Can A Christian refuse believers baptism And not be Sinning?

[freeatlast]

You remind me of the old time preacher who knowing the argument was weak, wrote in the margin of the sermon notes, "Give with much repetition and shout more forcefully.

You have proved by the responses to your posts that:

1) Baptism is not a command - but an ordinance.

2) Baptism is not an indicator of salvation of lack thereof.

3) Both (1) and (2) above are century held Baptist distinctions.

Your responses remind me of date rape. She says no and he says she must not mean no but full steam ahead. The bible teaches baptism is a command and you say it is not.

1) the bible proves baptism is a command although you reject the bible.

2) Baptism is a testimony to what God has done and showing our acceptance of His provision

3) Both 1 and 2 are Christian held positions on this matter from the time of Pentecost.

 

[agedman]

To respond in obedience first requires authority give a command. Your car is making a suggestion. Baptism is a command.There is a big difference. God commands Baptism for those who have been saved.

What do you consider the word "command" means?

The word "command" has a military hierarchical dimension that the word "ordinance" does not enjoy.

What do you consider the word "ordinance" means?
I have given what use the term "ordinance" as used by the Baptists means.

Perhaps you are using the terms with different definitions.



Perhaps you hold to a variant meaning of the words.

 

[agedman]

Your responses remind me of date rape. She says no and he says she must not mean no but full steam ahead.

I withheld my objection to this terminology, but because this is the second time, I want you to know that it is offensive.

You interject something that is violent and criminal, into the argument that has no place in the discussion. Please do not do it again.

1) the bible proves baptism is a command although you reject the bible.

To make such a statement is to call into question not only my view but that long held by Baptists. Of course you have the right to your opinion. Perhaps you haven't noticed that the Scriptures indicate a difference between the commands(ments) and ordinances. That BOTH are not of any impact upon the believer. That only two ordinances (baptism and Lord's Super) are offered to the believer.

2) Baptism is a testimony to what God has done and showing our acceptance of His provision

Baptism is a "picture" of what Christ has done. As the Baptists typically say, "Buried like him..., raise to walk..."

Within that picture, it is a "testimony" to the world of a change in the person that God has performed. However, to the individual believer it is far more holy worshipful and experiential.

As far as "our acceptance of His provision" I would agree with that statement provided that "our acceptance" is acknowledged as the only response that can be offered as a new born child of God. As I have posted other places, the new birth is not unlike the physical birth. The cry of the baby indicates life, but the cry does not come before life. The cry does not bring life, nor can it provide any nurture to the life. The cry is but the only response possible to the new born.

3) Both 1 and 2 are Christian held positions on this matter from the time of Pentecost.

As I have modified your post, then I would agree that it is as was held from the beginning.

 

[agedman]

This argument is a little, silly, judgmental? I suppose all arguments are. The point is that Baptists say the only proper mode of Baptism is immersion or "dunkin" if you prefer.

Are some people on this Forum saying that all those outside the Baptist communion who refuse immersion are unsaved? That is a pretty bold statement, if you believe that salvation is by Grace alone!

I agree with both statements.

 

[gb93433]

Baptism is a command. Any person refusing the first command they have is suspect as to being saved.

Could you point to some scripture that commands one to be baptized?

 

[psalms109:31]

The point of this O.P. is can one be sinning by refusing water Baptism right?

We should not let men make what we do for God through His word a work. We all know we are saved by grace and it is what Jesus has done that saved us. The wages of my sin is death not baptism, so i must trust not in what I have done, but His finished work.

We are saved by grace through faith not of ourselves so where did it come from it comes from God through the words of Jesus that is Spirit and life and the words about Jesus. We are born again through what?

1 Peter 1:23
For you have been born again, not of perishable seed, but of imperishable, through the living and enduring word of God.

We are saved by what?

Ephesians 2:8
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—

Where does this faith come from?

Romans 10:17

New International Version (NIV)

17 Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word about Christ.

Romans 10:17

New International Version 1984 (NIV1984)

17 Consequently, faith comes from hearing the message, and the message is heard through the word of Christ.

How is this faith useless?
James 2
Faith and Deeds
14 What good is it, my brothers and sisters, if someone claims to have faith but has no deeds? Can such faith save them? 15 Suppose a brother or a sister is without clothes and daily food. 16 If one of you says to them, “Go in peace; keep warm and well fed,” but does nothing about their physical needs, what good is it? 17 In the same way, faith by itself, if it is not accompanied by action, is dead.

