Another Baptism thread [Archive]

View Full Version : Another Baptism thread

Chief117

14th April 2005, 01:35 PM

I have always enjoyed my freedom, as a non-denominationalist, to interpret scriptures according to how God intended, and not twisted by any man to fit their current belief. As such, I believe that a man's reaction to the Word of God is a direct reflection of the depth of his walk with our Lord. I want to be free to hear my King's voice--as I'm sure is the reason many of you are non-denominational.

The conviction has come upon me to study baptism in our Lord's Word, which he divinely inspired and left as a lamp unto our feet. I have come upon the conviction that I need to understand fully things like baptism, communion, disciple-making, the role of the church as an authority, etc.

My study is still young, and I've really only done part of one book (The Gospel of Matthew), but I am already getting the impression that many Christians either have a completely wrong belief, or their understanding of baptism is extremely limited.

For example, the importance of baptism is greater than most people give it credit. This is evidenced by the fact that the story of John the Baptist, paired with Jesus' baptism, almost begins every gospel (note that Matthew starts with Jesus' birth, for obvious reasons). Also, many documented events in which the disciples witnessed to unbelievers also began with the baptism.

Secondly, baptism is likely not merely symbolic based on what I've read so far. First of all, John the Baptist refused to baptize the Sadducees and Pharisees because they were not truly repentant. If the act was merely symbolic, then what would this matter? Let the men meet God through baptism and perhaps they would become repentant. Well, that isn't the case. Repentance is the prerequisite of baptism. Also, why does John the Baptist baptize? THe Bible is quite clear: "And so John came, baptizing in the desert region and preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins." THe preposition here clearly indicates purpose.

Baptism must in some way wash away our sins--an active event that cannot be simultaneously symbolic.

Comments and questions are welcome. I would like to see your reactions to the Word of God.

Stinker

14th April 2005, 06:53 PM

Linux98

14th April 2005, 07:34 PM

Baptism must in some way wash away our sins--an active event that cannot be simultaneously symbolic.

I think you are reasoning through implication. In addition, the entire chapter of Romans 10 does not say "boo" about water baptism and I'm sure it would if baptism was necessary for salvation.

Your sins are cleansed by your faith in Christ. Therefore, water baptism has zip to do with salvation.

However, water baptism is the first physical act of obedience to God that you can do as a new Christian. The power of baptism is the same power of refusing to sin once you have been saved; it is the power of obedience to a command of Jesus.

Dispy

14th April 2005, 07:58 PM

I have posted the following on "Do you believe Baptism is essential for Salvation? (2)" as to my views on water Baptism.

To thouroughly understand the meaning of water baptism, we must look at the history and purpose of the water rite and see if it still applies today in the dispensation of Grace.

In Genesis 12:1-3, the promise to Abram was that the nations would be blessed through his seed (Isreal).

In Exodus 19, 3-6 God told Moses to tell the children of Israel that if they would obey His voice and keep His covenant, then they would be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.

In Exodus 29:1-4 We have the establishment of the priesthood and the washing with water (baptism) was a requirement.

In 2Samuel7:13-16 we have the promise of an everlasting kingdom and throne.

In Matthew 3:1-2 we find John the Baptist preaching repentance and baptism and proclaiming that kingdom at hand (about to be set up).

(The dispensation of the Law was still in effect at this time and works were required to demonstrate faith. Therefore, salvation required believing, repenting and baptism. Baptism was the vehicle (work) that demonstrated faith. Further, I do believe that the water signified that one baptized became a member of "that nation of priests.")

In Matthew 3:11 John says the the One (Jesus) that was to follow him would baptize them with the Holy Ghost and with fire. The Holy Ghost baptism by Jesus did not require water. That could be accomplished by the laying on of hands as Acts 8:14-17 and 19-1-6 shows. However, those that did believe and were baptized in water at Pentecost did receive the Holy Ghost because they did as commanded in Acts 2:38.

