DID PAUL WATER BAPTIZE ??

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

RB: #21
There is NO BAPTISM other than water baptism in the church epistles where we are commanded teach people to go and do

There is not a place in Scripture where "'_we_ (people like you and I) are commanded (to) teach people to go and do (baptism)'" -- what, in water, which Christ commanded not even his own apostles.

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

Jaime: #17
GE, how did Paul respond to The admonition of Ananias in Acts 22 and WHY, where Ananias said to him, "why do you tarry, arise and be baptized washing away your sins calling upon the Lord." Was Paul's response necessary? Or was Ananias' words misdirected? Should his words have been an appeal TO the Holy Spirit on behalf of Paul? Or does other scripture give us a clue as to the gift of the Holy Spirit? This gift differientiating Christ's baptism from John's baptism.

You ask me, how Paul responded? Don't look at Paul's response; look at what Ananias said to him, did he say: 'Why do you tarry, arise and be baptized washing away your sins being immersed / washed in / with water"? Or did he say: "Why do you tarry, arise and be baptized washing away your sins calling upon the Lord!"?

Even Ananias' words, "ARISE and be baptised" tells you the power to wash away sin resides not in going down into water and be dipped or sprinkled, but to be re-created "upright" the way God first created man to be, "but man had many skewed side-ways."

[Jaime]

In 1Peter 3:21, baptism IS the calling upon the Lord FOR a clean consciense NASB. Other versions translate it FROM a clear conscience. Going back to Acts 22, i would say Paul was baptized or calling upon the Lord FOR a clear comscience or to have his sins washed away.

Again baptism IS the calling upon the Lord. It's not like washing dirt off the body, but something WAY more substantial.

[soterion]

The medium one is immersed in during baptism is water. But the purpose behind it is specified by Peter as calling on the name of the Lord for a clean conscience so as to be saved. Peter tells us that the saving is not due to the washing away of the dirt from the body by the water, but rather it is the calling upon the Lord for a clean conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

In other words, it is not anything that the physical water does that has any salvific value, but rather it is the exercise of faith toward the risen Christ that avails toward our being saved. Inasmuch as He commanded it and promised that it serves the purpose of salvation (Mark 16:15-16), then obedience to Jesus' will, through faith toward Him, benefits us His saving grace.

- Edited to correct grammar

[RB]

Be glad to explain all that I have written and a reminder that you did not write any thing about 1 Cor 15:29 , about  BAPTISM FOR  THE  DEAD   

I have not written much lately due to being sick, but trust me, I would never refrain from not addressing another person's scripture(s) that he thinks supports his position. Now if I explain 1st Corinthians 15:29 will you then answer my position on that verse with what YOU think it means? I'm not going to spend time allowing this to be a one way street for you only.

1st Corinthians 15:29~Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? why are they then baptized for the dead?

Baptism for the dead? What? Are you kidding me? What does this verse mean?

Have you ever been confronted by a Mormon about this verse? They believe in baptism for dead relatives, who didn't have a chance to meet Joe Smith, their founder. So they keep the world's best genealogical database for identifying dead relatives who need to be saved by a Mormon baptism on their behalf. These baptisms by proxy take place in their special underground baptisteries. You can save your whole family tree this way. Surely you understood all this from reading the verse, didn't you?

If you find this hard to believe, read their official novel Doctrines and Covenants. Joe didn't mention baptism for the dead in his first novel, the Book of Mormon; but you can find it in sections 124 and 128 of the sequel, D&C.

Have you ever read a Presbyterian commentary on this verse? Because they chose infant sprinkling over Bible baptism 400 years ago, when they were birthed by the Great Mother Church, they have no clue about the intent of these words. Some of their commentators will list ten or so possibilities and then conclude by saying it is impossible to know. And their list of possibilities will never include the true explanation, for they have rejected Bible baptism.

If you find this hard to believe, here are twelve of their educated ideas for the meaning of the verse. As hard as it is to believe, these twelve examples were produced by seminary graduates.

1. It was a purification ritual for Jewish Christians after touching a dead body.
2. It was a purification ritual of a dead body before the body was buried.
3. It was a baptism in the name and stead of those who died before they were baptized.
4. It was a baptism of those who were at the pint of death in preparation for dying.
5. It was a baptism in the same location where the Christians buried their dead.
6. It was a baptism for washing away the dead works and sins of the subjects.
7. It was a baptism of those who replaced saints that had died in the Corinthian church.
8. It was a baptism based upon a profession of faith in the resurrection of the dead.
9. It was a baptism of suffering and death by those teaching the resurrection.
10. It was a baptism in the name of a Savior Who had died and risen again.
11. It was a baptism of those who converted to Christianity upon seeing a martyr's death.
12. It was a baptism of those frightened into conversion by the death of Christ-rejecters.

For Bible believers without seminary degrees, fear of a synod, or allegiance to Mormon apostles to cloud their judgments, the interpretation for this verse is simple, powerful, and glorious.

