I ask you again: Why did John the Baptist baptize?
Look at Mat. 3:11
I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: (Matthew 3:11)
The word "unto" (eis) is the same word in Acts 2:38 "for" (eis) in the Greek.
John would not baptize anyone unless they had repented.
I indeed baptize you with water because of your repentance. It was on the condition of their repentance and only because of their repentance that he would baptize them.

The same was true with Peter.
Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for (because of) the remission of sins,
In other words because your sins have already been remitted, you now be baptized. The word eis means here "because of", just as it does in Mat.3:11.

How terrible to call the great Apostle Paul unsaved when he wasn't.

Was Paul able to address Christ as Lord when he fell off his horse on the way to Damascus? Here is what he taught the Corinthians:

Wherefore I give you to understand, that no man speaking by the Spirit of God calleth Jesus accursed: and that no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, but by the Holy Ghost. (1 Corinthians 12:3)
--Apparently Paul was convicted by the Holy Spirit and was saved at that point in time when he was able to call Christ Lord. He also submitted to Christ as Lord asking him: "Lord what would you have me to do?"
No unsaved man ever asks Christ that question!
The scenario you need to more honestly ask yourself is this:
Can one be saved and still not be baptized (as Saul was)? And the obvious answer is YES. And all that time he was saved and in sweet fellowship with the Lord even though he was not baptized. Isn't it wonderful not to be bound by laws, but rather to live under grace.

Grammatically:
"Calling on the name of the Lord," precedes "arise and be baptized."
Salvation comes from calling on the name of the Lord, not from being baptized. Baptism was the last thing he did, and it didn't have anything to do with his salvation.

Yes, in the likeness...it is a picture of salvation. It has nothing to do with salvation except to be a symbolic picture of it.

The likeness is in the baptismal picture itself. As one goes into the water he is buried in immersion. His old life is buried. He arises as Christ arose. He arises to a new life in Christ. It is a picture of salvation. It has nothing to do with salvation, per se.

The Bible says: "He that has the Son has life; he that has not the Son has not life."
I have the Son of God as my Savior. I trusted him two years before I was baptized. That was the time I was saved. If I had died before I was baptized the Bible gives me the assurance that I would have gone to heaven.

Verily, verily, I say unto you, He that heareth my word, and believeth on him that sent me, hath everlasting life, and shall not come into condemnation; but is passed from death unto life. (John 5:24)

But you don't believe that do you?
You don't believe that I was saved during those two years.
You don't believe that I am saved now, do you?
And because you don't that is why you cannot give me a straight answer, true?

 

Nein Jung Frau! They did not display faith at all. Thus why lead them to baptism? Faith is necessary for baptism or its of no avail.

 

I think you and Thinkingstuff are both missing the point here. Paul wasn’t saying those people had never been baptized, but that he (Paul) did not do it. Someone else had done the baptizing of all but two of them. In this instance, Paul was implying that these Corinthian converts had not turned out right and that it would have reflected badly on him if he had been the baptizer. And Paul did baptize. He baptized the Philippian jailer and his household; also Lydia and her household. It is unthinkable that Paul would ever have made new converts without baptizing them or seeing that someone else did. In fact he thought baptism was so important that he rounded up a group in Ephesus who had only had the baptism of John and gave them the baptism of Christ.

 

Not to derail the thread, but do you conclude from the quoted verse that a public profession of faith is necessary for salvation?