Is Baptism Optional?--Setting The Record Straight.

God's word does not change over time, men change and twist the scriptures and thus wrest in themselves their own destruction. we are not added to local churches there is only one church that we are added to that is the lord's church, and we are baptized into Christ, who's body is the church.

sorry about that darron but yes it is required for salvation for my earlier reasons stated.

and as i stated earlier the eunuch is a good example, baptism is involved with preaching Jesus, then why would the eunuch stop the chariot on the middle of the road just to go down into the water to be baptized if it wasn't that important.

In Christian Love,

Dustin

 

Hi Dustin, I appreciate your passion for what you believe and between this thead and the other couple of baptism threads you have aldready debated the things I would have said. Let me ask you this though. Do you believe that God has changed the way he has dealt with His people over the past thousands of years?? Are there things in place with the NT church that were not in place when Moses was around?? Is a NT Christian expected to follow the Law as written in Lev.?? (including killing their own child if disrespectful). I'll let you answer these before I go any further. Thanks in advance for answering.

In Christ,
Brian

 

The Necessity of Baptism

Christians have always interpreted the Bible literally when it declares, "Baptism . . . now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body, but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Pet. 3:21; cf. Acts 2:38, 22:16, Rom. 6:3–4, Col. 2:11–12).

Thus the early Church Fathers wrote in the Nicene Creed (A.D. 381), "We believe in one baptism for the forgiveness of sins."

"The Lord himself affirms that baptism is necessary for salvation [John 3:5]. . . . Baptism is necessary for salvation for those to whom the Gospel has been proclaimed and who have had the possibility of asking for this sacrament [Mark 16:16]"

The Christian belief that baptism is necessary for salvation is so unshakable that even the Protestant Martin Luther affirmed the necessity of baptism. He wrote: "Baptism is no human plaything but is instituted by God himself. Moreover, it is solemnly and strictly commanded that we must be baptized or we shall not be saved. We are not to regard it as an indifferent matter, then, like putting on a new red coat. It is of the greatest importance that we regard baptism as excellent, glorious, and exalted"

Yet Christians have also always realized that the necessity of water baptism is a normative rather than an absolute necessity. There are exceptions to water baptism: It is possible to be saved through "baptism of blood," martyrdom for Christ, or through "baptism of desire", that is, an explicit or even implicit desire for baptism.

As the following passages from the works of the Church Fathers illustrate, Christians have always believed in the normative necessity of water baptism, while also acknowledging the legitimacy of baptism by desire or blood.

 

The Necessity of Baptism according to the ECFs

As the following passages from the works of the Church Fathers illustrate, Christians have always believed in the normative necessity of water baptism, while also acknowledging the legitimacy of baptism by desire or blood.

Hermas


"‘I have heard, sir,’ said I [to the Shepherd], ‘from some teacher, that there is no other repentance except that which took place when we went down into the water and obtained the remission of our former sins.’ He said to me, ‘You have heard rightly, for so it is’" (The Shepherd 4:3:1–2 [A.D. 80]).

Justin Martyr


"As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly . . . are brought by us where there is water, and are regenerated in the same manner in which we were ourselves regenerated. For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water. For Christ also said, ‘Except you be born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:3]" (First Apology 61 [A.D. 151]).

Tertullian


"Happy is our sacrament of water, in that, by washing away the sins of our early blindness, we are set free and admitted into eternal life. . . . [But] a viper of the [Gnostic] Cainite heresy, lately conversant in this quarter, has carried away a great number with her most venomous doctrine, making it her first aim to destroy baptism—which is quite in accordance with nature, for vipers and asps . . . themselves generally do live in arid and waterless places. But we, little fishes after the example of our [Great] Fish, Jesus Christ, are born in water, nor have we safety in any other way than by permanently abiding in water. So that most monstrous creature, who had no right to teach even sound doctrine, knew full well how to kill the little fishes—by taking them away from the water!" (Baptism 1 [A.D. 203]).

"Without baptism, salvation is attainable by none" (ibid., 12).

