Baptism?

what_is_baptism

This may be the post that sinks me. But here goes nothing. (Ha! I didn’t get the pun until my 3rd read through.)

I’ve been in the Christian community for 22 years. I have had vast range of religious teaching from state university to strict Bible college. I have had a vast range of fellowship and worship experiences from Purtian-esque to Charismatic to monastic. I have assembled with Christians in different countries, cultures and languages. There are pieces from all those experiences that have illuminated my walk with the Lord. But in those experiences I have found a problem.

There is one giant, biblical truth that is overlooked, explained away, misinterpreted and flat-out denied.

Baptism.

If you have any religious anything, you probably come to the discussion table with some preconceived ideas. Try to put those on the shelf for a moment. Examine what you’ve been told, what you’ve heard and even what you believe to be true.

It’s amazing that we have the great privilege of having the Word of God at our fingertips. The early Christians in Berea lived this privilege to the fullest and used the Scriptures every day to examine and verify what they were being taught.

And the people of Berea were more open-minded than those in Thessalonica, and they listened eagerly to Paul’s message. They searched the Scriptures day after day to see if Paul and Silas were teaching the truth. Acts 17:11

So let’s me and you, ordinary Christian gals of the 21st century, examine and verify what we are being taught! Let’s see what the bible say about baptism.  Is it important? Does it save us? Should I do it?

Baptism is all over the Bible. The New Testament starts off with the baptism of John. Old Testament foreshadows it with rocks stars like Noah and Moses.

Vine’s defines baptism from the Greek word baptisma.

“baptism,” consisting of the processes of immersion, submersion and emergence (from bapto, “to dip”)

We are talking about water baptism, being dipped down into water (John 3:23, Acts 8:38).

Jesus’ ministry is book-ended with baptism. He began with his baptism by John (Luke 3:21). Three years later, his final words to his disciples, as he closed his ministry, commended them to, “Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit” (Mt. 28:19).

Baptism was important to Jesus. 

After the ascension of Jesus (Luke 24 & Acts 1), the Holy Spirit comes. In the middle of riotous mob, Peter is the first apostle called to preach the first gospel message.

Peter breaks it down. They had been waiting for a Messiah. He came. They denied him. They killed him. (Acts 2:14-36).

Peter’s words pierced their hearts, and they said to him and to the other apostles, “Brothers, what should we do?”

Peter replied, “Each of you must repent of your sins and turn to God, and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins. Then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Later in Acts 10:48 Peter orders baptism to Cornelius and his household.

So he gave orders for them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Acts 10:48

Baptism was important to Peter.

Paul writes to the church in Rome much later with a similar message in Romans 6.

Since we have died to sin, how can we continue to live in it? Or have you forgotten that when we were joined with Christ Jesus in baptism, we joined him in his death? For we died and were buried with Christ by baptism. And just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glorious power of the Father, now we also may live new lives.

Since we have been united with him in his death, we will also be raised to life as he was. We know that our old sinful selves were crucified with Christ so that sin might lose its power in our lives.

Paul teaches here that baptism:

  • Joins us with Jesus
  • Joins us with his death
  • Kills our sinful self
  • Raises us to new life
  • Gives power over sin

 

Baptism was important to Paul.

The early letters that circulated among the first churches say:

Some of us are Jews, some are Gentiles, some are slaves, and some are free. But we have all been baptized into one body by one Spirit, and we all share the same Spirit. 1 Cor 12:13

 For you were buried with Christ when you were baptized. And with him you were raised to new life because you trusted the mighty power of God, who raised Christ from the dead. Col. 2:12

 For there is one body and one Spirit, just as you have been called to one glorious hope for the future.  There is one Lord, one faith, one baptism,  and one God and Father, who is over all and in all and living through all. Eph. 4:4-6

You don’t need further instruction about baptisms, the laying on of hands, the resurrection of the dead, and eternal judgment. Heb. 6:2

Baptism was important to the first Christians.

Ok, so it’s important but does it save you?

 

Should I do it?

 

What are you waiting for? Get up and be baptized. Have your sins washed away by calling on the name of the Lord. Acts 22:16

 

Serena
Tweet3
Share
Pin5
8 Shares
Let Go and Let Dad!Engaged is NOT the New Married
Comments: 37
  1. Amber
    10 years ago

    When some who read this inevitably get angry, I humbly. ask them to consider the story of Naaman the leper. When Naaman is told to dip in the Jordan 7 times to heal his leprosy, he gets angry. But his servants ask him, “My father, if the prophet had told you to do something great, would you not have done it? how much more, when he says to wash and be clean?”
    Wash and be clean. God does the work…we just submit to the cleansing.
    Thank you for standing up for truth.

    ReplyCancel
    • 10 years ago

      THE ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH BY STEVE FINNELL
      Why was the Ethiopian eunuch so concerned about being baptized in water?
      1. Did the eunuch want to be baptized so he could join the the 1st Church of Philip?
      2. Did the eunuch want to be baptized as a testimony of his faith?
      3. Did he want be baptized because Jesus commanded it and he wanted to be obedient?
      4. Was he in a hurry to be baptized because he realized that water baptism had nothing to do with the forgiveness of his sins?
      5. Did the eunuch want to be baptized because his sins were already forgiven?
      6. Did he want be baptized to demonstrate that he was saved before he was baptized?

      The answer is NO, NO, NO, NO, NO, and NO.

