Water Baptism

[Sirus]

For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ. (Galatians 3:27 NKJV)

The truth is the church of God has recognized the baptism referred to in Galatians 3:27 as baptism in water for over 2000 years simply because the baptism noted there is baptism n water.

Gal 3:27
As many of you as have been baptized into Christ - All of you who have believed in Christ as the promised Messiah, and received baptism as a public proof that ye had received Christ as your Lord and Savior, have put on Christ - have received his Spirit, and entered into his interests, and copied his manners. ~ Adam Clarke's Commentary on the Bible

Were baptized into Christ
Not in relation to Christ (Meyer), but into spiritual union and communion with him….Paul here conceives baptism, not as a mere symbolical transaction, but as an act in which believers are put into mystical union with the crucified and risen Lord. Comp.Rom_6:3-11. ~ VINCENT'S WORD STUDIES

Are you going to explain the baptism of John as you said you would or not?

[Sirus]

Yes, it does, how? Through baptism.

baptism is unto something else, not itself. John's baptism was unto to repentance (water unto repentance) saying they should believe on him (for the remission of sins) that should come after. Jesus' baptism is unto to belief in the one that came after John -fulfilling- belief in the one after, in whom is the remission of sins.

[BroRog]

Now you are mixing obedience to Christ with rituals of the Law. Where does Paul speak of "Rituals" as saving? When he speaks of circumcision, he is speaking of the Law of Moses, which we know the Jews thought was a means of justification. That is the argument that Paul makes.

Yes, and Christians are now saying the same thing about Baptism. And I believe Paul would argue against using Baptism as a means to justification just as he argued against circumcision being used as a means to justification. There really is no difference.

No, in saying that is seems to indicate to me that you have missed the point of what Peter and Paul are saying. Paul is not arguing that an act of obedience has no bearing on salvation. He is arguing that the Mosaic Law is not a means of justification. Thinking one could be justified by keeping the Mosaic Law was the thinking of the Jews, Paul argues that this is not so. Using your logic then, one could also conclude that repentance isn't necessary either, are we going to go there?

You don't understand my logic because, it would seem, you don't see the difference between internal states such as: faith, repentance, regret, confession, love of God, fear of God, a view to the eternal, agreement with God's worldview, introspection, a mind set on things above, a mind set on the spirit, a spirit that cries "abba Father", and the like as compared to external expressions of faith like Baptism, circumcision, communion, keeping the Sabbath, and the like. We aren't saved by performing the external expressions of faith. We are saved because we have the right kind of heart.

Agreed, however, one must still get into the tub.

Not really. Again, getting into the tub is a cultural practice in which the initiate is making a commitment to become the disciple of Jesus Christ. If his getting into the tub doesn't represent an honest, genuine commitment to become a disciple of Jesus, his baptism is meaningless. If he makes a commitment to be a disciple, but for some reason he isn't able to get into a baptismal pool, he already has what the baptism represents.

You might want to check with the apostles on this one. It seems now you are contradicting two apostles.

Galatians 3:26-27 ( KJV )
For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

It seems that Paul thinks one is entered into Christ through an external expression of faith.

On the contrary, the expression "baptized into Christ" is a metonym for "became a disciple of Christ." Those who have become a disciple of Christ, whether they have gotten into a baptismal pool or not, are baptized into Christ.

According to the apostle a man does not have the Spirit of God in him until after he is baptized.

Who? Where?

Why would this be good enough for this man and yet not good enough for Abraham? You see God knew Abraham's heart also, He knew that Abraham would offer up Isaac if He asked him to. Why wasn't that enough? Why did God make Abraham go through with offering up Isaac?