In Matthew 4:23 we find Jesus preaching "the gospel of the kingdom"

In Matthew 10:5-7 we find Jesus COMMANDING His disciples to preach "the kingdom at hand" (about to be set up) to the Jews only.

Why to the Jews only? Because it was prophesied in Isaiah 42:6 that they were to be "for a light unto the Gentiles." Wasn't Abram promised that the nations (Gentiles) would be blessed through his seed (Israel) and didn't God tell Moses that if they kept the covenants of God that they would be "a nation of priests."

After the crucifiction of Christ Jesus gave the 11, the "so called" great commission. According to Luke 24:47, they were to begin at Jerusalem. Why? Because that is where Moses's seat was and the scribes and Pharisees sat in it, Mat23:2,3. How else could the nation of Israel be "a light unto the Gentiles" unless the leaders and children of Israel became that "nation of priest" by accepting their long promised Messiah. I doubt if the 12 could have done it all by themselves in their lifetime.

How did the leaders respond?. Well first they rejected God the Father when they refused to be baptizsed of John and ALLOWED him to be killed. Then they rejected God the Son when they DEMANNDED that Jesus be Crucified. Even after Peter gave them a second opportunity for Jesus and His kingdom to return (Acts 3:14-21) they rejected the Holy Ghost by KILLING (stoning) Stephen.

Now that the Jews, as a nation, rejected the Trinity, How could they be that "nation of priests" and a "light unto the Gentiles?" How could that "everlasting kingdom" be set up when they rejected the King. How could all the OT promises made to the Jewish fathers be fulfilled? They can't as long as the Jews do not recognize their King. The Jews, as a nation, do not recognize Jesus as their long promised Messiah, even to this day.

How is the "good news" of "the gospel of the kingdom" through the "so called" great commission going to now go to the nations now? Didn't the 12, that were commissioned to go to the nations, agree with Paul that he should go to the heathen (Gentiles) and that they would stay with the "circumcision" (Jews)? Are they 12 now out of the will of God? Wasn't Paul raised up to go to the Gentiles, kings and children of Israel? Why was there a need for Paul to be raised up to go the the entire world alone when there were already 12 commissioned to do so? Did Paul go about preaching "the gospel of the kingdom" (Law) and that "the kingdom at hand?" No!!! He never once offered the kingdom and the gospel he preached was "the gospel of the grace of God." Aren't Grace and Law opposite doctrines? He never once preached "repent and be baptize" as Peter did.

We learn from Romans 11:7-12, that Israel as been temporarily blinded until "the fulness of the Gentiles be come in" (rapture of Body of Christ) vs 25, and then "all Israel shall be saved; as it is written..." vs 26. After the rapture of the Church, the Blody of Christ, the dispensation of Grace will have ended and the dispensation of the Law will resume and the gospel of the kingdom will again be preached, "before the end come."

The "good news" of the gospel today is not "the kingdom is at hand" but salvation by "grace through faith" in the cross work of Christ. The Law was nailed to the cross and works are no longer required.

I said all of the above to show that the rite of water baptism was connected to the nation of Israel only. We learn from Hebrews 7 & 8 that the Aaronic/Levitical priesthood, with its washings (baptisms), was done away with. Christ is now our high priest after the order of Meschisedec, a Gentile priest. There is no water connected to that priesthood. Not once in Paul's Epistles does he require water baptism. Yes he did baptize a few but that was before he received the full knowlsedge of "the mystery."

Today according to Eph 4:5 there is only "one baptism." It is the baptism of 1Cor12:13 "For by one Spirit (Holy Spirit) are we all baptized into one body...." the Body of Christ (dry cleaned).`

I can see no reason or commandment for the water rite of baptism for the Body of Christ today. Yes it was a requirement under "the gospel of the kingdom."

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

Jim Woodell

14th April 2005, 11:08 PM

WesWoodell

15th April 2005, 12:34 AM

You are very close Chief117.

Please answer this question..........

What changed in reference to water baptism, from the baptism of John (Mk.1:4) to the baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (Mt.28:19)?