      The Ethiopian was in a hurry to be baptized because:
      1. He wanted his sins forgiven. (Acts 2:38)
      2. He wanted his transgressions forgiven. (Colossians 2:13)
      3. He wanted to be saved. (1 Peter 3:21)
      4. He wanted to be baptized into Christ. (Romans 6:3)
      5. He wanted to walk in newness of life. (Romans 6:4)
      6. He wanted his body of sin done away with. (Romans 6.6)
      7. He wanted wanted to live with Christ. ( Romans 6:8)
      8. He wanted to be saved. (Mark 16:16)
      9. He wanted wanted to be clothed with Christ. (Galatians 3:27)
      10. He wanted to have his sins washed away. (Acts 22:16)
      11. He wanted to be saved. (Titus 3:5)
      12. He wanted to enter the kingdom of God. (John 3:5)
      13. He wanted the Lord to add him to His church. (Acts 2 :41,47)
      14. He wanted to be sanctified. (Ephesians 5:26)
      15. He wanted to be blameless and holy. (Ephesians 5:27)
      16. He wanted to be free of spots and wrinkles.(Ephesians 5:27)
      17. He wanted to receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Acts 2:38)

      THE CONVERSION OF THE ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH (Acts 8:26-38)

      Philip preached Jesus to the eunuch.

      The first question the eunuch ask was “What prevents me from being baptized?”

      Philip said Acts 2:37 [… “If you believe with all your heart you may.” And he answered and said , I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”]

      When Philip preach Jesus to the eunuch he must have told him what Jesus said in Mark 16:16 He who has believed and has been baptized shall be saved; but he who has disbelieved shall be condemned.

      THE ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH WAS SAVED ON THE ROAD FROM JERUSALEM TO GAZA; BUT ONLY AFTER HE BELIEVED AND WAS BAPTIZED!

      NOTE: In the New Testament Scriptures there is not one single account of anyone denying water baptism as being essential for the forgiveness of sins. Not one mention of anyone saying I was saved before I was baptized. Not one person stated they were saved before baptism, but were baptized so they could join the local church. Not one individual said I was baptized as a testimony of my faith, but it had nothing to do with my salvation. WHY DO YOU NOT READ ABOUT THESE THINGS HAPPENING IN THE 1ST CENTURY CHURCH? WHY? BECAUSE THESE ARE ALL MAN-MADE TRADITIONS THAT ORIGINATED MUCH LATER. (SEE MY APRIL 17 POST—“THE PRICE OF TRADITION’)

      (All Scripture quotes from: NEW AMERICAN STANDARD BIBLE)

      ReplyCancel
      • 10 years ago

        Amen! I also love the story of the Ethiopian Eunuch because his baptism took place in a “desert.” So many people argue, “But what if someone is in the desert and he wants to be baptized, but obviously can’t because he’s in a desert?” They use this as an excuse that we don’t “have” to be baptized. God is powerful and can provide the water to be baptized. He provided for the Eunuch, and He did the same for a bunch of prisoners back in the 80s. That’s how I became a Christian. Here’s the story: http://thelordslady2.blogspot.com/p/my-story.html

        ReplyCancel
      • Randy
        9 years ago

        Steve, I grew up with the example of the Eunuch’s conversion as a proof text of full-emersion baptism. And I grew up thinking that the point of the story (reason the Holy Spirit included it) was to reinforce the importance of this ritual cleansing ceremony. Later, I became aware of the context of this story, which doesn’t begin with Philip preaching about Jesus.
        Again I will applaud and reiterate the wisdom of this post’s opening comments regarding “putting your preconceived ideas on the shelf for a moment.” I say this next not as an attack, but to point out some of the preconceptions.
        Your question concerning “why the eunuch was concerned/interested in being baptized” is a good one. But you ignored the context of the story. The eunuch was on his way home. He “had gone to Jerusalem to worship” (28), but if you examine the Old Testament commands and Levitical laws, you will see that he was not allowed to actually worship in the Temple. He was forbidden by law from entering due to his physical status of eunuch. So, in this context we see a man of great faith and reverence for Jahweh who traveled an extreme and arduous journey just to stand outside of the temple. He was not able to personally offer a sacrifice, because he couldn’t close enough to the priests. Yet he went anyway! I will propose (maybe even assume) that this man would have also joined in as many religious events as he could, which would have included being baptized (Mitzvah) in one of the many baptismal pools available in Jerusalem. Since this was a man-made tradition, no Levitical laws applied; however, I don’t know if local customs would have restricted his participation. I must admit that it is possible that this too was denied him if they realized that he was “not whole”. And it would add even more illumination to how he worded his request to Philip for baptism.
        Next for framing the context, read Acts 8:32-33 very closely and slowly keeping in mind the physical condition of this man. See the parallels of this Christological prophesy to the man’s own painful past. “no justice, his descendants taken away from him, his life (as a man) taken away. [if you Google castration and historical accounts, you will find even more disturbing parallels regarding “silent like a lamb being sheared” and silent suffering and humiliation] This contextual frame fully explains the eunuch’s question about “about whom, I ask you, does the prophet say this?” (35) Because it sounds like Philip and the prophesy are talking about this eunuch with no justice (can’t worship Jahweh like other men), with no descendants, and with no manhood.
        Now we all assume that some of the elements included in the statement that Philip told the good news about Jesus included things like Pentecost and Peter’s sermon regarding baptized in the name of this Messiah… and the promise being available for all who are afar off. Within this context, a momentous opportunity arises for the man of faith who is denied equal participation in worship.
        Before I give my summation, I challenge you to closely examine the wording of the eunuch’s request. It is not:
        • Lets’ do it.
        • I’m convinced of the need and ready now to be baptized.
        • I’m afraid I might die before arriving safely home, so baptize me now just to be safe.
        No matter which translation you examine, the wording is a little strange:
        • What prevents me from being baptized?
        • Is there anything preventing me from being baptized?
        To answer your question within this context of denial and exclusion, the eunuch was wondering or challenging Philip. Is there fine print from Leviticus that excludes me because of my physical malady? Is this another act of worship that I’m excluded from? Did Peter mean it when he said “all who afar off?”

