Posted on 05/06/2015 6:08:12 AM PDT by Gamecock
We become Christians when we repent and believe, and JESUS baptizes us in the Holy Spirit:
“For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.”
Water baptism also plays a role in salvation, but salvation has two parts: justification and sanctification. Water baptism does NOT justify us, but it does play a role in sanctification: separating us from the evil world around us.
Peter wrote:
“when the patience of God kept waiting in the days of Noah, during the construction of the ark, in which a few, that is, eight persons, were brought safely through the water. 21 Corresponding to that, 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”
Water baptism corresponds to the Flood. The Flood did not save Noah’s life or give him life. It did, however, separate him from the world - sanctification. Water baptism corresponds to the Flood, not to Noah’s faith.
1 Peter 3:21
Galatians 3:27
Acts 2:38
Mark 16:16
John 3:5
Acts 22:16
Water baptism.
Baptists love to divide baptism into sub categories so as to explain away its significance unto Salvation.
Eph. 4:4-6 should correct that silly notion.
Butting into this, let me suggest you know neither the Bible nor the doctrine of baptisms, if you are forwarding the concept of baptismal regeneration.
An interesting post and discussion that really highlights the differences in view whether baptism is a sacrament or an ordinance.
SACRAMENT. A sensible sign, instituted by Jesus Christ, by which invisible grace and inward sanctification are communicated to the soul.
An ordinance is a “prescribed practice.” It is something that has been prescribed and ordered by Jesus Christ and practiced by the Church. An ordinance is something that the Church practices because Jesus Christ has told her to do so.
I don’t claim any particular expertise in the type of Protestantism that believes in baptism as an ordinance, but my understanding is that those who practice that do not believe that any grace is communicated through baptism, rather that it is a public affirmation following a conversion experience. (If I’m wrong, I’m wrong out of ignorance, not out of maliciousness, so please correct me)
My question is for those Protestants who believe baptism to be a sacrament (vice an ordinance): do you accept the validity of a baptism performed by a group that believe it’s an ordinance (and not a sacrament)?
1 Peter 3:21 (And yet we read this in Romans 3:25-26; Romans 4:5)
Galatians 3:27 (this conveniently follows what is said in Galatians 3:26—again already saved)
Acts 2:38 (and yet what does Acts 10:43 say? Only AFTER believing and being saved did Cornelius and his family get baptized in Acts 10:47-48)
Mark 16:16 (John 5:24, John 3:18, 1 John 5:13 and Romans 10:9-10 disputes this assumption)
John 3:5 (Already addressed in my previous post)
Acts 22:16 (Paul was already saved per Galatians 1:11-12—his words)
If that was Billy Graham’s doctrine, then that’d be one of the few things he got right. Actually, that doctrine has survived since Christ established it, and despite the establishment’s attempts to eradicate it: Sometimes through institutional violence and lately through demagoguery. Baptist was the name given the early Christians because they re-baptized people.
It’s pretty clear in the scripture that baptism is for believers. I can’t imagine anyone would miss it unless they’re interpretation is contaminated by two millennia of extra-biblical teaching.
Butting into this....
____________________________
Butt all you want to, but as you see from my posts... I supply nothing but scriptures to back up God’s word. Not my opinion, my interpretation, my denominational view or whatever.
But God’s word.
My corner of Protestantism, which sees Baptism as a sacrament, will accept any Trinitarian Baptism as valid. Catholic? Baptist? Methodist? All good. It is the efficacy of the water and the work of the Holy Spirit that is important, not the individual's understanding at the time of the actual ceremony that matters.
Oneness Pentecostal? Mormon? You get a redo.
Baptism? I don’t recall Jesus, while dying on the cross, asking the thief to his right if he had been baptized in the church. I do remember the thief confessed his sins to Jesus, repented, and accepted Jesus as the true son of GOD. And Jesus assured the thief, HE would go and prepare him a place in paradise today.
I know parents want what’s best for their infants, but I believe an infant can neither accept nor deny Jesus. But Jesus knows the little children - he knew them in the womb.
Jesus, knows our heart and I believe all that are given to him by the father will not be lost. He will find his lost sheep. When I was lost I was not seeking Jesus, but he found me. I accepted him (whether through election or free will) and have his promise of eternal life. Truly this was amazing grace.
Obviously, I believe the physical act of baptism will not save you, only the blood of Jesus Christ. There is a place in the church for baptism, but again any physical act by you or others will not save you.
Peace to all brethren.
“Baptists love to divide baptism into sub categories so as to explain away its significance unto Salvation.”
Ummm...have you ever read of being baptized in the Holy Spirit? Have you read that Jesus never baptized anyone in water?
What does anyone expect to gain by baptizing an infant? Should we go into prisons, and forcibly baptize prisoners so the prisoners will all convert and be saved?
” There is one body and one Spirit, just as also you were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all who is over all and through all and in all.”
