• Welcome to Baptist Board, a friendly forum to discuss the Baptist Faith in a friendly surrounding.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register to get access to all the features that our community has to offer.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!

Baptism?

Craigbythesea

Well-Known Member
You are now making baptism the condition for salvation. Faith is not enough in your mind.

The bible disagrees with you;

Joh 3:16 "For God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him shall not perish, but have eternal life.

Rom 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;

Rom 10:13 for "WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD."

Eph 2:8 For by grace you have been saved through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God;

Rom 5:10 For if while we were enemies we were reconciled to God through the death of His Son, much more, having been reconciled, we shall be saved by His life.

Baptism is not a requirement of salvation. For someone to teach that faith + water baptism is a requirement for salvation, is to teach another gospel than was taught by Paul. 1Co_15:1-4 Paul did not make water baptism a part of his gospel message and went so far as to say that Christ did not send him to baptize but only to spread the gospel message. 1Co_11:17 This would seem to be a major oversight if water baptism were indeed necessary as no one would have been saved.

If baptism were necessary for salvation then how do you deal with the paralytic man Mat_9:2, the penitent woman Luk_7:37-50, the tax collector Luk_18:13-14, and the thief on the cross Luk_23:39-43. Was Jesus just misleading them? Were they still lost in their sins since none were baptized?
The flagrant dishonesty that is characterizing your posts is frightening. What kind of a man are we dealing with?

No one—no one at all—is saying or suggesting that water baptism is a “condition” for salvation. No one—no one at all—is saying or suggesting that water baptism is “necessary” for salvation. No one—no one at all—is saying or suggesting that water baptism is a “requirement” for salvation. We are saying, however, what is expressly taught and illustrated in the New Testament—water baptism is efficacious for salvation.

When persons who identify themselves a being Christians willfully and deliberately turn the truth into a lie in an attempt to deceive Christians they are committing an atrocity against our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus.
 

David Lamb

Well-Known Member
The flagrant dishonesty that is characterizing your posts is frightening. What kind of a man are we dealing with?

No one—no one at all—is saying or suggesting that water baptism is a “condition” for salvation. No one—no one at all—is saying or suggesting that water baptism is “necessary” for salvation. No one—no one at all—is saying or suggesting that water baptism is a “requirement” for salvation. We are saying, however, what is expressly taught and illustrated in the New Testament—water baptism is efficacious for salvation.

When persons who identify themselves a being Christians willfully and deliberately turn the truth into a lie in an attempt to deceive Christians they are committing an atrocity against our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus.
But saying that baptism is efficacious for salvation is the same as saying that baptism is the cause of salvation. Where has Silverhair been dishonest in his posts? Just because somebody disagrees with you that doesn't mean they are being dishonest when the state how they disagree.
 

Silverhair

Well-Known Member
The flagrant dishonesty that is characterizing your posts is frightening. What kind of a man are we dealing with?

No one—no one at all—is saying or suggesting that water baptism is a “condition” for salvation. No one—no one at all—is saying or suggesting that water baptism is “necessary” for salvation. No one—no one at all—is saying or suggesting that water baptism is a “requirement” for salvation. We are saying, however, what is expressly taught and illustrated in the New Testament—water baptism is efficacious for salvation.

When persons who identify themselves a being Christians willfully and deliberately turn the truth into a lie in an attempt to deceive Christians they are committing an atrocity against our Lord and Savior Christ Jesus.

Efficacious: capable of or successful in producing an intended result.

To quote you "water baptism is efficacious for salvation".

What did you say in post # 19 "The practice of pouring or sprinkling has saved millions of lives".

Your posts have made water baptism a condition of salvation.

There is a vast difference between, we are baptized as a condition of salvation and we are baptized in response to being saved.
 

OnlyaSinner

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
Efficacious: capable of or successful in producing an intended result.

To quote you "water baptism is efficacious for salvation".

What did you say in post # 19 "The practice of pouring or sprinkling has saved millions of lives".

Your posts have made water baptism a condition of salvation.

There is a vast difference between, we are baptized as a condition of salvation and we are baptized in response to being saved.
While I totally agree that water baptism is a command for those already saved, the context of Craig's "saved millions" may be related to his concern for diseases following immersions in polluted water.
Beyond that context, "efficacious for salvation" says faith-plus-works to me.
 

David Lamb

Well-Known Member
While I totally agree that water baptism is a command for those already saved, the context of Craig's "saved millions" may be related to his concern for diseases following immersions in polluted water.
Beyond that context, "efficacious for salvation" says faith-plus-works to me.
That doesn't make sense. How could millions have been saved by being baptised (immersed) in polluted water?
 

Ben1445

Well-Known Member
I don't understand the "saved millions" comment, either. Just trying to pick his mind.
For what it is worth, I am still waiting for an explanation from him on how Jesus mistakenly taught that God made the world in six days. He seems to disagree with Paul in Colossians that Jesus made everything and without Jesus “was not anything made that was made.”
Instead he seems to believe that “science” is more accurate than God, and that Jesus made mistakes and was not aware of how the world was created.


I know this is a little off topic, but I find that when pressed, there is no answer that you will receive by picking Craig’s brain.
If you can’t trust the Creator to tell you how you made the universe, how can you be sure that the Creator and Savior is giving you accurate information about baptism?