All twelve of the explanations given above can be eliminated immediately, for they are not taught anywhere else in the Word of God. And further, Paul would not have appealed to a heretical concept of baptism to establish the resurrection without correcting the error.

Second, we submit to the Holy Ghost that the context of I Corinthians 15 is exclusively the bodily resurrection of the dead~both Jesus Christ and His saints. The 29th verse is in the middle of numerous arguments ~doctrinal and practical ~made by Paul to prove the resurrection. So the verse must be teaching another argument in favor of the resurrection of the dead.

Third, we submit to the Holy Ghost's direction in Ist Corinthians 2:13 to compare spiritual things with spiritual to understand God's wisdom. By reading Romans 6:3-5; Colossians 2:12; and Ist Peter 3:21, we know that true baptism is by immersion to show a LIKENESS or FIGURE of burial and resurrection. Peter's verse could not be plainer in this regard.

Fourth, we read the verse distinctly and give its sense according to the Divine method used by Ezra and the Levites (Nehemiah 8:7-8). When we do this, we observe that the middle clause requires a sense of resurrection in both the preceding and following clauses. Therefore, we see Paul's use of an ellipsis in the first and third clauses. In other words, his purpose in this verse is defending the resurrection, by virtue of the middle clause, so that the surrounding clauses must include resurrection also.

An ellipsis is an intentional omission of words that are clearly understood to enhance the force of the sentence. Paul left out the words THE RESURRECTION OF in both the first and third clauses. By so doing, he boldly showed baptism without any hope of resurrection to be a mere memorial of death! What a horrible destruction of baptism's symbolism, if there is no resurrection!

The Bible has many examples of elliptical constructions. Proverbs is full of them. Consider among many Proverbs 22:1, where the words TO BE CHOSEN are elliptically removed from the second clause. Consider also Proverbs 20:16, where the words THAT IS SURETY are missing from the second clause. Consider also Proverbs 19:1, where the words THE RICH are missing from the second clause. These examples could be multiplied almost indefinitely.

In Ist Corinthians 15:29-32, Paul uses two practical arguments to convince the Corinthians to hold to the doctrine of the resurrection. The second argument, in 15:30-32, is the utter folly of Paul's cheerful sufferings, if there is no reward of a future resurrection. The first argument, in 15:29, is the utter folly of baptism, if it is only a picture of death without the hope of the resurrection.

Since true baptism is by immersion in water to show both burial and resurrection, then the Corinthians had better defend the doctrine of the resurrection or repudiate their baptisms. Thus, 15:29 is a powerful practical argument for the resurrection of the body and a further proof text for baptism by immersion.

Let God be true, but every man a liar. God inspired and preserved this verse in order to expose those who invented baptism for dead relatives (Mormons) and those who superstitiously sprinkle infants (Catholics and Presbyterians: etc.). Both of them err in the interpretation of this text, for they have chosen their inventions over God's Holy Word.

If you have been baptized by immersion according to the apostolic pattern, then you were baptized in a figure of our Lord's resurrection for your justification, a figure of your spiritual resurrection to walk in newness of life, and a figure of your future bodily resurrection.

So, what is your  understanding of 1st Corinthians 15:29?

[notreligus]

  Be glad to explain all that I have written and a reminder that you did not write any thing about 1 Cor 15:29 , about  BAPTISM FOR  THE  DEAD   and ignorned 1 Cor 10:1 and 2  Where  Israel was  BAPTIZED UNTO  Moses in the  CLOUD  and in the  SEA ??

In Acts 2:36  the  CONTEXT  is  Israel  !!

And in verse 37 Israel was  PIERCED   through the  heart , and said to  Peter and the remaining  disciples   WHAT  WILL WE  DO ??

He is dead and than Peter is verse 38  and  Peter  SAID / PHEMI  ,  is in the  IMPERFECT TENSE   and means that Peter began here to preach BAPTISM  of  repentance to Israel  and   probably stopped by Acts 15  as    NOTHING   is spoken by Peter at all and drops from the seen !!

All can see that Peter used a different formula , be   baptized in the  name of  Jesus Christ ,   THAN  to  baptize in the name of the  FATHER , THE  SON  and  Holy Spirit !!

Then , this  BAPTISM  forgave them for the  CRUCIFIXION  of  the  Lord and  Christ / messiah !!

   This is the  NEAR  VIEW  as we know from  2 Cor 3:13-15 that Israel is  soon to be set aside , and  Isa 6  and  Luke 13:6-9  and many other passages say the same thing !!

Because  Israel is to be set aside , Christ raised  a  NEW  APOSTLE  with a different message Rom 16:25 and  26  1 Cor 9:17   and  Col 1:25 and 26  , a message HIDDEN  in Christ !!