18 But someone will say, “You have faith; I have deeds.”

Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds. 19 You believe that there is one God. Good! Even the demons believe that—and shudder.


20 You foolish person, do you want evidence that faith without deeds is useless[Some early manuscripts dead]? 21 Was not our father Abraham considered righteous for what he did when he offered his son Isaac on the altar? 22 You see that his faith and his actions were working together, and his faith was made complete by what he did. 23 And the scripture was fulfilled that says, “Abraham believed God, and it was credited to him as righteousness,”[Gen. 15:6] and he was called God’s friend. 24 You see that a person is considered righteous by what they do and not by faith alone.

25 In the same way, was not even Rahab the prostitute considered righteous for what she did when she gave lodging to the spies and sent them off in a different direction? 26 As the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without deeds is dead.

1 Corinthians 13:2
If I have the gift of prophecy and can fathom all mysteries and all knowledge, and if I have a faith that can move mountains, but do not have love, I am nothing.

And finally

Romans 8:15
The Spirit you received does not make you slaves, so that you live in fear again; rather, the Spirit you received brought about your adoption to sonship. And by him we cry, “Abba, Father.

 

[OldRegular]

Those in this discussion who keep "hollering" that one must be Baptized [and to Baptists that means immersion] to be saved should read the following:

Galatians 3:1-5
1. O foolish Galatians, who hath bewitched you, that ye should not obey the truth, before whose eyes Jesus Christ hath been evidently set forth, crucified among you?
2. This only would I learn of you, Received ye the Spirit by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?
3. Are ye so foolish? having begun in the Spirit, are ye now made perfect by the flesh?
4. Have ye suffered so many things in vain? if it be yet in vain.
5. He therefore that ministereth to you the Spirit, and worketh miracles among you, doeth he it by the works of the law, or by the hearing of faith?

Now only the saved receive the Holy Spirit. So are these people claiming that Salvation is by the "work" of water baptism rather than by by the Grace of God!

I know that Church of Christ people believe that the "work" of baptism is required, but Baptists?

I know that Roman Catholics believe that the "work" of baptism is required, but Baptists?

Salvation is the gift of God by His Grace alone, not of works lest any man should boast.

 

[freeatlast]

Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized [aorist/passive/imperative] in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 2:38
That is a command

'Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized [aorist/middle/imperative], and wash away your sins, calling on His name.'
Acts 22:16
That also is a command

Matt 28:19
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
That is a command

1. Baptism is a matter of obedience. Personal obedience to the Great Commission
dictates that we obey the Lord in baptism and that baptism be taught and practiced
among our disciples. We therefore obey the injunction to teach "all things that I [Christ]
have commanded you" (Matthew 28:19-20).
2. Baptism is a witness to the world. Baptism in one of the most effective witnesses of
our faith to family and friends.
3. Baptism is a witness to other believers. Since baptism is an outward and public
demonstration of the believer's identification with the person and work of Christ, it is also
identification with other believers. In some countries where believers are persecuted
severely for their faith,and any person who refuses baptism has reason to have their confession question as to being real​

 

[psalms109:31]

The wages of our sin is death, we failed salvation by works, all have sinned. We can not save ourselves, because of the cost we must trust in the finish work of Christ.

Romans 4:5
However, to the one who does not work but trusts God who justifies the ungodly, their faith is credited as righteousness.

Our faith brings action deeds that no longer is a work for our salvation but a witness to the world God changing us to be, that our lives point people to God.

Matthew 5:16
In the same way, let your light shine before others, that they may see your good deeds and glorify your Father in heaven.

We should not make what we do a work that we should be ashamed of and to run away from what God is doing in our lives, but continue to do our deeds Christ is leading us to do for others around us.

 

[Batt4Christ]

IF they are convinced that either their infant baptism was valid, or that the mode of Baptism not essential, not mandated in bible...

Would they be in a state of habitual sin if they choose not to do 'adult baptism?"

"If you love me, keep my commandments". One of Christ's commandments was to be Baptized. It should be one of the very first outward signs of the inward change wrought in Salvation. If someone is truly saved, but reject baptism, one has to be concerned about their profession - but since we cannot judge a person's salvation, we can judge sin - and to reject Christ's command is to sin. Continuing rejection of scriptural baptism is to continue to sin.