I'll answer that if you answer this. In Exodus 32:9, God tells Moses,

The Lord said to Moses, "I have seen this people, and behold, they are an obstinate people. Now then let Me alone, that My anger may burn against them and that I may destroy them; and I will make of you a great nation." Then Moses entreated the Lord his God, and said, "O Lord, why does Your anger burn against Your people whom You have brought out from the land of Egypt with great power and with a mighty hand? Why should the Egyptians speak, saying,`With evil intent He brought them out to kill them in the mountains and to destroy them from the face of the earth'? Turn from Your burning anger and change Your mind about doing harm to Your people. Remember Abraham, Isaac, and Israel, Your servants to whom You swore by Yourself, and said to them, `I will multiply your descendants as the stars of the heavens, and all this land of which I have spoken I will give to your descendants, and they shall inherit it forever.' " So the Lord changed His mind about the harm which He said He would do to His people.

Notice how Moses pleads for his people and what is the basis for his plea? He appeals to God's chesed, his covenant faithfulness to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. Moses argues that God made a promise to the fathers, and since God is not one to renege on a promise, he should not wipe out these people. So, here is the question. Why didn't Abraham make the same argument? Why didn't Abraham plead for his son, saying that God made a promise and that if God were to kill his son, he would renege on a promise? After all, Isaac was the promised son, and Abraham could have appealed to God's chesed, his covenant faithfulness, just as Moses did.

So, if Abraham didn't receive the oath by simple believing in his heart, why would your hypothetical Christian receive the Spirit without obedience?

You say Baptism is a matter of obedience. You haven't proved that it is. The actual command is for us to become disciples of Jesus Christ. Baptism was a cultural practice associated with becoming a disciple, which may or may not be a cultural practice today. If a man happens to live in a time and place where baptism is not a cultural rite of passage ceremony marking entrance into the disciplehood of Jesus Christ, but the man became a disciple anyway, then he has what the baptism represents, which is all he needs.

[percho]

I don't know why you think this.

He was born with it and did not have to be 'given it' or be renewed. His baptism of the Spirit w/o measure was an anointing for His ministry. After He lived a sinless life and loved righteousness and hated iniquity, He was tempted by Satan, came out of the wilderness, was anointed to preach the gospel.

John 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you;

Why not? Because it was not his to give and he had not yet been given it by the father because he had not yet gone through his baptism of which his water baptism was a symbol.

What did his coming up out of the water symbolize?
What did the dove descending upon him symbolize?
Why at this time did the voice say, this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased?

[Sirus]

Is it your contention that God would not forgive the sins of those baptized by John the Baptist?

of course!

Remember he was a prophet filed with the Holy Spirit and sent by God for that purpose.

Huh? What do you base this on? It says he was sent to baptize unto repentance saying they should believe on Christ for remission of sins. It does not say he was sent to baptize for the remission of sins.

Joh 1:29 The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.
Joh 1:30 This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me.
Joh 1:31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.

It's amazing that no one can answer concerning John and for the remission of sins, but you sure have a lot to say about Acts 2:38.

[BroRog]

Paul says it all - what part do you keep misunderstanding?

Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were 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. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. (Romans 6:3-5 ESV)

The picture in baptism points two ways, backwards to Christ’s death and burial and to our death to sin (Rom. 6:1), forwards to Christ’s resurrection from the dead and to our new life pledged by the coming out of the watery grave to walk on the other side of the baptismal grave ~ F. B. Meyer.

I disagree with both of you. (what's new?) In Romans 3:5, Paul isn't explaining what it means to be baptized "into Christ." He assumes that the reader already knows what it means. Instead, he is explaining the implications of what it means, which is that anyone who has been baptized into Christ, has agreed with the purpose and meaning of Christ's death. Contrary to what you and Mr. Meyer say, He isn't defining what it means to be baptized "into Christ". He is attempting to answer the question for why his gospel of salvation by grace does not lead to an increase in sin. He argues from the implications and significance of being baptized into Christ, assuming that his readers already know what it means to be baptized into Christ. Baptism into Christ isn't a reenactment of Christ's death or our death.