When the  Rapture is done , then Rom 11:26   BAPTISM  will   begins and  in  Mark 16:16-18   BAPTISM will begin again , so you see I do believe in  BAPTISM  ,  and this  is the  FAR VIEW  !!

But the last verb in  Acts 2:38 is YE  SHALL  RECEIVE /LAMBANO   is in the  Greek  FUTURE  TENSE and that is why the it is the  FAR  VIEW in  Mark 16 !!

dan p

I was raised in the Christian Church and Churches of Christ.   Baptism is doctrine NUMBER ONE in those groups!   You won't know why you're being baptized in those groups except that they believe that Acts 2:38 refers to some new practice for the Church, water baptism and by full immersion.   Peter said it - no matter to whom or why - and it is demanded for salvation.

Those who emphasize water baptism for salvation often know absolutely nothing about baptism as practiced by those who are/were followers of Judaism.   Jews are baptized by water and they may have had water poured over them or they would practice full immersion where a mikveh was available.   The Temple in Jerusalem had a mikveh with water piped into it such that water flowed in and out.   That was symbolic of being cleansed of sin and sins being washed away.   That baptism only brought temporary relief.   It was not what God demanded for permanent reconciliation.  Jewish baptisms were done because these people were under the authority of Moses and the Mosaic Law.

John's baptism was transitional.   John's baptism was not new in form but new in meaning.   The Messiah was to be revealed and the Messiah was going to begin a new program.    The Law was becoming obsolete. 

Acts 2:38 was spoken by Peter to Jews!   Christ had already made the New Covenant, a blood covenant, a covenant that required these Jews to come under the authority of Jesus.   That was their repentance, to turn away from Moses and to turn to the Messiah, the Lord Jesus Christ, and His New Covenant, and to come under the authority of Christ.   

Paul, who did not begin his missionary teaching and preaching journeys until seventeen years after Christ called him, found as he did travel to visit Jewish believers and Gentiles, both believers and unbelievers, that the Jews who had ministered in the name of Christ were demanding that Gentile converts be both baptized and circumcised.   As far as Paul was concerned, they were still practicing the Mosaic Law and although Paul would revert to Jewish practices to be able to minister to Jews, he was against forcing Gentiles to practice the same rituals required for Jews.   

I look only to Romans Chapter Six for instruction as to the New Covenant meaning of baptism with water.   It is symbolical.  Paul said it is a likeness of Christ's death, burial and resurrection.   Those who demand water baptism for salvation under the New Covenant don't understand the New Covenant as Paul as presented it.   Paul's teachings are especially for New Covenant believers, whether they be former Jews or Gentiles.   They are the One New Man in the Body of Christ.   Their baptism is symbolic of how they have identified with Jesus Christ (not Moses or the Law).   

[4WD]

I look only to Romans Chapter Six for instruction as to the New Covenant meaning of baptism with water.   It is symbolical.  Paul said it is a likeness of Christ's death, burial and resurrection.   Those who demand water baptism for salvation under the New Covenant don't understand the New Covenant as Paul as presented it.   Paul's teachings are especially for New Covenant believers, whether they be former Jews or Gentiles.   They are the One New Man in the Body of Christ.   Their baptism is symbolic of how they have identified with Jesus Christ (not Moses or the Law).

The actual physical baptism is, among other things, symbolic of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.  But the baptism is real; it is physical; it is a real action performed on the repentant believer.  It is an actual immersion in water. And it is the time in the repentant believer's life when God, as promised, has forgiven his sins, and has given him the gift of the Holy Spirit; it is the time when the repentant believer is born again; it is when we who were dead in our trespasses, were made alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved-- (Eph 2:5)  Dead but made alive again -- that is the spiritual resurrection; that is regeneration.

[dan p]

  And just where isnthe  NEW  COVENANT /DIATHEKE  mentioned in Rom 6  , and then why does Paul why we are  BAPTIZED  FOR  THE  DEAD , so will your theology explain 1 Cor 15:29 ??

dan p

[RB]

And just where isnthe  NEW  COVENANT /DIATHEKE  mentioned in Rom 6  , and then why does Paul why we are  BAPTIZED  FOR  THE  DEAD , so will your theology explain 1 Cor 15:29 ??

dan p

Dan, who are talking to? Your post makes no sense, as most of your posts do not.

I addressed 1st Corinthians 15:29 Reply #39 on: Yesterday at 15:15:07~I'm now waiting on you to prove my post wrong. Then we can move on to another point.

Sir, is English your first and only language?

[notreligus]

The actual physical baptism is, among other things, symbolic of the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ.  But the baptism is real; it is physical; it is a real action performed on the repentant believer.  It is an actual immersion in water. And it is the time in the repentant believer's life when God, as promised, has forgiven his sins, and has given him the gift of the Holy Spirit; it is the time when the repentant believer is born again; it is when we who were dead in our trespasses, were made alive together with Christ--by grace you have been saved-- (Eph 2:5)  Dead but made alive again -- that is the spiritual resurrection; that is regeneration.