"We have, indeed, a second [baptismal] font which is one with the former [water baptism]: namely, that of blood, of which the Lord says: ‘I am to be baptized with a baptism’ [Luke 12:50], when he had already been baptized. He had come through water and blood, as John wrote [1 John 5:6], so that he might be baptized with water and glorified with blood. . . . This is the baptism which replaces that of the fountain, when it has not been received, and restores it when it has been lost" (ibid., 16).

Hippolytus


"[P]erhaps someone will ask, ‘What does it conduce unto piety to be baptized?’ In the first place, that you may do what has seemed good to God; in the next place, being born again by water unto God so that you change your first birth, which was from concupiscence, and are able to attain salvation, which would otherwise be impossible. For thus the [prophet] has sworn to us: ‘Amen, I say to you, unless you are born again with living water, into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven.’ Therefore, fly to the water, for this alone can extinguish the fire. He who will not come to the water still carries around with him the spirit of insanity for the sake of which he will not come to the living water for his own salvation" (Homilies 11:26 [A.D. 217]).

Origen


"It is not possible to receive forgiveness of sins without baptism" (Exhortation to the Martyrs 30 [A.D. 235]).

Cyprian of Carthage

"[T]he baptism of public witness and of blood cannot profit a heretic unto salvation, because there is no salvation outside the Church." (Letters 72[73]:21 [A.D. 253]).

"[Catechumens who suffer martyrdom] are not deprived of the sacrament of baptism. Rather, they are baptized with the most glorious and greatest baptism of blood, concerning which the Lord said that he had another baptism with which he himself was to be baptized [Luke 12:50]" (ibid., 72[73]:22).

Cyril of Jerusalem


"If any man does not receive baptism, he does not have salvation. The only exception is the martyrs, who even without water will receive the kingdom.
. . . For the Savior calls martyrdom a baptism, saying, ‘Can you drink the cup which I drink and be baptized with the baptism with which I am to be baptized [Mark 10:38]?’ Indeed, the martyrs too confess, by being made a spectacle to the world, both to angels and to men [1 Cor. 4:9]" (Catechetical Lectures 3:10 [A.D. 350]).

Gregory Nazianz


"[Besides the baptisms associated with Moses, John, and Jesus] I know also a fourth baptism, that by martyrdom and blood, by which also Christ himself was baptized. This one is far more august than the others, since it cannot be defiled by later sins" (Oration on the Holy Lights 39:17 [A.D. 381]).

Pope Siricius


"It would tend to the ruin of our souls if, from our refusal of the saving font of baptism to those who seek it, any of them should depart this life and lose the kingdom and eternal life" (Letter to Himerius 3 [A.D. 385]).

John Chrysostom


"Do not be surprised that I call martyrdom a baptism, for here too the Spirit comes in great haste and there is the taking away of sins and a wonderful and marvelous cleansing of the soul, and just as those being baptized are washed in water, so too those being martyred are washed in their own blood" (Panegyric on St. Lucian 2 [A.D. 387]).

Ambrose of Milan


"But I hear you lamenting because he [the Emperor Valentinian] had not received the sacraments of baptism. Tell me, what else could we have, except the will to it, the asking for it? He too had just now this desire, and after he came into Italy it was begun, and a short time ago he signified that he wished to be baptized by me. Did he, then, not have the grace which he desired? Did he not have what he eagerly sought? Certainly, because he sought it, he received it. What else does it mean: ‘Whatever just man shall be overtaken by death, his soul shall be at rest [Wis. 4:7]’?" (Sympathy at the Death of Valentinian [A.D. 392]).

Augustine


"There are three ways in which sins are forgiven: in baptism, in prayer, and in the greater humility of penance; yet God does not forgive sins except to the baptized" (Sermons to Catechumens on the Creed 7:15 [A.D. 395]).

"I do not hesitate to put the Catholic catechumen, burning with divine love, before a baptized heretic. Even within the Catholic Church herself we put the good catechumen ahead of the wicked baptized person. . . . For Cornelius, even before his baptism, was filled up with the Holy Spirit [Acts 10:44–48], while Simon [Magus], even after his baptism, was puffed up with an unclean spirit [Acts 8:13–19]" (On Baptism, Against the Donatists 4:21:28 [A.D. 400]).