The phrase "baptized into" indicates becoming a disciple. To be "baptized into" means that someone has decided to become a student of a teacher. For instance, those who were "baptized into" John, decided to become John's student, learn from John, strive to understand John's teaching, and to live according to John's teaching. This is why Paul asked the disciples at Ephesus, "Into what then were you baptized?" (emphasis added) The answer isn't "water", though John used water to baptize his students. Rather, the answer to the question, "Into what then were you baptized?", is the teaching of John. To be baptized into John is a figurative way to say that they were immersed in John's teaching. If we understand the idiom, we understand that to be baptized with the baptism of repentance, is a figurative way to say that we were taught that we need to repent. And as Paul says, John not only taught his students to repent, he taught them "to believe in him who was coming after him, that is, in Jesus." So then, to be baptized "into John" is to be immersed in John's teaching.

Accordingly, to be baptized in the name of Jesus is to be immersed in Jesus' teaching after having made a commitment to become his disciple. This is the Biblical view of baptism. If a person gets baptized, and they don't know what this means in terms of becoming a disciple of Jesus, commiting themselves to living according to his teaching, then their baptism isn't the Biblical baptism.

[BroRog]

You miss again Rog - Jesus commanded belief and baptism in the Great Commission - it is hard to miss...

Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit...He who believes and is baptized will be saved... ~ Jesus Christ

The active imperative verb in the sentence is "matheteusate:make followers";the term "baptizing" is the participle "baptizontes:baptizing" The command is to make disciples, and specifically, to make them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. The emphasis in this passage should swing to the fact that the Apostles are going to make disciples for Jesus and not for themselves. The fact that teachers baptized students was already an established practice as we saw in the case of John the Baptist who baptized people into his teaching. As I point out above, to be "baptized into" someone is to be immersed in their teaching and a commitment to learn from that person. Jesus expects that the Apostles will want to baptize students of their own, immersing them in their own teaching, but Jesus wants them to understand that when they make disciples, the disciples are Jesus' disciples.

[BroRog]

You're wrong again Rog - baptism is not about "removing dirt from the body" - baptism now saves us by appealing to God for a clear conscience as it points us to the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

...eight persons, were saved by water. Baptism, which is symbolized by that water, now saves you also, not by removing dirt from the body, but by asking God for a clear conscience based on the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
(1Pe 3:20-21 ISV)

1 Per 3:21. The sense is, that baptism, including all that is properly meant by baptism as a religious rite - that is, baptism administered in connection with true repentance, and true faith in the Lord Jesus, and when it is properly a symbol of the putting away of sin, and of the renewing influences of the Holy Spirit, and an act of unreserved dedication to God - now saves us. ~ Albert Barnes

Albert Barnes misses the point. Peter strongly places the emphasis on the internal appeal to God and away from the water, when he says, "not the removal of dirt from the flesh", which is surely what a baptism in water does. To be immersed in water during the Baptism ceremony is a cleansing of the body, which is supposed to represent an internal purification and a commitment to a new life. The external cleansing represents the internal cleansing, which is the moment when an appeal to God for a good conscience takes place. Peter is saying that our baptism isn't the external cleansing, but the internal appeal to God. Peter isn't saying, as you seem to think, that the external cleansing IS the appeal; rather, he is saying that the baptism IS NOT the external cleansing but rather the internal reverent petition to God.

[Sirus]

John 16:7 Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you;

Why not? Because it was not his to give and he had not yet been given it by the father because he had not yet gone through his baptism of which his water baptism was a symbol.

What did his coming up out of the water symbolize?
What did the dove descending upon him symbolize?
Why at this time did the voice say, this is my beloved son in whom I am well pleased?

OK, you just keep asking questions never getting to your point. Or, not getting your point across. My answers to your questions have not been your answers, so why continue? Why not just say what you believe and answer the questions yourself? Then I can give my opinion in a much more efficient manner using less time and is fewer posts.

[losthorizon]

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.