You had to mark your territory in my post.

I never said that baptism was not real.  Communion is real with the juice and the bread - both real.  But neither are the actual blood or body of Christ.   They are symbolic. 

Regeneration is the infilling of the believer by the Holy Spirit.   There is no baptismal regeneration as taught by Alexander Campbell.   He made that up.   

[dan p]

  Hi and this is what I believe 1  Cor 15:29  is saying  !!

I reread what I wrote and my thought were ahead of my fingers and I do speak  another language , but I was in a hurry  and I have a  problem with neuromuscular  condition !!

I read your 12 position and do disagree !!

#1  The chapter in 1  Cor 15:29 ,  context is speaking about   RESURRECTION   and not about  WATER  BAPTISM  for the dead as what the  Mormons  believe !!

I believe that the answer for  BAPTISM  for the  DEAD  is found in Rom 6;4   and  reads ,  , Therefore we are   BURIED  with Him by   BAPTISM INTO  DEATH   , taken from the  KJV and I believe that verse  reads   a better translation  is  Therefore we were  buried together  with Him through  THE   BAPTISMA / BAPTIZER  which is the nHOLY  SPIRIT   and when checking the Greek text the word is   NOT  the Greek  BAPTISM  but is the  Greek  word  BAPTISMA !!

So the  BAPTISMA /  BAPTIZER   places all  believers into this  DEATH  BAPTISM   which is not  water  BUT  a  HOLY SPIRIT  BAPTISMA and as Jesus was raised from the  DEAD  we  also will be raised when Christ comes back for the  BODY  OF  CHRIST  , 1 Cor 15:51-58 and 1  Thess 4:13-18 !!

dan p

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

God be with you, Dan P.

[RB]

I reread what I wrote and my thought was ahead of my fingers and I do speak another language, but I was in a hurry and I have a  problem with neuromuscular condition!!

That answers a few things for me~then overall you do well in answering. May God is who gracious above all be so to you in your physical problems, and he will if our hearts are truly set upon pleasing him.

I read your 12 positions and do disagree !!

Dan, you know that they were not my positions but positions of many others, only mentioned so as to show how many different thoughts are about 1st Cor. 15:29.

#1  The chapter in 1  Cor 15:29 ,  context is speaking about   RESURRECTION 

WHich point I clearly said that I believe in.

When we do this, we observe that the middle clause requires a sense of resurrection in both the preceding and following clauses. Therefore, we see Paul's use of an ellipsis in the first and third clauses. In other words, his purpose in this verse is defending the resurrection, by virtue of the middle clause, so that the surrounding clauses must include resurrection also................In Ist Corinthians 15:29-32, Paul uses two practical arguments to convince the Corinthians to hold to the doctrine of the resurrection. The second argument, in 15:30-32, is the utter folly of Paul's cheerful sufferings, if there is no reward of a future resurrection. The first argument, in 15:29, is the utter folly of baptism, if it is only a picture of death without the hope of the resurrection.

Since true baptism is by immersion in water to show both burial and resurrection, then the Corinthians had better defend the doctrine of the resurrection or repudiate their baptisms. Thus, 15:29 is a powerful practical argument for the resurrection of the body and a further proof text for baptism by immersion.

So, I agree and plainly said that I did.

and not about  WATER  BAPTISM 

Dan, Paul used their baptism IN WATER to prove how inconsistent they were in some of them saying that there is NO RESURRECTION of the body! In their baptism, and ours~ they and we are saying that we BELEIVE in a future resurrection of our bodies JUST AS CHRIST was raised from the dead for us! THis is one of a few things as to WHY we are baptized. The main thing is that a believer is baptized INTO CHRIST~that is, INTO his religion and faith as a committed follower of him and his teachings~but also as here in 1st Cor. 15:29 we are baptized for the dead...that is~we believe in a FUTURE bodily resurrection, and we submit to water baptism to PROVE IT.

not about  WATER  BAPTISM  for the dead as what the Mormons believe

I agreed~for they do not understand what Paul is teaching here, and neither do you.

I believe that the answer for  BAPTISM  for the  DEAD  is found in Rom 6;4   and reads, Therefore we are   BURIED  with Him by   BAPTISM INTO  DEATH

Dan, I agree that Romans 6:1-6 certainly has a link with 1st Cor. 15:29 and vice versa. But truly they are used in different sense in both places showing us the different reasons WHY   water baptism is very important in the Christian religion of Jesus Christ. We understand WHY Peter asked~ can ANY forbid WATER that these should not be baptized? Then he COMMANDED them to be baptized in the name of the Lord, even in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost!

I believe that verse  reads  a better translation  is  Therefore we were  buried together  with Him through  THE   BAPTISMA / BAPTIZER  which is the holy  SPIRIT   and when checking the Greek text the word is  NOT  the Greek  BAPTISM  but is the  Greek  word  BAPTISMA !!