In reality what I am saying is that I don’t give much credibility to @Craigbythesea because he does not give God enough credit for conveying to men what God has in His Word.
If you can’t trust part of God’s Word, what part can you trust? If you can’t trust God’s Word, what are we even doing here at all? What is religion?
 

David Lamb

Well-Known Member
For what it is worth, I am still waiting for an explanation from him on how Jesus mistakenly taught that God made the world in six days. He seems to disagree with Paul in Colossians that Jesus made everything and without Jesus “was not anything made that was made.”
Instead he seems to believe that “science” is more accurate than God, and that Jesus made mistakes and was not aware of how the world was created.
Jesus did not "mistakenly teach" anything. Jesus Christ is fully God, as John writes in the first chapter of his gospel. So Colossians is not contradicting what Jesus said.
 

Ben1445

Well-Known Member
Jesus did not "mistakenly teach" anything. Jesus Christ is fully God, as John writes in the first chapter of his gospel. So Colossians is not contradicting what Jesus said.
I’m 100% in agreement with you.
I was just bringing to light the position of @Craigbythesea


It has a tendency to invalidate almost anything that he says in my mind.
 

Ben1445

Well-Known Member
In that case, sorry for misunderstanding, and thank you very much for explaining.
For clarity and fairness, I haven’t made this up. It comes from here.

Who are the good examples?"The man Jesus was NOT the Creator of all things nor was he inerrant. He had no formal education but was taught by his parents and the men in the community where he was raised. Therefore, he understood the first eleven chapters of Genesis to be an accurate, literal account of actual events. However, we know today a whole lot more about those eleven chapters than did Jesus the man. For example, we know today that those eleven chapters were written in a genre of literature hugely different from Genesis 12-50. Indeed, those eleven chapters were written in a genre of literature that is not found anywhere else in the Bible—but is found in epic tales, sagas, myths, and legends. That genre of literature never uses metaphorical language but exclusively literal language. Genesis 1-11 is a literal account of non-historical events—that is, events that never occurred. Indeed, the “windows of heaven” in Gen. 7:11 and 8:2 are to be understood as real windows rather than metaphorical or poetical expressions as young earth creationists claim. The “dome” in Genesis 1:6-8 is to be understood as a real solid dome rather than a poetical expression or mistranslation as young earth creationists claim."
 

Martin Marprelate

Well-Known Member
Site Supporter
The simplest way to understand the meaning of a word is to study its usage in as many texts as possible. Fortunately we are saved the very hard work that such a study would involve because a 19th Century scholar, T.J.Conant, in his book, The meaning and use of Baptizein (Wakeman Classic Reprints. ISBN 1-870855-31-0 ), has given every single usage of Baptizo in Classical or Koine Greek, and as we study the word, we can see that it always and invariably means, ‘To dip’, ‘submerge’ or ‘to immerse.’ Sometimes the usage is figurative, as when people are said to be ‘overwhelmed’ by grief, drink, debt or desire. Very occasionally, ‘sprinkle’ is a possible alternative translation, but never once is it required by the context.

Sometimes the word does indeed refer to being permanently submerged. We read several times in ancient Greek literature of ships being ‘baptized’ in the sea when they sink and of people drowning as they were ‘baptized’ in rivers or lakes. However, we read in Josephus, Jewish Antiquities, Book XV, 3,3, describing the murder of the boy Aristobulus: ‘Continually pressing down and submerging (Gk. Baptizo ) him while swimming, as if in sport, they did not desist until they had entirely suffocated him.’ Here we are looking at a series of temporary immersions resulting in a drowning.

Indeed, there are several other times where the word indicates a temporary submersion, such as the plunging of a sword into an enemy’s breast, or as Heliodorus (Aethopics Book IV ch. 17 ) writes, ‘When midnight had plunged (Gk. Baptizo ) the city in sleep, an armed band of revelers took possession of the dwelling of Chariclea.’ Or Gregory Thaumaturgus (Panegyric on Origen XIV ): ‘He himself would remain on high in safety, and stretching out a hand to others save them, as if drawing up persons immersed (Gk. Baptizo ).

Here is Basil the Great (On Baptism, Book 1, Chap 2, 10 ), commenting on Rom 6:3: ‘We were baptized (Gk. Baptizo ), says he, in order that from it we might learn this: that as wool dipped (Gk. Baptizo) in a dye is changed as to its colour; or rather (using John the Baptist as a guide, when he prophesied of the Lord, “He will baptize (Gk. Baptizo) you in the Holy Spirit and fire”)….let us say this: that as steel, immersed (Gk. Baptizo) in the fire kindled up by spirit (wind), becomes more easy to test whether it has any fault, and more ready for being refined;…..so it follows and is necessary, that he who is immersed (Gk. Baptizo) in fire (that is the word of instruction, which convicts of the evil of sin and shows the grace of justification) should hate and abhor unrighteousness, as it is written, and should desire to be cleansed though faith in the power of the blood of our Lord Jesus Christ.’ To translate baptizo anywhere in this text as ‘pour’ or ‘sprinkle’ or ‘permanently submerge’ simply doesn’t work. Whether the person baptized, the wool, the steel, the text refers to something being placed into a substance and then withdrawn. Basil was one of the early Greek Fathers. He ought to know what baptizo means.
 
Top