Further - any church that de-emphasizes baptism as important (I didn't say necessary to be saved - that would be a work) - who fails to push scriptural baptism (that is - complete immersion in water in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit of only born-again professed believers in Jesus Christ) is also sinning.

 

[freeatlast]

"If you love me, keep my commandments". One of Christ's commandments was to be Baptized. It should be one of the very first outward signs of the inward change wrought in Salvation. If someone is truly saved, but reject baptism, one has to be concerned about their profession - but since we cannot judge a person's salvation, we can judge sin - and to reject Christ's command is to sin. Continuing rejection of scriptural baptism is to continue to sin.

Further - any church that de-emphasizes baptism as important (I didn't say necessary to be saved - that would be a work) - who fails to push scriptural baptism (that is - complete immersion in water in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit of only born-again professed believers in Jesus Christ) is also sinning.

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[preacher4truth]

"If you love me, keep my commandments". One of Christ's commandments was to be Baptized. It should be one of the very first outward signs of the inward change wrought in Salvation. If someone is truly saved, but reject baptism, one has to be concerned about their profession - but since we cannot judge a person's salvation, we can judge sin - and to reject Christ's command is to sin. Continuing rejection of scriptural baptism is to continue to sin.

Further - any church that de-emphasizes baptism as important (I didn't say necessary to be saved - that would be a work) - who fails to push scriptural baptism (that is - complete immersion in water in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit of only born-again professed believers in Jesus Christ) is also sinning.

Yes.

Yet, we have men on the BB arguing away these truths by their finite reason.

The Scriptures are clear; Baptism is a command. We have some here who reject this and are drawing their own conclusions, which are unscriptural, concerning the path of Biblical soteriology concerning the things that take place at true conversion; faith, repentance, belief, confession, baptism, regeneration &c.

The defending of persons, hypothetically or not, who have decided to be disobedient to the command to be baptized is rebellion toward God and standing up with those who are being disobedient to God. It's called rebellion, and it is rebellion toward God.

Let's keep in mind that being baptized is the answer of a good conscience toward God which has much to do with the conscience admitting true salvation, so thus the opposite end, that is, one refusing this cannot have a good conscience before God.

Before someone goes on an unfounded tirade; 1) No, baptism does not save; 2) No, not all who are baptized are genuinely converted.

However, any person refusing to be baptized is rightly called into question as to whether said person has been truly regenerated. I've never witnessed in my life a person who was regenerated not wanting right then to be obedient to God. I cannot believe in ones "salvation" when said wants to knowingly disobey God immediately after "salvation."

Bible knowledge, sharp theology, deep understanding of the Scriptures; none of these supplant obedience which is a true and Scriptural test of ones true standing with God. The former can be learned by study and from others, obedience can only come from genuine regeneration, as it is by His seed living within us that we are enabled to obey Him.

 

[freeatlast]

Yes.

Yet, we have men on the BB arguing away these truths by their finite reason.

The Scriptures are clear; Baptism is a command. We have some here who reject this and are drawing their own conclusions, which are unscriptural, concerning the path of Biblical soteriology concerning the things that take place at true conversion; faith, repentance, belief, confession, baptism, regeneration &c.

The defending of persons, hypothetically or not, who have decided to be disobedient to the command to be baptized is rebellion toward God and standing up with those who are being disobedient to God. It's called rebellion, and it is rebellion toward God.

Let's keep in mind that being baptized is the answer of a good conscience toward God which has much to do with the conscience admitting true salvation, so thus the opposite end, that is, one refusing this cannot have a good conscience before God.

Before someone goes on an unfounded tirade; 1) No, baptism does not save; 2) No, not all who are baptized are genuinely converted.

However, any person refusing to be baptized is rightly called into question as to whether said person has been truly regenerated. I've never witnessed in my life a person who was regenerated not wanting right then to be obedient to God. I cannot believe in ones "salvation" when said wants to knowingly disobey God immediately after "salvation."

Bible knowledge, sharp theology, deep understanding of the Scriptures; none of these supplant obedience which is a true and Scriptural test of ones true standing with God. The former can be learned by study and from others, obedience can only come from genuine regeneration, as it is by His seed living within us that we are enabled to obey Him.

:thumbs::thumbs::thumbs:

 

[JesusFan]

Yes.

Yet, we have men on the BB arguing away these truths by their finite reason.

The Scriptures are clear; Baptism is a command. We have some here who reject this and are drawing their own conclusions, which are unscriptural, concerning the path of Biblical soteriology concerning the things that take place at true conversion; faith, repentance, belief, confession, baptism, regeneration &c.