You cannot read Romans 6:1-6 and come away from the context of those scriptures and teach a Holy Ghost baptism over water baptism, without some corruption of the holy scriptures which you are attempting to do by saying the Greek said this or that when the CONTEXT said otherwise, which proves to us that you do not know what you are a talking about.

"What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin."

Paul without question is speaking of water baptism that places a person INTO CHRIST, or into HIS religion as a committed follower of him and his teachings! I do not need to read this in Greek when I can clearly read it in my own language and understand it. Besides, NO ONE has ever seen the very original words that Paul wrote such scriptures in~we BY FAITH accept that God has preserved his words for us and our children unto this very day per Psalm 12. You would do well to believe the same, and stop listening to voices outside of the holy scriptures!

So the  BAPTISMA /  BAPTIZER   places all  believers into this  DEATH  BAPTISM   which is not  water  BUT  a  HOLY SPIRIT  BAPTISMA

Dan, can you please give me NT scriptures that teach such an baptism so I can read them for myself, for I have NEVER seen such scriptures and NO WHERE did the apostles teach such doctrine~IF you believe otherwise, then show me. There is ONLY ONE baptism for NT saints that truly identifies us with Jesus Christ and that is WATER BAPTISM by immersion. There is NOT another.

also will be raised when Christ comes back for the  BODY  OF  CHRIST  , 1 Cor 15:51-58 and 1  Thess 4:13-18 !!

At the LAST DAY I agree, not as you have said in other places as you teach your premillennial eschatology beliefs. Another subject for another time.

Dan, I've been in the faith and contending for it almost 45 years, and I have learned this: If a person's doctrine concerning Jesus Christ is wrong, then his overall teachings are also wrong~impossible to be correct in other areas. When a person is sound concerning Jesus Christ's gospel, then his overall doctrine usually is also sound. I judge people by what they think of Christ's gospel as far a being a worthy servant of the gospel of Jesus Christ~per Galatians chapter one.

[4WD]

You had to mark your territory in my post.

I never said that baptism was not real.  Communion is real with the juice and the bread - both real.  But neither are the actual blood or body of Christ.   They are symbolic. 

Your argument is precisely the same as that used by any who disavow any connection of immersion with salvation.  I think that includes you.  If not, then I apologize for thinking that.

Regeneration is the infilling of the believer by the Holy Spirit.   There is no baptismal regeneration as taught by Alexander Campbell.   He made that up.

Yes regeneration is the infilling of the believer by the Holy Spirit.  And that occurs when the repentant believer is [water] baptized [immersed].  I don't really know what Alexander Campbell taught, but I seriously doubt that he taught baptismal regeneration.  That is and has always been a false teaching by the Catholic Church and by some Protestant churches who still cling to it [Lutherans? Episcopalians?].

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

RB: 347
can you please give me NT scriptures that teach such an baptism so I can read them for myself, for I have NEVER seen such scriptures and NO WHERE did the apostles teach such doctrine~IF you believe otherwise, then show me. There is ONLY ONE baptism for NT saints that truly identifies us with Jesus Christ and that is WATER BAPTISM by immersion. There is NOT another.

Matthew 28:19 from Jesus' own lips to his own apostles not to you or me or anyone except they, "baptize IN MY NAME" not in water because His baptism "is not in or with or of water", whether by sprinkling or by immersion except an immersion through the preaching of The Name of God in the NAME of Jesus Christ, "THE NAME of the Son and the Father and the Holy Spirit".

If you want to be baptised in or with water, get a servant from a heathen country to teach you on one condition, that you go over the head of Him Who baptises with Spirit and with Power.

[soterion]

Matthew 28:19 from Jesus' own lips to his own apostles not to you or me or anyone except they, "baptize IN MY NAME" not in water because His baptism "is not in or with or of water", whether by sprinkling or by immersion except an immersion through the preaching of The Name of God in the NAME of Jesus Christ, "THE NAME of the Son and the Father and the Holy Spirit".

If you want to be baptised in or with water, get a servant from a heathen country to teach you on one condition, that you go over the head of Him Who baptises with Spirit and with Power.

Acts 10:47-48.
Can any man forbid the water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is water immersion. Unless you want to attribute error to the apostle, you have to agree.

[dan p]

  And there are many ways to check for the  BAPTISMA ,   Blue letter  bible ,  bible  hub and  wikipedia !!

Strong's number is  G908   and here  are all the  references , 22 of them where  BAPTISMA  is used !!

