Fun with baptism

[bmerr]

To All,

bmerr here. We all go round and round about baptism, and the same things get said over and over. I'm sure that after awhile, we all get tired of it, and people visiting might think we aren't having much fun, or that we don't like each other.

I thought it might be fun for us to pretend we're the one inspiring the men who wrote the NT. We're not changing the Bible or anything, I just thought it might be interesting to see how we might have said things differently.

If anyone's interested, imagine you want the penmen of the NT to make it clear that baptism is neccessary for salvation, the remission of sins, etc. We all know the verses that speak of the meaning and purpose of baptism. How would we have written them differently than they were?

Again, the goal is to make it clear to mankind that baptism is essential for salvation. (You don't really have to believe it in order to participate.)

In Christ,

bmerr

 

[Brother Bob]

dunk or die!!!

 

[Mishelly]

:laugh::thumbsup::smilewinkgrin:

dunk or die!!!

 

[Marcia]

I don't see the point of "having fun" with a false teaching.

I'm not going to pretend to command something that is not true. Are you trying to get it to look like we agree with you, bmerr? Well, I'm not playing.

 

[Mishelly]

Sorry for getting into the discussion as this is just for fun

My question is, if one believes then why would they not want to be baptized?

“And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16: 15 – 16, NKJV)

I see this as believing is the key to being saved not the baptizm but if one truly believes then again I ask why would they not want to be baptized?

I say Dunk em,Dunk em real Good :tongue3:

 

[LeBuick]

I say Dunk em,Dunk em real Good :tongue3:

:wavey: :laugh: :thumbsup:

 

[bmerr]

I don't see the point of "having fun" with a false teaching.

I'm not going to pretend to command something that is not true. Are you trying to get it to look like we agree with you, bmerr? Well, I'm not playing.

Marcia,

bmerr here. No, ma'am. I just thought it would be interesting to see how we would word things if we were wanting to teach that baptism was essential.

For example, if I wanted to make it clear that salvation required one to believe and be baptized, could I write Mark 16:16 more clearly than Mark did? What words could I use to make it more plain than "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved..."?

Or, if I were to cause people to believe that repentance and baptism were needed in order for their sins to be remitted, how would I write Acts 2:38?

It's just an excersise to get our creative juices flowing. I guess one could come at it from the opposite perspective by asking, "If I wanted people to believe that baptism was not essential for salvation, why would I write verses like Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38 the way they are written?"

Try it like that.

In Christ,

bmerr

 

[FriendofSpurgeon]

Marcia --- I agree. No fun in pushing a false teaching -- even in jest. Somehow methinks that other motives are involved. FOS

 

[Revmitchell]

Marcia,

bmerr here. No, ma'am. I just thought it would be interesting to see how we would word things if we were wanting to teach that baptism was essential.

For example, if I wanted to make it clear that salvation required one to believe and be baptized, could I write Mark 16:16 more clearly than Mark did? What words could I use to make it more plain than "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved..."?

Or, if I were to cause people to believe that repentance and baptism were needed in order for their sins to be remitted, how would I write Acts 2:38?

It's just an excersise to get our creative juices flowing. I guess one could come at it from the opposite perspective by asking, "If I wanted people to believe that baptism was not essential for salvation, why would I write verses like Mark 16:16 and Acts 2:38 the way they are written?"

Try it like that.

In Christ,

bmerr

Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! 16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report 17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Ro 1:16 For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
How is that for plain? Funny though, I didnt see baptism in there anywhere. Just hear the Word, believe, and confess. Pretty plain.

 

[Darron Steele]

What is already written is good enough.

I do not think playing `How would you impove on what God wrote' should be fun for a Christian.

I think any problem is us; sometimes:
1) we need to translate it better at times,
2) we need to interpret more carefully in light of what its passages were intended to mean when it was written, and/or
3) we need to interpret more carefully consulting the whole of the Scriptures rather than just favorite passages.

 

[mman]

Romans 10:9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. 11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.
12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him. 13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved. 14 How then shall they call on him in whom they have not believed? and how shall they believe in him of whom they have not heard? and how shall they hear without a preacher? 15 And how shall they preach, except they be sent? as it is written, How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things! 16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel. For Esaias saith, Lord, who hath believed our report 17 So then faith cometh by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.

Ro 1:16For I am not ashamed of the gospel of Christ: for it is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the Jew first, and also to the Greek.
How is that for plain? Funny though, I didnt see baptism in there anywhere. Just hear the Word, believe, and confess. Pretty plain.

Well, no wonder you didn't see it, you skipped right over it. Read chapter 6, you'll find it there.

The Gospel, the death, burial, and resurrection (I Cor 15:1-4).

Notice how we obey that gospel in Rom 6:3-4.

Also I noticed you ommitted repentance. Therefore, you believe that repentance and baptism are not required for the remission of sins. - Interesting.