"That the place of baptism is sometimes supplied by suffering is supported by a substantial argument which the same blessed Cyprian draws from the circumstance of the thief, to whom, although not baptized, it was said, ‘Today you shall be with me in paradise’ [Luke 23:43]. Considering this over and over again, I find that not only suffering for the name of Christ can supply for that which is lacking by way of baptism, but even faith and conversion of heart [i.e., baptism of desire] if, perhaps, because of the circumstances of the time, recourse cannot be had to the celebration of the mystery of baptism" (ibid., 4:22:29).

"When we speak of within and without in relation to the Church, it is the position of the heart that we must consider, not that of the body. . . . All who are within [the Church] in heart are saved in the unity of the ark [by baptism of desire]" (ibid., 5:28:39).

"[According to] apostolic tradition . . . the churches of Christ hold inherently that without baptism and participation at the table of the Lord it is impossible for any man to attain either to the kingdom of God or to salvation and life eternal. This is the witness of Scripture too" (Forgiveness and the Just Deserts of Sin, and the Baptism of Infants 1:24:34 [A.D. 412]).

"Those who, though they have not received the washing of regeneration, die for the confession of Christ—it avails them just as much for the forgiveness of their sins as if they had been washed in the sacred font of baptism. For he that said, ‘If anyone is not reborn of water and the Spirit, he will not enter the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5], made an exception for them in that other statement in which he says no less generally, ‘Whoever confesses me before men, I too will confess him before my Father, who is in heaven’ [Matt. 10:32]" (The City of God 13:7 [A.D. 419]).

Pope Leo I


"And because of the transgression of the first man, the whole stock of the human race was tainted; no one can be set free from the state of the old Adam save through Christ’s sacrament of baptism, in which there are no distinctions between the reborn, as the apostle [Paul] says, ‘For as many of you as were baptized in Christ did put on Christ; there is neither Jew nor Greek . . . ‘ [Gal. 3:27–28]" (Letters 15:10[11] [A.D. 445]).

Fulgentius of Ruspe


"From that time at which our Savior said, ‘If anyone is not reborn of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven’ [John 3:5], no one can, without the sacrament of baptism, except those who, in the Catholic Church, without baptism, pour out their blood for Christ, receive the kingdom of heaven and life eternal" (The Rule of Faith 43 [A.D. 524]).

 

All those examples of "baptism of blood" and "baptism of desire" show then that the water is not what saved. (And why would someone have been a martyr without being literally baptized first, if that was so important? So if Islamists kill Americans for being "Christians", is that the "baptism of blood" too, even if they have neither baptism nor faith?)
And they all have stumbled on the spiritual meaning of "washed". We are not "washed" by the water, which would make it a literal washing of physical dirt as 1 Pet. says, but rather "the washing OF water BY the word" (Eph.5:26), where "water" there is symbolic. It is not "washing of the word through water". And "born of water" they are mistaken as well. Christ was paralleling "water" with "the flesh" in contrast to "the spirit". It meant natural birth, and He was saying that just the one birth was not enough to save (they thought it was, as they trusted in their physical inheritance, bence their first birth).
Hippolytus rationalizes his view on the "first birth" being through "concupiscence", implying the marital union to be basically sinful. This was a gnostic teaching that rapidly corrupted the church and led to a mountain of problems in centres to come, especially when the larger world would revolt against it. Once again, the purpose of the second birth (by the SPIRIT) is not a "washing" of any physical "filth".

 

1. No, not required for salvation.
2. Yes, God commands it, we should do it.

 

no, we are not required to follow the law of moses, but jews were to follow it until Christ, that is when the covanent was made that was based on better promises. and Christians are still under the same covanent as those in the early church. and always will be. if not please show me scripture where it says that the covanent that the early church would change over time.