#1 in Matt 3:7
#2 in Matt 20;22
#3  IN Matt 21:25

#4  in Matt 21:25

#5 Mark 1:4

#6, in Mark 10:38
#7 in Mark 10:39

#8 in Luke 3:3

#9 in  Luke 7:29

#10 ,in Luke 12:50

#11 in Luke 20 :4

#12  in Acts 1:22

#13 in Acts 10:37

#14 , in Acts 13:24

#15 in Acts 18:25

#16  in Acts 19:3

#17  in Rom 6:4

#18 in  Eph 4:5

#19  in Col 2:12

#20  in 1  Peter 3:21

If  you believe in  WATER  BAPTISM   say what  1  Cor 10:1 ans 2  mean as all were  BAPTIZED   unto to  Moses in the  CLOUD  and in the  SEA ??

dan p

[soterion]

If  you believe in  WATER  BAPTISM   say what  1  Cor 10:1 ans 2  mean as all were  BAPTIZED   unto to  Moses in the  CLOUD  and in the  SEA ??

dan p

dan p, βαπτισμα (baptisma) is the Greek word behind the transliteration into the English word baptism. Translated, the Greek word means immersion, submersion, dip, overwhelm, etc.

Water is the medium for the baptism that Jesus, as well as the apostles, commanded and is to be observed by those seeking to obey Him. This is established in scripture.

That does not mean, however, that every use of the word baptism is referring to water. Nobody believes it is. When a different medium is specified, such as in 1 Corinthians 10, we know that it is not speaking of the baptism that Jesus commanded to be observed by those seeking His will.

[dan p]

 And in Acts 19:4  it use 2 different  Greek words John indeed  (1)   BAPTIZED   , SO  WHATS DOES THIS  MEAN ? and Luke says , with a  BAPTISM  of    (2)  REPENTANCE  !!

In number  #1  what does that  Greek  BAPTIZED  here  mean ?

In number #2  what does  BAPTISM  mean ?

These are both  difference words  as  #1  means    John indeed  BAPTIZO / WATER  BAPTIZED  with a  BAPTISM / BAPTISMA of  REPENTANCE !!

Just means that  John was a  WATER  BAPTIZER  , that is what verse 4 means !!

But you avoided  1  Cor 2  Where is uses the  Greek word   BAPTIZED /  BAPTIZO  , so how did that happen ??

dan p

[revc]

And in Acts 19:4  it use 2 different  Greek words John indeed  (1)   BAPTIZED   , SO  WHATS DOES THIS  MEAN ? and Luke says , with a  BAPTISM  of    (2)  REPENTANCE  !!

In number  #1  what does that  Greek  BAPTIZED  here  mean ?

In number #2  what does  BAPTISM  mean ?

These are both  difference words  as  #1  means    John indeed  BAPTIZO / WATER  BAPTIZED  with a  BAPTISM / BAPTISMA of  REPENTANCE !!

Just means that  John was a  WATER  BAPTIZER  , that is what verse 4 means !!

But you avoided  1  Cor 2  Where is uses the  Greek word   BAPTIZED /  BAPTIZO  , so how did that happen ??

dan p

This is the first glance I've taken at this thread.  Dan, it seems you are not versed in NT Greek at all, hence the confusion I see in the last couple of posts I have read.  1 Cor. 10: 2 is no help to you if you wish to eliminate immersion in water as the point at which God has specified a penitent believer is united to the death, burial, and resurrection of Christ so making those redemptive acts of Christ's his own.  Soterion's point above is plain, regarding the medium of baptism.  You are struggling because you appear to be trying to get around the truth, a common problem on this forum.  At lest you don't appear to have a wild hatred for the original language like others.  Maybe if you actually tried asking for help it would be forthcoming.  Do not despise instruction as some do (Prov. 1:7).

RC

[dan p]

  And  he asked  where these passages were and I wrote where they are found and most people have no idea that they are there !!

If   BAPTISM  is  IMMERSION BY  WATER  how in  1  Cor 10:2  were they  water  baptized  unto  Moses , in the  cloud and in the  sea ??

What I am trying  TO  show is that the Greek  BAPTISM  can be translated by many other words ,  like  Heb 9:10  where it reads   DIVERS  WASHING   /  BAPTISMOS   and that verse says what that  BAPTISMOS  means !!

dan p

[soterion]

 
If   BAPTISM  is  IMMERSION BY  WATER  how in  1  Cor 10:2  were they  water  baptized  unto  Moses , in the  cloud and in the  sea ??

What I am trying  TO  show is that the Greek  BAPTISM  can be translated by many other words ,  like  Heb 9:10  where it reads   DIVERS  WASHING   /  BAPTISMOS   and that verse says what that  BAPTISMOS  means !!

dan p

Baptism and 1 Cor 10 has been answered as directly and clearly as can be answered with regard to what you are asking. See Reply #52.

Obviously, English is not your first language and your limitations with it is making our replies difficult for you to understand. Maybe I need to try to simplify my answers and you can take a bit more time reading these responses to try and better understand them.

[revc]

If   BAPTISM  is  IMMERSION BY  WATER  how in  1  Cor 10:2  were they  water  baptized  unto  Moses , in the  cloud and in the  sea ??

What I am trying  TO  show is that the Greek  BAPTISM  can be translated by many other words ,  like  Heb 9:10  where it reads   DIVERS  WASHING   /  BAPTISMOS   and that verse says what that  BAPTISMOS  means !!