The defending of persons, hypothetically or not, who have decided to be disobedient to the command to be baptized is rebellion toward God and standing up with those who are being disobedient to God. It's called rebellion, and it is rebellion toward God.

Let's keep in mind that being baptized is the answer of a good conscience toward God which has much to do with the conscience admitting true salvation, so thus the opposite end, that is, one refusing this cannot have a good conscience before God.

Before someone goes on an unfounded tirade; 1) No, baptism does not save; 2) No, not all who are baptized are genuinely converted.

However, any person refusing to be baptized is rightly called into question as to whether said person has been truly regenerated. I've never witnessed in my life a person who was regenerated not wanting right then to be obedient to God. I cannot believe in ones "salvation" when said wants to knowingly disobey God immediately after "salvation."

Bible knowledge, sharp theology, deep understanding of the Scriptures; none of these supplant obedience which is a true and Scriptural test of ones true standing with God. The former can be learned by study and from others, obedience can only come from genuine regeneration, as it is by His seed living within us that we are enabled to obey Him.

No one on this is denying that Christians need to get baptizrd, but we DO argue that there is a precident to delay that process, and that the person can still be in good standing with God!

far better to have one who has really been saved and who know what it means to go under water, than to just dunk anyone who professes jesus!

 

[agedman]

Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized [aorist/passive/imperative] in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
Acts 2:38
That is a command

'Now why do you delay? Get up and be baptized [aorist/middle/imperative], and wash away your sins, calling on His name.'
Acts 22:16
That also is a command

Matt 28:19
Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
That is a command

1. Baptism is a matter of obedience. Personal obedience to the Great Commission
dictates that we obey the Lord in baptism and that baptism be taught and practiced
among our disciples. We therefore obey the injunction to teach "all things that I [Christ]
have commanded you" (Matthew 28:19-20).
2. Baptism is a witness to the world. Baptism in one of the most effective witnesses of
our faith to family and friends.
3. Baptism is a witness to other believers. Since baptism is an outward and public
demonstration of the believer's identification with the person and work of Christ, it is also
identification with other believers. In some countries where believers are persecuted
severely for their faith,and any person who refuses baptism has reason to have their confession question as to being real​

If you are focusing on "baptizo," a common word used throughout the NT to mean immersion, and proclaim in these two cases in acts that suddenly the word takes on the standard of a command that is extremely weak.

No scripture stands alone in building principle and doctrine. As such, the use of the word throughout the NT must be taken into account. Scripture building upon Scripture.

Therefore, Peter is not commanding, but exhorting.

If one assigns the standard in the Acts as you desire, would be placing baptism in the exalted position that it is a requirement for salvation. Baptism is not.

It is an ordinance.

Of course, as I posted, perhaps you are using the word command without the military hierarchical definition that the word is commonly defined.

I noticed that your 3 points are in close agreement with what I have posted and you have argued against.

>>>>>>>>

Is the desperation to make it a command obliging a prerequisite in agreement that a person cannot have fellowship with Christ, indwelling of the Holy Spirit, blessing by God as a believer/son, and other such without baptism?

Some in the world of believers have stated or come close to stating such?

Are you agreeing with them?

 

[agedman]

"If you love me, keep my commandments". One of Christ's commandments was to be Baptized. It should be one of the very first outward signs of the inward change wrought in Salvation. If someone is truly saved, but reject baptism, one has to be concerned about their profession - but since we cannot judge a person's salvation, we can judge sin - and to reject Christ's command is to sin. Continuing rejection of scriptural baptism is to continue to sin.

Further - any church that de-emphasizes baptism as important (I didn't say necessary to be saved - that would be a work) - who fails to push scriptural baptism (that is - complete immersion in water in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit of only born-again professed believers in Jesus Christ) is also sinning.

I haven't read anyone on this thread that has "de-emphasized" baptism as important.

However, there is a huge difference in subject when the emphasis is moved from ordinance to command.

Certainly Jesus said, "If you love me, keep my commandments" however, there is far more to that statement than believers baptism. The Lord is using the word for "commandments" that implies an order from authority such as a military leader. It is used in the same way in verse 21.

The question must be asked, what are the commandments? Christ stated two. Both based upon love.