        In my spiritual journey and search for biblical truth (free of preconceptions), I see now that this story is recorded to impress the importance of the Mitzvah, but is just one of many examples in Acts that stresses how the gospel (delivered first to the Jews) is for all mankind, Jews (Levitically whole), Jews (proselytes and not whole), Samritans (not true Jews), and even Gentiles. This is a beautiful and powerful story about those who were once excluded are now invited in and accepted as equal members of God’s family.

        When you offered 17 reasons for the eunuch’s concern, you actually gave the reasons that YOU were concerned. (by the way, every one of those reasons are out-of-context of Acts 8, which should be a warning sign that you may not be revealing truth from scriptures, but reaching back into your personal bag of preconceptions).

        ReplyCancel
  2. 10 years ago

    Thank you for showing it so simply. It is challenging to read the scripture with NO preconceived ideas, but it is so important to try our very best to do just that.

    ReplyCancel
  3. Sarah
    10 years ago

    I grew up in the church you are now a part of. I went to college with your husband and sat next to him in Creation vs. Evolution class. I am no longer a member of that church and their teaching on baptism is one of the reasons. I appreciate and still agree with the teaching that it is necessary. However, the Greek word “baptizo” does *not* necessarily mean “dip” or “immerse”. I learned this by doing my own research rather than taking what was said from the pulpit at face value. A rather simple search at various Bible sites (Bible Gateway, Blue Letter Bible, etc), using their bible dictionaries/encyclopedias made this clear. I leave this comment along with a prayer.

    ReplyCancel
    • 10 years ago

      I appreciate your thoughts! But we are part of a church plant and have only been here for 7 1/2 years. Not sure about the connection.

      ReplyCancel
      • Sarah
        10 years ago

        I mentioned the connections by way of introduction. I could be completely wrong about any connection between us and my being wrong about it would have no bearing on the fact that the Greek language does not support the claim that baptism must be immersion.

        ReplyCancel
        • 10 years ago

          I see. But I was confused about the church part. We started this church here so I know everyone that has been here.

          Why are you opposed to baptism by immersion?

          ReplyCancel
          • Sarah
            10 years ago

            I’m not opposed to baptism by immersion. I’m opposed to teaching that baptism *must* be by immersion “because that’s what the Greek word means”. Because that’s not actually what the Greek word means.

            ReplyCancel
          • 10 years ago

            I will give you that. But I do not base my belief on immersion solely on the definition of the word. The biblical description overwhelmingly paints a picture of a lot of water all around you, ie the Red Sea, Noah’s Ark, being buried, going down in the Jordan. If I picked up a bible and just started reading it, I wouldn’t come up with any thing but a full dunk.

            ReplyCancel
          • Sarah
            10 years ago

            Forgive me for being rather suspicious of anyone who claims that if they just picked up their Bible and read it they would (gasp!) come to the conclusion they already hold. Every Bible believer who is not Catholic or Orthodox would say the same. This isn’t an argument. It’s asking me to blindly trust your interpretation, which, unless you’re also claiming to be divinely inspired, you’re not even trying to give me a reason to do.

            ReplyCancel
    • Marie
      10 years ago

      You are relying on things posted on the internet? There could be 100+ different opinions posted on the internet, and they could all be merely someone’s opinion. The Bible is the inspired word of God written by those who were guided by the Holy Spirit. Romans 6 could not be plainer —we are “buried therefore with him by baptism into death, in order that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life.” Paul says further that in baptism we have “died to sin” and should no longer live therein. So baptism is the beginning of our walk with Christ, we must continue faithful until death (Rev. 2:10)

      ReplyCancel
      • Sarah
        10 years ago

        Yes, the Bible is God’s inspired word. But if we don’t understand what it means it will do us little good. You can just as easily learn about the Greek word “baptizo” off the internet, if that makes you feel better about it. The word simply does not necessitate “immersion”.

        Besides all of that, if the internet is a completely unreliable place to get information about religious truth, then why would you use a combox to try to broadcast what you believe is religious truth?

        ReplyCancel
  4. Randy
    10 years ago

    This article began so beautifully. I only wish the author could take their own advice:
    • Try to put those preconceived ideas on the shelf for a moment.
    • Examine what you’ve been told, what you’ve heard and even what you believe to be true.

    Having been raised in the very faith group that is the source of this argument, I am dismayed to see it rear its ugly head again. Having viewed this article that claims to take a fresh look, I read nothing new. No new evidence. No additional justification. But the old argument that is based not on scriptural justification, but instead is based on a series of assumptions, and a lack of understanding of the context. My brothers and sisters who continue this useless argument overlook a fundamental question, and belabor the lesser aspects. These assumptions include:
    1. There is something magical or mystical about the act of immersion in water.
    2. John the Dipper invented baptism.
    3. Jesus invented a new baptism, or least changed it from what John had done.
    4. When combined these assumptions collide to create the misconception that baptism was created for “Christians” and not Jews.