Dan, I would suggest that you dig much further into the Greek words than you apparently have.  The plural of Βαπτισμoς occurs in Hebrews 9:10 which refers to dippings or washings, and the context shows that it is talking about Jewish ritual washings, none of which necessitate full immersion.  However, βaπτισμα refers to being submerged.  Your failure to grasp the usages of the word group is why you are confused and wrong in what I have read so far.  Baptism is not "immersion by water", unless the text says or implies that it is IN water (not BY water).  In 1 Cor. 10:2, being baptized into Moses was clearly not being washed by the cloud or sea, but by being under those two things.  You are not allowing the context to explain the use of words in your apparent attempt to eliminate the necessity of penitent believers being immersed in water as the baptism commanded by Christ and carried out by the apostles and their contemporaries (e.g., Philip -> Eunuch).  How much more plain can language be than the response of the eunuch after hearing the preaching of Jesus?  "Here is water... etc..."  In response to the preaching of the great Savior and His sacrifice, the eunuch wanted to be immersed in water.  Where did he get the idea that such was necessary?  It was included in the preaching of Jesus by Philip. 

I think it would be a good idea for me to read this thread when I get time.  I imagine others have covered it sufficiently, but another viewpoint or statement of facts may help shed additional light.

RC

[dan p]

Hi mand here is how I answer  1 Cor 10:2   ALL  were   PLACED / BAPTIZED   ( together )  unto  Moses in the  CLOUD  and in the  SEA !!

In Rom 6:3  , That as  many as were    BAPTIZED / PLACED  into Christ Jesus  were  BAPTIZO /PLACED   into his  death !!

In  Col 2:12  reads , Having been buried together with Him in  BAPTISM / BAPTISMA  and here it means  by the  BAPTIZER  the  Holy Spirit !!

In  Eph 4:5  reads  ONE  LORD  , ONE  FAITH  , ONE   BAPTIZER / BAPTISMA  and check the  Greek text and see !!

This does not say that   WATER  BAPTISM   did not  happen , only that  WATER  BAPTISM IS NOT FOR  TODAY !!

dan p

[revc]

Hi mand here is how I answer  1 Cor 10:2   ALL  were   PLACED / BAPTIZED   ( together )  unto  Moses in the  CLOUD  and in the  SEA !!

In Rom 6:3  , That as  many as were    BAPTIZED / PLACED  into Christ Jesus  were  BAPTIZO /PLACED   into his  death !!

In  Col 2:12  reads , Having been buried together with Him in  BAPTISM / BAPTISMA  and here it means  by the  BAPTIZER  the  Holy Spirit !!

In  Eph 4:5  reads  ONE  LORD  , ONE  FAITH  , ONE   BAPTIZER / BAPTISMA  and check the  Greek text and see !!

This does not say that   WATER  BAPTISM   did not  happen , only that  WATER  BAPTISM IS NOT FOR  TODAY !!

Sorry Dan, you are wrong on every point, there, buddy.  You can't just make stuff up.  It is obvious that you haven't got any Greek schooling at all.  It is sad that you aren't willing to learn, but that is an all too common trait shared by many in Christendom.

RC

[dan p]

 And you are saying that Col 2:12 does not use the  Greek word  BAPTISMA  and does say we  are   BURIED TOGETHER  WITH  HIM  and you say this  burying together with Jesus is by  WATER ??

dan p

[revc]

And you are saying that Col 2:12 does not use the  Greek word  BAPTISMA  and does say we  are   BURIED TOGETHER  WITH  HIM  and you say this  burying together with Jesus is by  WATER ??

Dan, I will post some notes on Col. 2:11-13 tomorrow some time, Lord willing.  In the mean time, would you try to be more precise with your question here?  I figure that your first language is not English, which is fine, so, in order that I do not misconstrue your inquiry, maybe break it out into distinct questions.  But I do stand by my statement that all of your 5 points are wrong.  I will attend to them tomorrow as well.

RC

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

RB: #39
So, what is your  understanding of 1st Corinthians 15:29?

You gave a good remonstrance. I would only ask, on what grounds do you base your assumption of this baptism to be a water-baptism? I do not find the element of water physically necessary or of spiritual benefit for the spiritual truth of the physical resurrection.

[dan p]

 And here is another verse to consider is in Heb 6:1 and 2  !!

Heb 6:1  it reads , Therefore   LEAVING / APHIEMI   which also can mean  FORSAKE ,  LEAVE , LET ALONE  , the  principles  of thr  doctrines of Christ let us go on to perfection !!

Then verse 2  ,  says  ,  FORSAKE   the  doctrine of  BAPTISMS !!

Write you thought on , this verse ??

dan p

[TonkaTim]

And here is another verse to consider is in Heb 6:1 and 2  !!