When the very first GOSPEL message was proclaimed in Acts 2, the Holy Spirit inspired response to "what must we do" included the very two things you omitted, repentance and baptism (Acts 2:38).

 

[mman]

What is already written is good enough.

I do not think playing `How would you impove on what God wrote' should be fun for a Christian.

I think any problem is us; sometimes:
1) we need to translate it better at times,
2) we need to interpret more carefully in light of what its passages were intended to mean when it was written, and/or
3) we need to interpret more carefully consulting the whole of the Scriptures rather than just favorite passages.

That is exactly his point! You cannot improve on God's word. The existing wording shows that baptism is essential for salvation. You cannot change it to make it any more simple or plain.

If God really does mean "he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:16) what other words could he have possibly used to make that message any simpler???? There are none!

If God really requires repentance and baptism what other words could He have used to more simply convey that message than "Repent and be bapitzed, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, for the remission of sins" - Acts 2:38

If God really means that our sins are washed away at baptism what other words could he have used to make that idea any more plain than, "Arise and be baptized and wash away your sins" - Acts 22:16

If God really means that baptism puts us into Christ (where salvation is found - II Tim 2:10) what other more plain and simple words could He have used to convey this idea, than the ones he used "Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?" (Rom 6:3) or "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (Gal 3:27).

If God really means that baptism is essential for salvation what other words could he have used than, " baptism now saves you" - I Pet 3:21

If one reads these verses, what is the obvious conclusion? Many do not like that conclusion and are forced to twist the simple and plain teaching of these passages to fit their view of other scripture.

The passages dealing with baptism could not be more plain. The twisting could not be more blatant. Here is the result of twisting:

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved = He that believeth and is saved shall be baptized

Repent and be baptized for the remission of your sins = Repent for the remission of your sins and be baptized because your sins have already been forgiven

Be baptized and wash away your sins calling on the name of the Lord = Call on the name of the Lord and wash away your sins, then be baptized

Baptized into Christ = Baptized as a symbol that we are already in Christ

Baptism now saves us = Baptism now does not save us

I know there are variations on the twisting and I would not be surprised to see more variants.

 

[mojoala]

Gonna have to throw a wrench into the gears.

"Shall be"
"Shalt be"
and
"Wiil be"

or not the same as "ARE"

“And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned” (Mark 16: 15 – 16, NKJV)

is very much different from

“And He said to them, ‘Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized ARE saved; but he who does not believe ARE condemned” (Mark 16: 15 – 16, NKJV)

 

[Eric B]

If God really does mean "he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:16) what other words could he have possibly used to make that message any simpler???? There are none!

what other more plain and simple words could He have used to convey this idea, than the ones he used

Here is the result of twisting:

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved [let's quote the REST of the verse!], he that believeth not shall be damned = He that is baptized shall be saved, and he that is not baptized believeth not and shall be damned

Repent and be baptized for the remission of your sins = baptism IS the remission of your sins, and the very act of repenting

Be baptized and wash away your sins calling on the name of the Lord = be baptized, which is the act of callling on the name of the Lord as the WATER washes away your sins

"Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?" (Rom 6:3) or "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (Gal 3:27).
Baptized into Christ = Baptized into Christ is the physical act of getting into water
for putting Christ and being in His death and coming in contact with the blood are physical transactions that lie in the water
Baptism now saves us [once again, the rest of the verse] not the washing away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a clear conscience before God = Baptism now saves us since the water washes away our sins, and gives us a clear conscience

Then you cite II Tim 2:10, but don't actually quote it at all:
...that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus...if we be dead with Him, we shall also live with Him... =
baptism puts us into Christ (where salvation is found) because dying with Him and living with Him is the physical act of getting in and out of a pool of water.

Here's another one for you, which suns up the whole misunderstanding:

Eph.5:25,26 Christ also loved the Church and gave Himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing OF water BY the Word = Washing of the word BY water, which is the key to applying His giving of Himself to us.

 

[Brother Bob]

Don't forget the Holy Ghost Baptism and the Water of Life which flows from Heaven. If you would of ask me I would of given you "living water".

 

[mman]

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved [let's quote the REST of the verse!], he that believeth not shall be damned = He that is baptized shall be saved, and he that is not baptized believeth not and shall be damned

Repent and be baptized for the remission of your sins = baptism IS the remission of your sins, and the very act of repenting

Be baptized and wash away your sins calling on the name of the Lord = be baptized, which is the act of callling on the name of the Lord as the WATER washes away your sins

"Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?" (Rom 6:3) or "For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ." (Gal 3:27).
Baptized into Christ = Baptized into Christ is the physical act of getting into water
for putting Christ and being in His death and coming in contact with the blood are physical transactions that lie in the water
Baptism now saves us [once again, the rest of the verse] not the washing away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a clear conscience before God = Baptism now saves us since the water washes away our sins, and gives us a clear conscience

Then you cite II Tim 2:10, but don't actually quote it at all:
...that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus...if we be dead with Him, we shall also live with Him... =
baptism puts us into Christ (where salvation is found) because dying with Him and living with Him is the physical act of getting in and out of a pool of water.