Some would want to add baptism, and I don't know what else perhaps such things as women shall not wear pants, men shall not have hair touching the collar, ... Don't think that is a foolishness. Each of those were strongly frothed by hundreds of preachers. If a person happened to violate those "commandments" they were not right with God and many proclaimed them unsaved.


I see the same thinking when one places baptism in the realm of command. It then can be wildly and falsely proclaimed a sin if one is not baptized. That person that isn't baptized is not right with God, cannot receive the Holy Spirit, ...

It is NOT a sin, any more than refusing to partake of the Lord's Supper is a sin.

Or perhaps if one agrees that it is a sin, then one would also agree with baptizing for the dead because if (as the thief) a person dies before baptism, then the person died in sin. But, Paul did mention that some held baptism for the dead.

 

[freeatlast]

If you are focusing on "baptizo," a common word used throughout the NT to mean immersion, and proclaim in these two cases in acts that suddenly the word takes on the standard of a command that is extremely weak.

No scripture stands alone in building principle and doctrine. As such, the use of the word throughout the NT must be taken into account. Scripture building upon Scripture.

Therefore, Peter is not commanding, but exhorting.

If one assigns the standard in the Acts as you desire, would be placing baptism in the exalted position that it is a requirement for salvation. Baptism is not.

It is an ordinance.

Of course, as I posted, perhaps you are using the word command without the military hierarchical definition that the word is commonly defined.

I noticed that your 3 points are in close agreement with what I have posted and you have argued against.

>>>>>>>>

Is the desperation to make it a command obliging a prerequisite in agreement that a person cannot have fellowship with Christ, indwelling of the Holy Spirit, blessing by God as a believer/son, and other such without baptism?

Some in the world of believers have stated or come close to stating such?

Are you agreeing with them?

You say those verses cannot stand alone. Well then give me some verses that contradict them.
First there is no such thing as a Christian who does not have fellowship with the Lord. Second any person who refuses baptism sends a strong message of them most likely not being saved. Third if a person is saved and refusing Baptism then they would be under the conviction of the Spirit and have no personal assurance of their salvation. In other words they would doubt their salvation.

 

[JesusFan]

You say those verses cannot stand alone. Well then give me some verses that contradict them.
First there is no such thing as a Christian who does not have fellowship with the Lord. Second any person who refuses baptism sends a strong message of them most likely not being saved. Third if a person is saved and refusing Baptism then they would be under the conviction of the Spirit and have no personal assurance of their salvation. In other words they would doubt their salvation.

A christian who sins against the Will of God and refuses to confess that sin is indeed in a broken fellowship...

A christian can choose to be baptized later, for a reason that to them is a "valid reason" , and though YOU might think that it outright sinning, or that is a sign not really saved, believe that the Lord will honor that, as one is fully persuaded to have it done at a setime and for set reason!

 

[gb93433]

1 Cor. 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void.

 

[JesusFan]

I haven't read anyone on this thread that has "de-emphasized" baptism as important.

However, there is a huge difference in subject when the emphasis is moved from ordinance to command.

Certainly Jesus said, "If you love me, keep my commandments" however, there is far more to that statement than believers baptism. The Lord is using the word for "commandments" that implies an order from authority such as a military leader. It is used in the same way in verse 21.

The question must be asked, what are the commandments? Christ stated two. Both based upon love.

Some would want to add baptism, and I don't know what else perhaps such things as women shall not wear pants, men shall not have hair touching the collar, ... Don't think that is a foolishness. Each of those were strongly frothed by hundreds of preachers. If a person happened to violate those "commandments" they were not right with God and many proclaimed them unsaved.


I see the same thinking when one places baptism in the realm of command. It then can be wildly and falsely proclaimed a sin if one is not baptized. That person that isn't baptized is not right with God, cannot receive the Holy Spirit, ...

It is NOT a sin, any more than refusing to partake of the Lord's Supper is a sin.

Or perhaps if one agrees that it is a sin, then one would also agree with baptizing for the dead because if (as the thief) a person dies before baptism, then the person died in sin. But, Paul did mention that some held baptism for the dead.

This the very heart of the discussion!

Must or Should one who receives jesus be baptised?

believe that one definitly should, but still see it as being that the Lord requires usto be firmly convinced and persuaded that we are doing it because jesus desires it, and that we know what it means, NOT because church rushes us to make sure we are really saved!

Now IF we were RCC/Church of Christ etc could see a real reason to hurry it up, as they see it as a sacrament/element of grace, and w/o , cannot trust in being saved!