Heb 6:1  it reads , Therefore   LEAVING / APHIEMI   which also can mean  FORSAKE ,  LEAVE , LET ALONE  , the  principles  of thr  doctrines of Christ let us go on to perfection !!

Then verse 2  ,  says  ,  FORSAKE   the  doctrine of  BAPTISMS !!

Write you thought on , this verse ??

dan p

No it does not.

"2 Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. 3 And this will we do, if God permit."

Notice that? this will we do

[revc]

And here is another verse to consider is in Heb 6:1 and 2  !!

Heb 6:1  it reads , Therefore   LEAVING / APHIEMI   which also can mean  FORSAKE ,  LEAVE , LET ALONE  , the  principles  of thr  doctrines of Christ let us go on to perfection !!

Then verse 2  ,  says  ,  FORSAKE   the  doctrine of  BAPTISMS !!

Write you thought on , this verse ??

Dan, I am beginning to believe you have no desire whatsoever to accept truth and fact.  You aren't even close to understanding a language you are believing supports your absurd ideas about baptism.  I already mentioned your lexical error regarding the word group in post #57.  You chose to ignore that.  Too bad, as it is informative as it relates to Hebrews 6:1-2.  I doubt anything I say about Hebrews 6 will matter, but since you asked I will comment some.

Taking only one basic definition of a word with no regard to context is a bad idea.  You almost got the definition right but then you took only the aspect you wanted and used it to misinterpret the text.  Hebrews 6:1 uses αφιημι in the same way it is used in Matt. 15:14 (αφετε αυτους)  and 23:23 (αφηκατε τα βαρυτερα του νομου), in the sense of "to leave alone" or "omit", which, in the case of Hebrews 6:1-2 means the author wants to move past basic doctrines such as are mentioned and deal with weightier matters.  Sadly, when some people should be teaching, they need instruction in the rudiments all over again (5:12-14), a common malady even today.  The writer is saying that even though they need to be taught again in the rudiments, he wishes to pass over those things and move on.  Admittedly, some do not adhere to this view, seeing, rather, the author's desire that the readers further their Christian education by moving past mere rudiments (this "puzzle" in itself would be an interesting discussion).  In either case, the interpretation is nowhere near what you think it is – to "forsake the doctrine of baptisms," which, again is the plural of βαπτισμος, which refers to Jewish lustrations (9:10 διαφοροις βαπτισμοις = various washings).  It also leaves you in the ridiculous situation of calling for the forsaking of πιστεως επι θεον = faith in God (not to mention μετανοιας απο νεκρων εργων =  repentance from dead works).  Do you see the extreme foolishness of your assertion here?  You can't make stuff up like you do, and then leave out everything else the text says the author wants to move beyond. 

I still have yet to read this entire discussion, but I hope to find time soon.

RC

[dan p]

  So , what does , And this we will do   IF  God  permit  , what do you  believe  it means !!  I will go first !!

THE  Greek words  WILL WE  DO / POIEO  is in the Greek  FUTURE  TENSE , ACTIVE  VOICE and in INDICATIVE  MOOD  !

So why did the  HOLY SPIRIT  use the  Greek  FUTURE  TENSE here ??

The  second verb is  PERMIT/EPITREPO  is in the  Greek  PRESENT TENSE  , ACTIVE  VOICE  and in the  SUBJECTIVE  MOOD  !!

The  SUBJECTIVE  MOOD  controls  verse 3   means God will  permit   OR   will not Permit then !

dan p

[Gerhard Ebersöhn]

Soterion #50
Acts 10:47-48.
Can any man forbid the water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

Baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is water immersion. Unless you want to attribute error to the apostle, you have to agree.

No, baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is baptism in the name of Jesus Christ. That is what is written, and not, unless you want to attribute error to the apostle, your addition to or rather corruption of the Text, "'baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is water immersion.'"
Acts 10:47 "NEITHER water NOR man can forbid that these should be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we. And he commanded them to be baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ.

[soterion]

No, baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is baptism in the name of Jesus Christ. That is what is written, and not, unless you want to attribute error to the apostle, your addition to or rather corruption of the Text, "'baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is water immersion.'"

You can't be serious.

You actually believe that when Peter demanded water for them to be baptized and then commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, he was referring to two different and separate baptisms?

This is what happens when a false belief is so strongly held and defended that common sense thinking is thrown out the window in favor of such convolution. When evidence is provided that challenges a person's belief, cognitive dissonance results. The person either changes his or her belief in light of the new evidence, or the evidence is ignored or twisted in favor of the false belief.

Which do you think describes your handling of Acts 10:47-48? Are you accepting the passage to say that baptism in the name of Jesus involves water immersion, or are you twisting the direct meaning of the passage to hold on to your belief?

[Jaime]

GE, Soterion is right. Here is what the text says:

44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. 45 All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 47 "Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?" 48 And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.

Yes, baptism in the name of Jesus Christ IS in water.