    Those who believe this also believe that Jesus invented the “Lord’s Supper” and instituted it for his followers after observing the Passover Meal. (I’ll talk about that later)

    Baptism is the descriptive term, not the explanatory term. Dunking is what is being done. But cleansing is what is happening. This article focuses on the what, not the why. One is important, the other is not. It is all about cleansing. Mk 1:8 “… he will baptize you with the Holy Spirit.” John used the term to mean cleansing, not dunking. Because it is impossible to dunk someone in the Holy Spirit. However, it is possible to be cleansed or purified by the Holy Spirit.
    The real focus of baptism is not the dunking, but the cleansing.

    Acts 2:38 mentions baptism for the removal of sins. Acts 2:38 didn’t add “forgiveness” to create a new baptism; it was already part of the concept. Mk 1:4 “John was baptizing… for the forgiveness of sins.” Here is another proof text that this article and similar ones in the past will avoid, because it connects John’s Mitzvah/Baptism ritual to the forgiveness of sins, which contradicts two of the assumptions listed above. I’m sorry if this rocks your theology, but it is true.

    And to illuminate the context of Peter’s sermon and conclusion with baptism, let me point out that everyone present for Peter’s sermon understood what baptism was all about, and had a better understanding than most of us do today. By the time of Pentecost, the Mitzvah (Hebrew word for the Greek baptisma) ritual was firmly established in the hearts and minds of Jews as a tradition of ceremonial cleansing. The Mitzvah is not mentioned anywhere in the Old Testament, and therefore, was not a requirement from God. Jewish scholars and Rabbis have written extensively on the subject for the last 2,000 years! In Jewish theology (don’t forget that Peter and the others were Jews), this cleansing ritual was tied to the Old Testament water cleansing rituals for objects before they could enter the Temple. Objects (and people) were cleansed before being presented to God to become holy. Once consecrated as holy, the object could never again return to its former use, status or function.

    As a side note for those who bring up this argument about the necessity of baptism, they also want to argue the “scripturally pure” form of baptism as IMMERSION. However, as I just pointed out, the Jews traced their water conservation approach to cleansing to the OT rules that required pouring (not dipping) of water over the object or person. Interesting, isn’t it? The original cleansing rule was pouring, not dunking. Hmmm… there goes another good argument.

    Today, the traditional Jews still follow the custom as in New Testament times that the cleansing Mitzvah is performed on several occasions to mark (a) an end, (b) a new beginning, and (c) acceptance by the community.
    a. When a boy or girl reach 12 years old and becomes an adult under the law.
    b. When a lawyer, doctor, rabbi, etc. begin their ministry or professional career.
    c. When an outsider (Gentile) becomes a Jew or proselyte.

    This explains the context of Jesus going to John the Baptist and asking his cousin to perform the ritual. It also explains John’s confusion. Since John was preaching a Mitzvah/baptism/cleansing of repentance (and forgiveness) and looking for the Messiah’s appearance, John stated that Jesus should be dunking him. But Jesus was ready to begin his ministry, and was observing the Jewish tradition like any other Rabbi would. That’s what he meant by “It’s the proper thing to do.”

    Back to the “proof text” of Acts 2:38. No one questioned Peter’s response that included another Mitzvah, because what caught their attention instead was connecting that cleansing to Jesus the Messiah. That was different. When Peter referred to “baptism,” telling them to do it, probably every man present had already been baptized that very morning before entering the Temple grounds. Archaeologists have found several baptismal (Mitzvah) pools in Jerusalem that can accommodate large crowds of religious pilgrims. The First Century historian Josephus mentions the cleansing pools and associated cleansing tax or fee everyone had to pay. But just like John’s wilderness tour, this Mitzvah/Baptism was about cleansing in the name of the Messiah. Not one who is still coming, but one who came. And died. And rose up. That Messiah’s name is Jesus. Same baptism. Same Messiah. Same purpose.

    A true proof text this article avoids is Cornelius and his household. Without tearing several scriptures out of the Bible that talk about God cannot accept (look upon) or embrace sin, one cannot explain how Cornelius had the full embrace of the Holy Spirit (just like the apostles on Pentecost) unless God had deemed him clean and holy. I’ll go slow because I realize that this directly contradicts the CofC doctrine that this article grew out of.

    God can’t embrace sin. God (Holy Spirit) embraced Cornelius. Therefore, Cornelius was no longer guilty of his sin. Ergo, he was forgiven.

    When the original Jewish believers (they weren’t called Christians, yet) allowed the outsiders (like Cornelius) to be baptized, this included a great cultural shift of acceptance as part of the group. Remember that things and people are cleansed prior to being presented to the Temple or to God. So when Peter questioned his Jewish brothers about “any reason not to baptize Cornelius,” he was referring to the acceptance aspect, not the need for cleansing. It was obvious that God had already accepted him and fully embraced him.

    The “Great Commission” contains a comment from Jesus about baptizing in his name. But remember, that Jews were going to be baptizing each other regardless of what the apostles did. So in context, Jesus was only saying that when you do it (Mitzvah), do it my name. My sacrifice. My power. My promise. My covenant, not the old one.
    Conclusion. Once you understand the history, context, and purpose of Mitzvah/Baptism… once you connect the old tradition to the new tradition… once you look at the scriptural references from the Jewish perspective, the example of Cornelius becomes the proof text that NO, a ceremonial baptism/cleansing ritual is not a requirement for God to embrace us. No, it doesn’t magically, mystically connect us to the blood of Jesus in order for sacrifice to be effective. Paul wrote to the new gentile believers (who weren’t familiar with the established tradition of Mitzvah) that baptism is not about washing (the physical act), but about cleansing (the spiritual act). It is today’s version of an ancient Jewish tradition (not a commandment). It is an act of faith. Do I follow this tradition? Yes. Do I enforce it as a means of exclusion? No. Will I be so foolish to try to make it a requirement for God’s acceptance? Absolutely not; that would be telling God what to do. And God doesn’t like it when we try to tell him what to do.