Yes - there is only One Spirit, and only one baptism that saves us - and it is NOT water baptism. If you have not been united to Christ, then water baptism is simply a rinsing of the flesh. God is not a genie, and salvation isn’t about magical rites.
“This is the only thing I want to find out from you: did you receive the Spirit by the works of the Law, or by hearing with faith? 3 Are you so foolish? Having begun by the Spirit, are you now being perfected by the flesh?”
**Baptists were executed by the Pope for rejecting infant baptism?**
Baptists were also executed by Protestants because they rejected sprinkling. My copy of the GENEVA BIBLE has a prayer in the back condemning the “Papists” and “Anabaptists” in the same sentence.
Hah! I wondered when the Thief on the Cross argument would enter the fray.
I used to think this was an argument based on ignorance of the scriptures. But even Baptists can’t be that blind.
Using the TOTC argument against baptism is not just ignorance but deliberate deception.
“There is a place in the church for baptism, but again any physical act by you or others will not save you.”
Yeah? Then making that “Altar Call” and/or “Calling on the Name of the LORD” (also physical acts) won’t save you either?
All. Righty. Then.
Kennedy said he is not trying to change that approach but to open a new chapter.
“I want to move closer to the ecumenical fellowship of the Christian church and by accepting infant baptism, and then practicing it, we are not set off from Presbyterians and Methodists and Catholics,” Kennedy said. (my emphases bold & underline)
This aim here of this guy is to eradicate a well-founded and long-standing mark of separation of Biblical Christians from the error-riddled denominationalism of those who think they are validated believers. The chasm arises from living out the command of God to "Come out, be separate, and touch not the unclean thing."
"Be ye not unequally yoked together with unbelievers: for what
fellowship hath righteousness with unrighteousness? and what
communion hath light with darkness?
And what concord hath Christ with Belial? or what part hath he that
believeth with an infidel?
And what agreement hath the temple of God with idols?
for ye are the temple of the living God; as God hath said,
I will dwell in them, and walk in them; and I will be their God, and they
shall be my people.
Wherefore come out from among them, and be ye separate, saith
the Lord, and touch not the unclean thing; and I will receive you,
And will be a Father unto you, and ye shall be my sons and daughters,
saith the Lord Almighty.
Having therefore these promises, dearly beloved, let us cleanse
ourselves from all filthiness of the flesh and spirit, perfecting
holiness in the fear of God" (2 Cor. 6:14 - 7:1 AV).
Paedobaptism compounded with baptismal regeneration and ecumenism is such a massive rejection of the counsel of The God and His Christ as not to pass without sharp rebuke by any believer who lives and walks in the Spirit.
This Beth Newman cited in the article claiming to be Baptist (proper noun) and theologian is an oxymoron. She can be neither, by Biblical definition.
So, have at it, folks.
“And the congregation burst into applause,” Kennedy told Baptist News Global. “And they don’t applaud much.”
Well, that settles it. Lol, the litmus test of truth for our times! Infant baptism aside, this barometer of truth is unstable. One minute the crowd loves Jesus, the next Barrabas.
Fickle bunch.
“Our local large Baptist Church accepts infant baptisms and sprinkling now.”
In one of J. Vernon McGee’s Q&A programs, I learned something interesting about baptism:
“The word ‘baptism’ is never translated in the New Testament; instead, it is transliterated. This is unfortunate because the problems associated with this word would be resolved if it were actually translated. The Greek word ‘baptism’ means ‘identification. It really has nothing to do with water, as often it is speaking of something where water is not involved.
It sometimes has to do with something wet and sometimes with things which are dry. Let me illustrate: In 1 Corinthians 10 the Bible says Israel was baptized unto Moses while passing through the sea. They were now identified with Moses as God’s people and no longer in bondage. The only people who got wet were the Egyptians who were in pursuit and drowned. This provides a wonderful picture of the Christians today who are identified with Christ and no longer are in bondage to the world.
John the Baptist said the Lord would baptize them with the Holy Spirit and fire. Believers would be identified with Him as the Church, His body, by the Holy Spirit (1 Corinthians 12:13), but unbelievers would be identified with judgment (fire).
When we are baptized in water, we show outwardly that we have had a wonderful work performed in our heart by believing in Jesus and are identified with all other believers in Christ.
Although baptism is commanded to be administered to all those who have believed in Christ, it cannot save or contribute to our salvation, else we could say that works were necessary to be saved. The Scripture makes it very clear that no works on our part are necessary for salvation (Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5).”
Anyhow, FWIW, it made this ol’ Baptist stop and think and maybe come down some from the high horse relative to immersion, sprinkling, pouring. Still... babies shouldn’t be baptized because they haven’t believed in Christ. This Kennedy family in the article probably should get saved, learn some discernment, and then do the right thing for the kid.
Our church frequently will hold a Dedication when a baby is born, but it’s more for the parents than the kid.
Probably nothing wrong with it but is just a feel good thing for the parents.
A valid Baptism removes the original sin we are all born with.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.