Stinker I was going to send you this in a PM but your inbox is full, so I'll post it here instead.

I've done some more thinking about John's baptism when compared with the baptism of Christ. John's ministry was "a sign of things to come." Perhaps John's baptism was the same as the baptism of Jesus - meaning that the baptism of John was a participation in the death, burial and ressurrection of Christ. What confuses me when thinking about this is are these Scriptures:

Acts 18:24-26
24 Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures.
25 He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John.
26 He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately.
(NIV)

Acts 19:1-5
1 While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples
2 and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."
3 So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?" "John's baptism," they replied.
4 Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus."
5 On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.
(NIV)

After reading this I realize that there must be a difference between the two baptisms. The obvious one is that people didn't receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38) when they underwent the baptism of John. Could it be that John's baptism was simply a baptism of repentance, and the baptism of Christ is how we get "into Christ?" Now, consider this:

Mark 1:4
4 And so John came, baptizing in the desert region and preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.
(NIV)

This baptism of repentance was "for the forgiveness of sins." If John's baptism wasn't a baptism "into Christ," but simply one of repentance, could it be that what God really requires for us to be initially forgiven is simply repentance without the baptism, or is the baptism "into Christ" still a baptism of repentance with the added blessing of being counted "in Christ" (Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:27).

What do you think?

Stinker

15th April 2005, 08:00 AM

Stinker I was going to send you this in a PM but your inbox is full, so I'll post it here instead.

I've done some more thinking about John's baptism when compared with the baptism of Christ. John's ministry was "a sign of things to come." Perhaps John's baptism was the same as the baptism of Jesus - meaning that the baptism of John was a participation in the death, burial and ressurrection of Christ. What confuses me when thinking about this is are these Scriptures:

Acts 18:24-26
24 Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures.
25 He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John.
26 He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately.
(NIV)

Acts 19:1-5
1 While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples
2 and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."
3 So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?" "John's baptism," they replied.
4 Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus."
5 On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.
(NIV)

After reading this I realize that there must be a difference between the two baptisms. The obvious one is that people didn't receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38) when they underwent the baptism of John. Could it be that John's baptism was simply a baptism of repentance, and the baptism of Christ is how we get "into Christ?" Now, consider this:

Mark 1:4
4 And so John came, baptizing in the desert region and preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.
(NIV)

This baptism of repentance was "for the forgiveness of sins." If John's baptism wasn't a baptism "into Christ," but simply one of repentance, could it be that what God really requires for us to be initially forgiven is simply repentance without the baptism, or is the baptism "into Christ" still a baptism of repentance with the added blessing of being counted "in Christ" (Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:27).

What do you think?

Sorry about my inbox being full. I have taken care of that.

When new Christians were asked if they received the Holy Spirit, it was meant as a Biblical figure of speech. It was asking the new converts if they received the miraculous 'power' or gift. This is a metonymy which means one thing is named to suggest something else that associates closely with it. Here is a great example: And when Simon saw that through the laying on of the Apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, Saying; "Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost." (Acts 8:18-19)

Those who believe that this would mean that the Cornelious household could still have been in their sins when they were 'speaking in tongues' (Acts 10:43-48) would be arguing that the household was not granted remission of sins when they came to truly believe at the preaching of Peter (Acts 10:43)

John's baptism was a sign that those who underwent this baptism had repented unto the remission of their sins. It was preparation for the one following John. When Christ was realized, these people were re-baptized to show that they were Christ's. Jesus had already put their souls into contact with His cleansing blood via the baptism of the Spirit of 1Cor.12:13

Materialists (what I myself used to be) completely miss this spiritual teaching.

Dispy

15th April 2005, 08:49 AM

Wes, I know you didn't address your post to me, but I hope you don't mind my responding to it.

You posted:
"I've done some more thinking about John's baptism when compared with the baptism of Christ. John's ministry was "a sign of things to come." Perhaps John's baptism was the same as the baptism of Jesus - meaning that the baptism of John was a participation in the death, burial and ressurrection of Christ."