    1. The real focus of baptism is not the dunking, but the cleansing.
    2. The “magical” quality of baptism isn’t about getting completely wet, but in the sacrifice.
    3. Neither John nor Jesus nor Paul changed what Mitzvah/Baptism was, meant, or symbolized (an end, cleansing, new beginning, and acceptance into the group).
    4. All Jews did it. Many still do. The Messianic Jews (early Jerusalem church) did it in the name of Jesus. When outsiders accepted this Messiah (Samaritans and then gentiles), they too followed the tradition of a cleansing Mitzvah in the name of Jesus.
    5. One cannot be a lost sinner and baptized by the Holy Spirit; it’s either one or the other.
    6. Baptism is an act of faith; don’t try to convert it into a act of doctrine.

    ReplyCancel
    • Brian
      10 years ago

      Serena, I’m very encouraged by your post today. Thanks for sharing.

      To Mr. Randy, you are self-deceived and self-contradictory. Who is causing all the fight and division here? You. Serena is sharing a Biblical, faith filled conviction and you are spouting Calvinistic doctrine without thinking about it. Calvinism is not Biblical. It is just a bunch of sophisticated Augustinian teachings that are carried to their inevitable conclusions.

      “God can’t embrace sin. God (Holy Spirit) embraced Cornelius. Therefore, Cornelius was no longer guilty of his sin. Ergo, he was forgiven.”

      2 quick examples of instances where God’s Spirit worked on someone without their being saved: Balaam’s donkey and King Saul prophesying.

      The bible does not teach Calvinism, which is why Francis challenges people like yourself to put down the systematic theology and “institutes”, and instead dust off that Bible and let it speak for itself.

      ReplyCancel
      • Randy
        10 years ago

        Brian,
        I appreciate your enthusiasm, and I enjoy discussing (not arguing) Biblical truths, denominational doctrine, and even biased opinions.
        First, you obviously have no idea of Calvinism actually espouses. I do not accept any of the 5 Points of Calvinism (including irresistible grace).
        Second, you are obviously buried beneath a doctrine of saved by works to even make that accusation.
        Third, I believe Paul that we are “saved by grace through faith.” I know it’s simple and doesn’t convey a hidden “pattern” or Da Vinci code to decipher on exactly what WE MUST DO to be saved. Oops, maybe Paul meant that we are saved by the grace of God, initiated by our faith in him and his son. I realize that this contradicts 4 of the 5 “Steps of Salvation” that most of us grew up believing and placing our faith in. But as Campbell, Stone, and others have said long ago: “if our understanding of one scripture contradicts another, then we are obviously not truly understanding the first one.”

        From the early 1950s, a doctrine of Saved by Baptism was instituted and indoctrinated to replace the Saved by Grace that Paul spoke of (filled by the Holy Spirit). We are not saved by Law. We are not saved by works (including baptism). We are saved by Grace through Faith. It’s not complex, just hard for some of who were raised in a legalistic, works-based church family to accept.

        It wasn’t easy for me either. I was raised to put my faith in the purity of my doctrine, the purity of my “pattern of worship,” and the purity of my church’s foundation.

        To quote Paul again, “I count all that now as crap.”

        ReplyCancel
  5. 10 years ago

    If you think reading bible passages about baptism is rearing it’s ugly head… may God be merciful to you. I made no appeal to any belief other than what I have found in the word during my personal walk with him. My point is simply this- the bible is full of baptism. We need to stop ignoring that and give biblical baptism time and study.

    ReplyCancel
    • 10 years ago

      AMEN!

      ReplyCancel
    • Randy
      10 years ago

      Serena,
      I sincerely hope and trust that God will be merciful to me, and to you, and all who put their faith in his son.

      I almost ignored your misquote, but have decided to respond. I never said nor inferred that reading scriptures about baptism was “ugly.” I did infer that the half-century old practice of beating other believers over the head with those scriptures (many taken out of context) is an ugly practice.

      Paul told the Corinthians that whatever divides us is bad, and whatever unites and strengthens us is good. This ugly practice of judging other believers based on our understanding of scripture is ugly and not from the Holy Spirit.

      This old argument focuses on the act or ritual itself, rather than its purpose. Having grown up in a faith group accustomed to this form of piety, I understand first-hand how it teaches faith in acts that we perform:
      1. develop the right theology
      2. perform the right acts
      3. believe the right things
      4. discover the right pattern
      5. practice the right rituals (in the right order)

      Search the scriptures (not your personal doctrine) and prove my statements wrong:
      a. The real focus of baptism is not the dunking, but the cleansing.
      b. The “magical” quality of baptism isn’t about getting completely wet, but in the sacrifice.
      c. Neither John nor Jesus nor Paul changed what Mitzvah/Baptism was, meant, or symbolized (an end, cleansing, new beginning, and acceptance into the group).