In Christian Love,

Dustin

 

Hi Dustin, I wrote a great response yesterday and I lost it when I tried to post it. Oh well, I have less time now so will try to just hit the highlights of yesterdays "almost post". I noticed you did not answer my first question directly. You answered it indirectly by admitting that God dealt with His people differently at the time of Moses then he did the early church. God has always varied the way he has dealt with His people. He is God and can and does do whatever He wants. In times past He has spoken audibly to certain Children, and to whole groups as when Jesus was Baptized. There have been times of great miracles and other time frames when we don't see miracles. There have been times when Prophets could call fire to rain down from heaven and it would. In the early church God gave miraculous gifts of healing and miracles which allowed the Apostles and some choice few to heal any disease they wanted and even to raise the dead. Did God deal with the early church different then he does us? Well, yes he does because He does not give out gifts anymore that allow a person to raise the dead or heal any disease. There was a purpose to those gifts. God used them then but does not now. God used to require animal sacrifice for the forgiveness of sin but He does not now. Throughout the Bible we see God being God and changing the method by which he communicates and deals with His people. My argument in a nut shell is like those early miraculous gifts, Baptism served a distinct purpose in the early church. Lets face it John's water Baptism of repentance was different then the water Baptism that believers under went in Acts. Just in the NT we see 2 different types of water baptism, serving 2 different purposes. I would argue that the water Baptism in Acts 2:38 is a different water baptism then later in Acts making 3 different water baptisms. The point is that logic itself dictates that God could easily have changed the purpose of baptism as His people and church have grown. As a child grows he has different needs and wants and many things change in importance. So it is with the church. As it has grown and matured the nature of water baptism has changed as well. Baptism in the early church was a major step. Once Baptized, a person was open to the full persecution of the Romans and other non-believers. The Baptism, done generally in public, was a public confession and was how people were associated with "the way". They knew if they were baptized they could have problems, especially as the early years went on. Water baptism then is more like joining a church now. It was an open acknowledgement of following Jesus. Now when we join a church and attend services in a building bearing the name of Jesus or a name which people know refers to a Christian church, we are associated with Christ and may be persecuted. In this country we are lucky we seldom get seriously harassed for our faith. Anyway, hope that was enough to make my point. Please at least entertain the idea that water baptism is different now then it was, as you look at the scriptures and try to take in the "Big" picture.

In Christ,
Brian

 

God does not change and not tell us, when the new covanent came into being the old went away. thus that was a change and he told us, the maraculious gifts were only temporary and he told us which ones were temporary in the new testament, thus once again he told us, now can you show me where he tells us the view of baptism is different then, than now?

In Christian Love,

Dustin

 

Briguy,

bmerr here. The difference between the miraculous gifts of the Spirit and baptism is that not everyone had miraculous gifts (1 Cor 12:29-30), but everyone had been baptized (1 Cor 12:13).

Actually, the baptism of John was administered under the OT. The OT was in effect until the death of Christ (Heb 9:16-17). In Acts 19, we read of 12 men who had recieved the baptism of John after it was no longer in place. They were all baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus (Acts 19:1-5).

"Brethren, I speak after the manner of men; Though it be but a man's convenant, yet if it be confirmed, no man disannulleth, or addeth thereto." (Gal 3:15) The New Testament in Jesus' blood is confirmed. It was confirmed by His blood on the cross, and at His ascension, Jesus proclaimed, "All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth" (Matt 28:18).

If a man's covenant can't be changed, how much less can Christ's covenant be changed?


The terms of salvation are the same today as they have been since Acts 2. They will remain the same until the end of the world.

Friend, this is pure speculation. The word of God doesn't say anything about the meaning and purpose of baptism changing.

This is the case with the miraculous spiritual gifts you mentioned earlier. They provided for the infant church those things that were neccessary for its early growth (1 Cor 13:11-13).

Scripture reference?

If this were the case, would it not have been better for the Phillipian jailer to have waited for morning, instead of being baptized "...the same hour of the night..." (Acts 16:33), which was midnight (16:25)?


Why not use a verse that talks about baptism to find out what it was and is for?

It might be better if we all entertain the thought that what the Bible says about baptism is right, and the opinions and speculations of men to the contrary are not, no matter how long one may have believed them.


In Christ,

bmerr