Dispy responds:
John's baptism and the baptism of Jesus are two entirely different baptisms. John's baptism was "to prepare the way of the Lord," so they could be that nation of priests that God promied Moses. It had noting to do with the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. The purpose of the Cross is still future revelation to the Apostle Paul.

In Matthew 3:3 we find that mission of John the Baptist was to "prepare the way of the Lord." This is a fulfillment of Isaiah 40:3. Jesus tells us in Matthew 15:24 "I am not sent but to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Paul tells us in Romans 15:8 "Now I say tht Jesus Christ was a minister of the circumcision for the truth of God, to confirm the promises made to the fathers." So don't read the Church, the Body of Christ, into these passages. It too is future revelation.

I have listed some of the promises to Israel in my previous post which are: In Genesis 12:1-3, the promise to Abram was that the nations would be
blessed through his seed (Isreal).

In Exodus 19, 3-6 God told Moses to tell the children of Israel that if they would obey His voice and keep His covenant, then they would be a kingdom of priests and a holy nation.

In Exodus 29:1-4 We have the establishment of the priesthood and the washing with water (baptism) was a requirement.

In 2Samuel7:13-16 we have the promise of an everlasting kingdom and throne.

In Matthew 3:1-2 we find John the Baptist preaching repentance and baptism and proclaiming that kingdom at hand (about to be set up).

The water rite of baptism was initiated with the establishment of the Aaronic Priesthood.

According to OT prophesies the time for the kingdom to be established had arrived. The King was born in Bethlehem. In that kingdom, Isreal is to be "a nation of priests." That is why John came bapizing. To prepare the way for the Lord who came to establish that kingdom. Jesus is to sit on David's Throne and will be the High Priest of Israel. So the baptism of Jesus did not only identify Him with sinners, but He had to be baptized in order to be the High Priest of Israel in the kingdom He came to establish.

We know from reading the Gospels that the Jews rejected thier King and His Kingdom, therefore the OT promises could not be fulfilled as prophesied. However, they will still be fulfilled at a later date.
---------------------------------------

You continue:
"What confuses me when thinking about this is are these Scriptures:"

Acts 18:24-26
24 Meanwhile a Jew named Apollos, a native of Alexandria, came to Ephesus. He was a learned man, with a thorough knowledge of the Scriptures.
25 He had been instructed in the way of the Lord, and he spoke with great fervor and taught about Jesus accurately, though he knew only the baptism of John.
26 He began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Priscilla and Aquila heard him, they invited him to their home and explained to him the way of God more adequately. (NIV)

Dispy responds:
You will notice in Acts 18:2 that Aquila and Priscilla were co-laborers with the Apostle Paul. To Paul was committed the "revelation of the mystery which was kept secret since the world began."

As co-laborers with Paul, he (Paul) had explained to them the revelations that God had revealed to him (Gal.1:11,12). Those revelations cannot be found in the OT Scriptures in which Appolos was very well instructed. Therefore, Aquilla and Priscilla instructed Appolos in what Paul revealed to them.

According to Matthew 3:11 John the Baptist only knew the baptism of repentance, but did foretell to the Baptism of the Holy Ghost that Jesus would baptize with, and which happened at Pentecost. The Holy Ghost baptism at Pentecost was done by Jesus after the repentant convert was water baptized. The baptism of the Holy Ghost was not a water ceremony.
-----------------------------------------

You posted:
Acts 19:1-5
1 While Apollos was at Corinth, Paul took the road through the interior and arrived at Ephesus. There he found some disciples
2 and asked them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" They answered, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit."
3 So Paul asked, "Then what baptism did you receive?" "John's baptism," they replied.
4 Paul said, "John's baptism was a baptism of repentance. He told the people to believe in the one coming after him, that is, in Jesus."
5 On hearing this, they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.
(NIV)

Many today believe that Paul re-baptized those at Ephesus. Nothing could be further from the Truth.