I've always found this concept intriguing. It says eight souls were saved by water. First there's the deluge. What did it do? It washed away the sins of the world, quite literally, as in the wicked perished. This same water the wicked perished in, these 8 souls were saved in. What happened when the waters dried up? Sin had been washed away, 8 souls were saved, and life was started anew, and once again, quite literally in this case. To me, that seems to be the same concept as water baptism. One is emmerced under water, which represents washing away sins, and in this same water they are also saved, and when they arise out of it, they are a new creature, because their old self washed away when they went under, and their new self emerged when they came up. Perhaps it's just me, but it appears those 8 souls were indeed saved by water, the same waters that washed away the sins of the world at the time. And it appears they started over at that time, since they were told to replinish the earth. It's almost as if they had been born again and given a new chance in life.

And of course, I may be way off here, but this is what enters my mind for some reason when I think of the flood, and water baptism.

…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 (1 Pet 3:21, NASB).

Very good post, divaD your thinking is on the right track. Baptism is the antitype that now saves us. Alford puts it this way, "Water saved them, bearing up the ark; it saves us, becoming to us baptism." Some folks on this thread have a problem with the truth taught by Peter in this passage but the truth will remain there until He comes again and that truth clearly tells us that in some sense “baptism now save you”.

Or course, it is not a hard saying at all. Jesus said the very same thing in Mark 16:16 – “he who believes and is baptized shall be saved". Peter, in his forceful sermon on Pentecost confirmed the words of the Lord when he said believers must repent and be baptized in order to receive the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38). Baptism is not from man - baptism is from the mind of God - instituted and commanded by the Lord. There is but one way to be *in Christ* and that is through obedience to the gospel of Christ including the command to be *baptized into Christ Jesus*
(Galatians 3:27). Sadly, some folks just cannot overcome a secular bias that closes their eyes to the light of the knowledge of the glory of God.

What say ye Lord - Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved... Amen Lord!

"For we do not preach ourselves, but Christ Jesus the Lord, and ourselves your bondservants for Jesus’ sake. For it is the God who commanded light to shine out of darkness, who has shone in our hearts to give the light of the knowledge of the glory of God...." 2 Corinthians 4:3-6

[losthorizon]

Albert Barnes misses the point. Peter strongly places the emphasis on the internal appeal to God and away from the water, when he says, "not the removal of dirt from the flesh", which is surely what a baptism in water does. To be immersed in water during the Baptism ceremony is a cleansing of the body, which is supposed to represent an internal purification and a commitment to a new life. The external cleansing represents the internal cleansing, which is the moment when an appeal to God for a good conscience takes place. Peter is saying that our baptism isn't the external cleansing, but the internal appeal to God. Peter isn't saying, as you seem to think, that the external cleansing IS the appeal; rather, he is saying that the baptism IS NOT the external cleansing but rather the internal reverent petition to God.

Albert Barnes is on the mark - baptism, when administered in connection with true repentance and true faith in the Lord Jesus symbolizes the putting away of sin and the renewing of the Holy Spirit - as such baptism now saves us. Baptism in water is "the washing of regeneration and renewal of the Holy Spirit" - the old man of sin goes into the watery grave of baptism and is buried - he comes up out of the water a new creature in Christ Jesus - his sins washed away by the blood of Christ - born again of water and the Spirit. Question for you Rog - why do you remain ignorant to the fact that we were *baptized into his death*?

"Are ye ignorant that we were baptized into his death? To those who are not ignorant the sign of baptism speaks of death. To be baptised means to be immersed, to be sunk in a foreign element, to be covered by a tide of purification. The man who emerges from the water is not the same man who entered it. One man dies and another is born.." ~ Karl Barth, "Commentary on Romans"

Without this 'new birth' one cannot enter into God's kingdom on earth...

Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. (John 3:5 ESV)

[thedee]

Without this 'new birth' one cannot enter into God's kingdom on earth...[INDENT]Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God. (John 3:5 ESV)

John 3:5 is speaking of the Word of God. Water here is the WORD. Peter makes this clear:
1 Peter 1:23
"having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever,"

LH, can one be born again without the word of God? I see a lot of confusion on this thread with 'Water'. When "water" is used it does not always mean physical water.