      ReplyCancel
  6. 10 years ago

    https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5Is8QnxviOI

    ReplyCancel
  7. Randy
    10 years ago

    I never said nor attempted to infer that reading scriptures about baptism is ugly or not recommended. What I wrote is that if you will for a moment lay your assumptions on the shelf (as the author suggested) and explore the context of those passage, you might find knowledge. I agree that the NT is full of references to baptism (Mitzvah). The core of what I wrote is true. It was (and still is) a Jewish tradition. So, before we attempt to decide what is important, or what is sacred about the act of cleansing we should understand where it came from, what is was when Jesus referred to it, and then decide whether or not to argue about its importance today. Just because Jesus observed a tradition (like the feast of dedication – Jn 10:22) that doesn’t make it a commandment or requirement.

    My post supports your exhortation that we need to give biblical baptism time and study. But do not ignore historical documentation that illuminates the context of those scriptures. What we today call “christianity” was given first to the Jews, then to the gentiles (Rom 1:16). Therefore, it would be wise to understand what it meant to the Jews before trying to decide what it means to us gentiles today.

    ReplyCancel
    • Dennis Hopper
      10 years ago

      Revelation 1:5
      And from Jesus Christ…..Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood.

      ReplyCancel
  8. 10 years ago

    I didn’t grow up in the church, the body of Christ. Instead, I grew up in several different denominations (and you’d think that title would make it clear that a denomination means “part of a whole”). The truth of how to be saved can be very difficult to accept when we realize the amount of sincere believers who are blind to it. And some will work very hard to discredit the true meaning of baptism.

    I also lived in Holland for thirteen years, and the word “baptism” does mean “to dip” in the original Greek. Not only do my Greek friends confirm it, but so do the Dutch Bible translators. It literally reads “to dip” in the Dutch Bibles. “Go and be dipped, washing away your sins.”

    You see, baptism makes total sense. We read in 2 Thes. 1:8 God will “deal out retribution to those who do not know God and to those who do not OBEY THE GOSPEL of our Lord Jesus.” So, how does one “obey” the “good news?” Seriously? Well, what is the “good news” (which means “gospel”)? It’s defined for us in 1 Corinthians 15:1-4, which describes the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. So, how in the world do we obey Christ’s death, burial and resurrection? Romans 6:3-4 defines it perfectly, “Or do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death? Therefore we have been buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, so we too might walk in newness of life.”

    The scriptures speak for themselves. The teaching of baptism in The Word is quite simple, not at all complicated like some of us would like to think.

    Finally, if we truly LOVE God, we will obey Him. Jesus repeats himself several times in the book of John. John 14:15, “If you love Me, you will keep my commandments.” Again in John 14:21 “He who has My commandments and keeps them is the one who loves Me.” Again in John 14:23-24 “Jesus answered and said to him, “If anyone loves Me, he will keep My word; and My Father will love him, and We will come to him and make Our abode with him. He who does not love Me does not keep My words; and the word which you hear is not Mine, but the Father’s who sent Me.” And as if that wasn’t enough, Jesus repeats Himself yet again in John 15:10 “If you keep My commandments, you will abide in My love; just as I have kept My Father’s commandments and abide in His love.
    You might also want to consider how sly the devil is. Don’t you think he’d like to confuse believers, screw up our understanding of what could save us, making it more complicated than it actually is? Let’s not fall into that trap.

    In Him,

    Sandi

    ReplyCancel
  9. 10 years ago

    We also can’t ignore the fact that when Philip baptized the eunuch in Acts 8:38, they BOTH went DOWN INTO the water. If “pouring” was the practice, why would they both bother to go down into the water? Let’s not abandon common sense.

    Honestly, this reasoning is simply used to make sure everyone who believes can be saved, whether or not they’ve been baptized for the right reasons or the right way. We put our own souls at risk when we ourselves compromise the truth for the feelings/beliefs of the many. Our opinions of a matter will not change what has been made true by God.

    Remember Matthew 7:13-14 “Enter through the narrow gate; for the gate is wide and the way is broad that leads to destruction, and there are many who enter through it. For the gate is small and the way is narrow that leads to life, and there are few who find it.”

    Those were Jesus’ words. We need to take them to heart.

    ReplyCancel
  10. Kathy Cooper-Boyle
    10 years ago

    In translation from ancient text the word used ‘immersion’ didn’t have an English word that conveyed the meaning well so ‘baptism’ is used…(short explanation)…. There’s a reason much water is needed, just as there’s a reason Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and came up out of it. A stumbling over immersion in Christ problem is a heart problem…

    John 3: 22 After these things came Jesus and his disciples into the land of Judaea; and there he tarried with them, and baptized.
    23 And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.

    ReplyCancel
    • Randy
      10 years ago

      Sandi and Kathy,
      You are both fighting a hopeless battle with no victory. First (Kathy) read your history books before you make bold statements that sound as absolute truth (“the word used ‘immersion’ didn’t have an English word that conveyed the meaning well”). In the KJV, the scholars/translaters knew well that dip, emmerse, and plunge all existed and conveyed the literal meaning of “baptizo”; however, they chose not to use any of them and instead transliterated the Greek baptizo into Anglicized “baptize.” Many scholars debate that their reasoning was not to overtly disagree with the then current pouring and sprinkling rituals. But that just doesn’t matter. Over and done.

      Sandi,
      You keep trying to emphasize the abundance of water, or the “going down” and other attributes of the HOW it was accomplishes. Doesn’t matter! Instead look at what I posted about WHY it was practiced. It was practiced for 200 years before Jesus. It was a Jewish ritual that Jesus gave new meaning to. He didn’t change any of its original meaning, but added to it.