Here's another one for you, which suns up the whole misunderstanding:

Eph.5:25,26 Christ also loved the Church and gave Himself for it, that he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing OF water BY the Word = Washing of the word BY water, which is the key to applying His giving of Himself to us.

If you are trying to represent what I believe, you failed miserably.

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved = He that believth and is baptized shall be saved

Repent and be baptized...for the remission of sins = Repent and be baptized...for the remission of sins

Be baptized and wash away your sins = Be baptized and wash away your sins

Baptized into Christ = Baptized into Christ

Baptism now saves us = Baptism now saves us

No twisting required!

 

[mman]

Don't forget the Holy Ghost Baptism and the Water of Life which flows from Heaven. If you would of ask me I would of given you "living water".

The "Holy Ghost Baptism" was never a requirement or a command, but a promise. It is something that Jesus would do, not man.

Can you baptize others with the Holy Spirit?

You can however baptize others in water. Therefore, you could carry out the great commission to "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." with its parallel account in Matt 28:19-20 "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you."

Since man can only do one type of baptizing, which is in water, then this is of necessity the type of baptism that is commanded here. This is a perpetual command since those who are baptized were to be taught what Jesus had commanded them. One of the things Jesus had just commanded them to do was to baptize. Therefore, a perpetuating command is born.

That is exactly what they did as recorded in Acts. Since there is a perpetual command for men to teach and baptize (in water) others, that command continues today.

Paul said there is but one baptism. Now baptism with the Holy Spirit and baptism in water were two seperate events in the New Testament. One was a command the other a promise. Never once is it ever recorded that they ever occurred simultaneously. Since the baptism in water is a perpetual command it is the one baptism we read about in Eph 4:5.

Yes, while there have been many various types of baptism, now there is just one. There is but "ONE Lord, ONE faith, ONE baptism".

If you claim the one baptism today is with the Holy Spirit, then you need to show where baptism in water was abolished.

There is but one. Accept one and reject the other!

 

[Brother Bob]

No, but Jesus can and if He doesn't you have never been saved.

 

[mman]

No, but Jesus can and if He doesn't you have never been saved.

So, you are saying there are two baptisms today?

 

[Eric B]

If you are trying to represent what I believe, you failed miserably.

This was your side's game. You changed the texts to what you think they would need to say to support our beliefs, so we can changeb the texts to reflect what you're teaching.

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved = He that believth and is baptized shall be saved

Repent and be baptized...for the remission of sins = Repent and be baptized...for the remission of sins

Be baptized and wash away your sins = Be baptized and wash away your sins

Baptized into Christ = Baptized into Christ

Baptism now saves us = Baptism now saves us

No twisting required!

No, you just take those little snippets, ignore the context in some of them, and ignore the rest of scripture which clarifies what they mean.

The "Holy Ghost Baptism" was never a requirement or a command, but a promise. It is something that Jesus would do, not man.

Can you baptize others with the Holy Spirit?

You can however baptize others in water. Therefore, you could carry out the great commission to "Go into all the world and proclaim the gospel to the whole creation. Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned." with its parallel account in Matt 28:19-20 "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,
Since man can only do one type of baptizing, which is in water, then this is of necessity the type of baptism that is commanded here. This is a perpetual command since those who are baptized were to be taught what Jesus had commanded them. One of the things Jesus had just commanded them to do was to baptize. Therefore, a perpetuating command is born.

That is exactly what they did as recorded in Acts. Since there is a perpetual command for men to teach and baptize (in water) others, that command continues today.

Paul said there is but one baptism. Now baptism with the Holy Spirit and baptism in water were two seperate events in the New Testament. One was a command the other a promise. Never once is it ever recorded that they ever occurred simultaneously. Since the baptism in water is a perpetual command it is the one baptism we read about in Eph 4:5.

Yes, while there have been many various types of baptism, now there is just one. There is but "ONE Lord, ONE faith, ONE baptism".

If you claim the one baptism today is with the Holy Spirit, then you need to show where baptism in water was abolished.

There is but one. Accept one and reject the other!

REJECT baptism with the Spirit? Now you've flipped. So then according to you, baptism is supposed to put us into Christ, yet we are to reject the baptism by the Spirit INTO to His Body! So then the only thing you are getting from water baptism is not put into Christ, but simply wet. How can we be in Him without being immersed into His Body? Unless Christ IS the physical water. Are you going to teach that there is a "real presence" of the Blood in the water, like the Catholics teach with the communion cup?

Or instead, maybe there is only one baptism; of the Spirit, with the water as the outward sign of it. It's your logic that cantradicts Paul and says there WAS actually more than one baptism that was legitimate for us, only the others were abolished.