Also, I don't see how you can seperate repentance and faith. When one turns to God they are turning away from their old ways. This is repentance.

[losthorizon]

John 3:5 is speaking of the Word of God. Water here is the WORD. Peter makes this clear:
1 Peter 1:23
"having been born again, not of corruptible seed but incorruptible, through the word of God which lives and abides forever,"

We have gone of this together many times my friend and you are still in error. Please sit down for this news – the “water” of the new birth is just that – water of the H20 verity – the kind that gets you wet as you are immersed in water – baptized into Christ. The Christian church has understood this biblical fact for over 2000 years. The only ones who deny literal water in this passage are those who remain blinded to the God-ordained purpose of baptism in water.

Joh 3:5
of water and of the Spirit — A twofold explanation of the “new birth,” so startling to Nicodemus. To a Jewish ecclesiastic, so familiar with the symbolical application of water, in every variety of way and form of expression, this language was fitted to show that the thing intended was no other than a thorough spiritual purification by the operation of the Holy Ghost. Indeed, element of water and operation of the Spirit are brought together in a glorious evangelical prediction of Ezekiel (Eze_36:25-27), which Nicodemus might have been reminded of had such spiritualities not been almost lost in the reigning formalism. Already had the symbol of water been embodied in an initiatory ordinance, in the baptism of the Jewish expectants of Messiah by the Baptist, not to speak of the baptism of Gentile proselytes before that; and in the Christian Church it was soon to become the great visible door of entrance into “the kingdom of God,” the reality being the sole work of the Holy Ghost (Tit_3:5). ~ A Commentary on the Old and New Testaments by Robert Jamieson, A. R. Fausset and David Brown

LH, can one be born again without the word of God? I see a lot of confusion on this thread with 'Water'. When "water" is used it does not always mean physical water.

One cannot believe without faith and faith comes by hearing the word of God - the one who believes and is baptized is the one who will be saved - the one who refuses to believe is damned. Water is water and baptism in water is required by God for one to be born again - born of water and the Spirit.

Also, I don't see how you can seperate repentance and faith. When one turns to God they are turning away from their old ways. This is repentance.

Faith is not repentance and repentance is not faith and neither faith or repentance is baptism - all three acts of obedience are required by God for the remission of sins per Acts 2:38. I hope that helps.

[thedee]

We have gone of this together many times my friend and you are still in error. Please sit down for this news – the “water” of the new birth is just that – water of the H20 verity – the kind that gets you wet as you are immersed in water – baptized into Christ. The Christian church has understood this biblical fact for over 2000 years. The only ones who deny literal water in this passage are those who remain blinded to the God-ordained purpose of baptism in water.

I didn't see 1Peter1:23 mention water did you? We are born again by the Word of God.

Also, when are you going to reply to post #271?

[losthorizon]

I didn't see 1Peter1:23 mention water did you?

...eight souls were saved by water…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 (1 Pet 3:21, NASB)

Moot point - the fact that we are born again via God's word in no way contradicts or negates the fact that "eight souls were saved by water" in the Food and the "water of baptism now saves you". Did you think there is a contradiction? You do recognize water of the H20 type mentioned in 1Pet 3:21 - right? Does water baptism "now save you" as it points to the resurrection of Christ or was Peter mistaken? The truth remains true - the “water” of the new birth is just that – water of the H20 verity and one must be born of water and the Spirit to be saved. It's all in the Book.

Also, when are you going to reply to post #271?

Sure - the baptism commanded by John was immersion in water - a “baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins” as it prepared the believer for the coming kingdom of Christ that was inaugurated on first Pentecost after the resurrection of Jesus Christ. John's baptism ended and the ordinance of Christian baptism "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" began on the "Day of Pentecost" (Acts 2:38). The ordinance of baptism is the "one baptism" that is applicable to all Christians.

John appeared, baptizing in the wilderness and proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.
(Mark 1:4 ESV)