      I also pointed out that the ORIGINAL immersion Mitzvah was believed to be symbolic of the OT purification rituals. (All OT purification rituals were mandated by Levitical law to be by pouring)

      If we are going to spend valuable time talking about baptism, then focus on the WHY and the meaning or purpose… not the HOW.

      I love you both and pray for understanding. But I warn you that Jesus didn’t die so that we could be immersed and brag about it.

      ReplyCancel
      • 10 years ago

        Randy, what do you believe baptism is for? What’s your take on it?

        ReplyCancel
  11. Randy
    10 years ago

    Sandi,
    Read my original post. It illuminates many aspects of baptism (mitzvah) that is not always part of sermons. My summary is true and based on historical facts.
    Baptism existed for at least 200 years before Jesus.
    Jews understood baptism; when Peter mentioned it, they didn’t question it, because it was not a NEW religious idea. When gentiles joined the early church, they did not have the background and cultural understanding of Mitzvah. That is why Paul (apostle to the Gentiles) had to explain it in terms they could understand.

    Now, that is pretty much opinion-free.
    My point is that before we try to make out-of-context arguments about baptism, we had better have firm grasp of the fundamentals of baptism/mitzvah. What is was. What it may have become (and why). And most importantly… what is important about baptism.

    What do I believe? The most important aspect of baptism is not:
    1. how it’s done,
    2. when it’s done,
    3. who does it, or
    4. when does God accept us

    A semi-scriptural analogy to baptism is marriage. Check the gospels before you disagree. So, I ask a trick question of each person who wants to belabor the “dunking-essential-for-God’s-acceptance” argument. During your ceremony, exactly WHEN were you and spouse legally/spiritually married?
    1. ring exchange?
    2. after “I do”?
    3. the ceremonial kiss?
    4. certificate filed at the courthouse?

    The answer is none of the above. The true answer is “it just doesn’t matter.” So quit arguing about when; about the essential nature of the ring, kiss, preacher, etc. The important aspect of marriage is the vow and commitment (not any of the 1000 details that brides obsess over).

    ReplyCancel
  12. 10 years ago

    Randy, I agree with you as I’m familiar with the Mitzvah (I’ve done a ton of historical research for the books I write). And I read your first post. I know you say baptism is a cleansing, and I completely agree with that because that’s what the Bible teaches about it. What I’m wanting to know (and you still haven’t answered my question) is what you believe baptism is “for?” Why are we to be baptized (according to scripture)? Obviously, it’s commanded by Jesus at the end of Matthew.

    You’re clearly a well-versed man, but just in case you don’t know what passage I’m talking about where we’re “commanded” to baptize, I’ll paste it below. Matt. 28:16-20

    16 But the eleven disciples proceeded to Galilee, to the mountain which Jesus had designated. 17 When they saw Him, they worshiped Him; but some were doubtful. 18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority has been given to Me in heaven and on earth. 19 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, 20 teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age.”

    So, please answer my question, if you don’t mind. I’d really like to know. What do you believe baptism is “for?”

    ReplyCancel
  13. Randy
    10 years ago

    Sandi,
    Excuse me for making assumptions, but you seem to be applying a preconceived idea to the text in Matt 28:16-20, rather than having your interpretation blend into the historical and cultural context:
    1. Jews were baptizing 200 years before John and Jesus.
    2. John and Jesus both preached a baptism for forgiveness of sins.
    3. Almost everyone who heard Peter’s answer (Acts 2:38) about being baptized again had probably already been baptized that morning.
    4. The tradition of a ritual cleansing included an ending, a new beginning, and acceptance by the community as “being one of them.”
    5. Regardless of what Jesus told his disciples in Matt 28, the nation of Israel was going to continue to baptize.

    I make this assumption because when you summarize the Great Commission by saying, “we’re commanded to baptize,” you only focus on a small part of it.
    First, read from several different translations to understand:
    1. He didn’t say go out… and start baptizing everyone.
    2. He did say go out and make disciples… baptizing in the name of… and teaching…
    3. The crux of the command is to go and make, not to baptize.
    4. The unique caveat added to the centuries-old ritual of mitzvah/baptism was that now we are to do it in the name (power) of the risen Messiah.
    5. The parallel account in Mk 16:15-18 adds the importance of faith (in the Messiah) in this baptism. Decades of mistaken sermons have stumbled over the “he who believes and is baptized will be saved, but those who do not believe will judged guilty/punished. The disciples understood this as meaning “those who do not believe [even though baptized] will [still] be judged guilty/punished [because the power and gift are through faith in the Messiah].

    It would be a great proof text for some legalists if Paul had written in Eph 2:8-9 that we are saved “by grace through baptism.” But, alas, he did not. So, maybe that’s not what the Holy Spirit wanted us to believe.
    NOTE: the Mitzvah/baptism that John and Jesus and Peter referred to had no connotation of blood (Search the rabbinical teachings during Jesus’ time).
    The reason Jews practiced this man-made tradition was two-fold:
    1. Demonstrate the end, new beginning, and emergence into a new life and a new family at major life milestones (adulthood, weddings, professional career). Several rabbis during the time of Jesus commented about “being born anew” in this ritual. Jesus slightly changed the wording to born anew/above, implying and then explaining that something spiritual was involved in his use of the term.
    2. To cleanse and purify before going to the Temple (to approach God).
    Paul’s analogy to a gentile group of believers amplified the concept of renewal to include not just an end, but a symbolic death; not just a new beginning, but a burial and resurrection (common pagan terms). And he extended the concept part of a new community to being part of Christ. Don’t let Paul’s explanation of the symbolism and purpose of Mitzvah to a gentile group confuse us today. It’s still about a spiritual cleansing (act of faith), not a mystical connection to the blood of Christ that forms a new Christology that becomes the focus of our religion.

