The point is that they were saved Physically from the world that was destroyed.
The water had nothing to do with the spiritual salvation.
That is the basis of Peter's example.
-
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!
What Identifies A Christian As A Baptist?
- Thread starter ChristB4Us
- Start date
The point is that they were saved Physically from the world that was destroyed.
The water had nothing to do with the spiritual salvation.
That is the basis of Peter's example.
Let me just go ahead and lay out the difference in the physical baptism and the spiritual baptism.
Physical Baptism
We are standing in a pool of water, river, pond, creek, Church baptistry, it doesn't matter.
We are lowered into the water, immersion in the water, baptized into Christ, buried with Him in baptism by faith.
We are raised out of the water symbolizing the resurrection of Christ, we are born a new creation in Christ with our sins forgiven.
All of this done in the physical representing our union with Christ in His death, burial, and resurrection.
Spiritual Baptism
The exact same thing but the union with Christ is in the spiritual realm the very moment we accept Christ as our Savior. With the physical water baptism being performed as a confession of what has taken place in our hearts and soul. It is our public confession of being a new creation in Christ. Joined with Him spiritually in His death, burial, and resurrection.
37818
Well-Known Member
The three baptisms.
* Water
* With the Holy Spirit.
* The fire unquenchable.
Luke 3:16-17, John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.
* Water
* With the Holy Spirit.
* The fire unquenchable.
Luke 3:16-17, John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.
So now you are judging me by what you think I mean.
If I never said it and then say that I don't believe it, it is not my so-called "stance."
Baptist: "a member or adherent of an evangelical Protestant denomination marked by congregational polity and baptism by immersion of believers only" (Definition of BAPTIST)
Stop the "inferring." You cannot honestly discuss with someone by your "inferrences" about what they think. What is happening is that you are prevaricating about what I believe, not actually interacting honestly with what I do believe.
For the definition of the term "baptize" in Scripture, that it means only immersion:
"βαπτίζω dip, immerse" (Gingrich shorter lexicon).
"strictly dip, immerse in water" (Friberg lexicon).
"properly, to dip repeatedly, to immerge, submerge" (Thayer's Lexicon).
"to dip in or under water" (LS classical Greek lexicon).
37818
Well-Known Member
No. They are not the same events.
ChristB4Us
Member
20 that aforetime were disobedient, when the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water:
21 which also after a true likeness doth now save you, [even] baptism, not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the interrogation of a good conscience toward God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ; 1 Pet 3 Nonreferenced Bible version
Such an erroneous Bible version that Catholics would love to use.
So are you advocating that water baptism is necessary for salvation by that erroneous Bible version?
If so, then explain "not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but...." portion of that erroneous Bible version that did not managed to wrest the scripture entirely.
1 Peter 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.
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: KJV
So the like figure opposes that "after a true likeness...." when the words of "(not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but..." is deferring from water and thus from water baptism to believing in Jesus Christ which is the answer of a good conscience towards God and so referring to the baptism of the Holy Spirit.
ChristB4Us
Member
But actions speaks louder than your words in conveying that is what you meant by acting as an authoritative Baptist telling me that because I do not believe there is an emphasis on water baptism to be done by immersion only, then I cannot post as a Baptist.
You do noy have to directly say that when you did it.
ASV
No. "It was an act of repentance/profession. The only way for those Jews of 'that generation' to be delivered [saved] from the wrath to come and avoid bringing the curses/plagues of Lev 26/Dt 28 upon themselves and their progeny was to repent and profess Christ as LORD, and water baptism was an integral part of that profession."
ChristB4Us
Member
Thanks for the information.
The act of repentance on the part of those Jews that had crucified Jesus in unbelief, is by believing in Jesus Christ and the water baptism back then was seen as a public witness that these former Jews were now disciples of Jesus Christ in following Him.
Acts 2:36 Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. < ----- This is what the Jews were pricked in their hearts for doing in the next verse.
37 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
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. 39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
This same Peter preached the same gospel to the Gentiles for how believing in Him is how they had received the remission of sins and the Holy Ghost and they had received Him before water baptism.
Acts 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. 44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. 45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, 47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? 48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.
So 1 Peter 3:21 is a reference to the baptism with the Holy Ghost as that answer of a good conscience towards God is done by believing in Jesus Christ.as that is the baptism that saves us; not water baptism since Peter deferred from that by citing not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but..."
Maybe the ASV wording confuses the truth of that message but I see the KJV with the Lord's help in being clear about that truth being that the baptism with the Holy Ghost is being referred there in 1 Peter 3:21 as how we are saved by believing in Jesus Christ.
You think I made that up??
"According to the Baptists immersion, followed by emersion, is the essential thing in the symbolism of baptism. A surrender of this would be equivalent to giving up baptism itself. The real baptismal idea, they say, is expressed in the going down into, and the coming up out of, the water" (Systematic Theology, by L. Berkhof--not a Baptist--p. 628).
"Probably the majority of those who hold to believer's baptism utilized immersion exclusively, however, and are generally identified as Baptists" (Millard Erickson, a Baptist theologian, in Christian theology, 2nd ed., p. 1106).
"The Mode of Baptism. This is immersion, and immersion only. This appears from the following considerations: A. The command to baptize is a command to immerse.--We show this: (a) from the meaning of the original word βαπτίζω [baptizo] . That this is to immerse, appears: First,--from the usage of Greek writers--including the church Fathers, when they do not speak of the Christian rite, and the authors of the Greek version of the Old Testament" (Augustus Strong, a Baptist theologian, in Systematic Theology, p. 933).
"As Baptists, we endeavor to maintain purity of doctrine in the church, and we are dogmatic in our stand. Our insistence on scriptural baptism has been a 'thorn in the flesh' to other denominations, and a distinguishing and distinctive mark of Baptists from the beginning of our history" (Bruce Cummons, Baptist historian, Our Baptist Heritage, p. 6).
Last edited:
37818
Well-Known Member
I have no clue as to the meaning of your acronym O S A R.O S A R
ChristB4Us
Member
And yet for such a thorn in the flesh about water baptism when in and of itself as not necessary for salvation, one has to wonder how you can avoid what Paul was trying to avoid in creating factionalism within that body of Christ when you or the Baptist church you seem to think you are representing " if " they are actually insisting on that?
It seems rather moot to emphasize on something about water baptism needing to be done only by immersion in being a thorn in the side of other Christians when water baptism is not required for obtaining salvation at all as the Baptist church claims as well.
King of hypocritical to insist on something to divide believers from among themselves when water baptism is not required for salvation, but believing in Jesus Christ is. So it is worth dividing the body of believers on that basis alone? No, it is not.
Can't we all just get along? Yes, let's all just cast away all of our biblical convictions, and then we can all get along and be happy.
In fact, let's throw away everything but our soteriology. That would be great! (Sarcasm alert.)
Folks, you can stand for your convictions (baptism by immersion in this case), and still get along with people who don't agree with you. I have a friend who is a United Methodist pastor from a far country who pastored in our town. We used to meet at a local coffee shop for prayer and fellowship, and sometimes he would stop by my office for the same thing if his boy was here for a music lesson. You know what? He knew very plainly my stand on baptism as a Baptist, and yet we were still friends. It is not, "Either you drop your conviction or we can't be friends," but, "We can disagree on doctrine that is not fundamental and still be friends!"
Alas, he has moved on to get more training, but I still pray for him and love him and his family.
Alas, he has moved on to get more training, but I still pray for him and love him and his family.
Afraid not, my friend!
John's baptism was a baptism of repentance, that's what saved them and forgave sins.
The same goes for Acts 2:38, it was the repentance that saved them, then they were baptized.