    Baptism is an act of faith, an act of a believer (like Cornelius).
    Baptism is not an act of obedience. (that’s another bad doctrine taught by some based on the KJV wording. Note: there is no scriptural example of someone “obeying” the gospel; it is only used in the negative form “disobey” as ignoring the gospel.)

    What is baptism for?
    I have tried to provide historical examples of what baptism was for. It’s not new. It’s not an invention of Jesus, or even John.
    Does this act of Baptism/Mitzvah (a ritual of ceremonial cleansing) save us? Yes. But it’s not the immersion, nor depth of the water that saves us; it is our spiritual desire for renewal (1 Pet 3:21 “… baptism now saves you– not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience – through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.”

    What do I believe?
    1. I do not believe in a mystical baptism that imparts some supernatural power by virtue of the ritual itself.
    2. I do believe that the power of cleansing comes from the perfect sacrifice.
    3. I do not believe that baptism is in any form an act of “obeying the gospel.”
    4. I believe that we are saved by grace through faith, and baptism is an act of faith.
    5. Just as in times of old, we observe this cleansing ritual in our desire to approach God.
    6. And I firmly believe that our common faith in the Messiah should unite us (one faith, one hope, one baptism), not become a source of division, argument, and judgment.

    ReplyCancel
    • 10 years ago

      Randy,

      I’m sorry you feel you need to make assumptions about me and my faith. Not to mention judgment calls about me because I asked you a simple question: what is baptism for, which you only partially answered. And for you to say I’m the one being divisive . . . umm sure, you’re excused. ???

      As for Matthew, I was simply taking the text as it is. I’m an editor, and also in the Greek, the word “baptizing” coincides with the act of “making disciples.”

      I’m not interested in turning and twisting a verse to make it mean what I want. I WILL have to answer to the Father if I were to do that, and so I approach the scriptures with great study, care and a lot of prayer. I grew up in the denominational world with people who would use the Word against me just to get what they wanted, using my faith against me and making me fearful that I was going to hell if I didn’t believe in their interpretation of scripture. I’ve seen them use the scriptures as a tool to wield “power” over others just so they could look good, and again, to manipulate others so they could get what they want. That, my friend, is the LAST thing I want to do here.

      I just had a simple question. I didn’t want “historical evidences,” I wanted scripture, which I believe is from God and provides ALL the answers to our questions (2 Timothy 3:16-17). I trust only in that. I’m sorry to see you don’t.

      Bowing out of the conversation now.

      Blessings,

      Sandi

      ReplyCancel
  14. 10 years ago

    “Baptism is an ordinance of the New Testament, ordained by Jesus Christ, to be to the person who is baptised – a sign of his fellowship with Christ in His death and resurrection; of his being engrafted into Christ; of remission of sins; and of that person’s giving up of himself to God, through Jesus Christ, to live and walk in newness of life.
    Those who actually profess repentance towards God, faith in, and obedience to, our Lord Jesus Christ, are the only proper subjects for this ordinance.
    The outward element to be used in this ordinance is water, in which the person is to be baptised in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit.
    Immersion – the dipping of the person in water – is necessary for the due administration of this ordinance.”

    The Baptist Confession of Faith 1689

    ReplyCancel
  15. Tami
    9 years ago

    I believe that a God has commanded us to be Baptized as an outward demonstration of what has already taken place on the inside. Salvation and baptism most certainly happen at the same time (Only a God knows the heart of man), but can also happen separately. Baptism is not a prerequisite of heaven as proved by the scripture below.

    Luke 23:39-43
    Then one of the criminals who were hanged blasphemed Him, saying, “If You are the Christ,save Yourself and us.” But the other, answering, rebuked him, saying, “Do you not even fear God, seeing you are under the same condemnation? And we indeed justly, for we receive the due reward of our deeds; but this Man has done nothing wrong.” Then he said to Jesus, “Lord, remember me when You come into Your kingdom.”
    And Jesus said to him, “Assuredly, I say to you, today you will be with Me in Paradise.”

    The thief was not baptized but saved through faith.

    ReplyCancel
    • 9 years ago

      I agree Tami that he was totally saved by his faith but I’m not sure that he was not baptized.

      Mark 1:4-5 “John the Baptist appeared in the wilderness preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. And all the country of Judea was going out to him, and all the people of Jerusalem; and they were being baptized by him in the Jordan River, confessing their sins.”

      ReplyCancel
  16. Mick
    9 years ago

    Hey Tami,
    The explanation that I’ve heard about the thief on the cross is that though our Lord is being crucified, He had not died nor more importantly, risen from the dead. This means that the thief is no more out of the Old Mosaic Law than Moses was. The thief was hanging next to the greatest sacrifice under the Old Law, which was still in effect.
    One thing for sure, when the people asked “what shall we do? ” in Acts 2, it’s a new answer. One that requires baptism to remove our sins.

    ReplyCancel
  17. ray ban aviators made in china
    8 years ago

    Hi friend
    That post is very helpful,it give me much help,thanks a lot!
    ray ban aviators made in china http://www.hotsunglasses.ru/collections/ray-ban-aviator/

    ReplyCancel

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.

Serena
10 years ago 37 Comments Baptism, Grace, The Church1,457