It is apparent that those at Ephesus were baptized by Apollos prior to Pentecost, when repentantance and baptism was for the remission of sins. John's baptism preceeded the Holy Ghost baptism by Jesus. That is why those at Ephesus responded to Paul, when he asked: "did you recieve the Holy Spirit when you believed?" That is why they answered in the manner they did.

When Paul explained John's baptism to them (verse 4). They reponed in verse 5 to what John told them and were baptized for the remission of sins. It was after Paul laid hands on them that they received the Holy Spirit; just as those in Acts 8:17.
-------------------------------------

You go on:
After reading this I realize that there must be a difference between the two baptisms. The obvious one is that people didn't receive the Holy Spirit (Acts 2:38) when they underwent the baptism of John. Could it be that John's baptism was simply a baptism of repentance, and the baptism of Christ is how we get "into Christ?"

Dispy responds:
You are right, there is a difference in the two baptisms. However, the baptism of both John and Peter was a baptism for the remission of sins. The baptism of Jesus, with the Holy Spirit, was a fulfillment of Matthew 3:11 that John spoke of.

Today Jesus no longer baptizes the believer with the Holy Spirit. It is now the Holy Spirit that baptizes the believer into the Body of Christ. "For by one Spirit (Holy Spirit) are we all baptized into one body (the Body of Christ) whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink one Spirit" (1Cor.12:13). This is the "one baptism" of Ephesians 4:5, and is not a water ceremony. It happens the moment one places their faith and Trust in the Cross work (death, burial and resurrection) of Christ for their salvation.

You go on:
Now, consider this:

Mark 1:4
4 And so John came, baptizing in the desert region and preaching a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins. (NIV)

This baptism of repentance was "for the forgiveness of sins." If John's baptism wasn't a baptism "into Christ," but simply one of repentance, could it be that what God really requires for us to be initially forgiven is simply repentance without the baptism, or is the baptism "into Christ" still a baptism of repentance with the added blessing of being counted "in Christ" (Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:27).

What do you think?

Dispy responds:
To this I will respond from the book "BAPTISM and the Bible" by pastor C.R.Stam.

THE ORIGIN OF THE 'BURIAL' THEORY

Clearly the teaching of baptism as a burial in water has sprung from the gratuitous assumption that the word "baptismos" always, or almost always, refers to water baptism, whil in fact it basically refers to complete identification.

We quote the two passages from whence this misconception has arisen, so that we may consider them in the light of the Scriptures as a whole.

"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" (Rom. 6:4).

"Buried with Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised Him from the dead" (Col. 2:12).

It should be noted that both of these verses state that believers are "buried with" Christ, not "like" Christ. This in itself should convince us that these passages have nothing to odo with water baptism. In Gal. 2:20 we read that we have been "curcified with Christ," and it is clear that this was not accomplished by submission to any religious ceremony. Just as a believer has been "crucified with Christ" (Gal. 2:20) by simple faith, so also he has been buried-and raised-with Christ, "through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised Him from the dead" (See Col. 2:12 again). This coannot refer to water baptism, for if we must be physically buried to be "buried with Christ," must we not also be physically crucified to be crucified with Christ?

Further, Verse. 3 of Romans passage states that we were "baptized into Jesus Christ"-again, not like Christ, but into christ, to become one with Him. This should bring to mind the truth of 1 Cor. 12:13, where we read that "By one Spirit are we all baptized into one Body." Gal. 3.27 clearly states that this is the thought where our baptism into Chris is concerned:

"For as many of you have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ."

Returning to RLom. 6:3,4, we must ask: How are we baptized into Christ? The Apostle gives us a clear answer, couched in the form of a reproof that might well apply more appropriately to the Chruch of our day then to that of his own.

"Know ye not that as many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into His death? (Rom. 6:3).

We are baptized into Christ, then by being baptized into His death. We become one with Him as we become one with Him in His death. This is the great message of Rom. 6:3.
(SNIP)

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

Andyman_1970

15th April 2005, 09:58 AM

Baptism must in some way wash away our sins--an active event that cannot be simultaneously symbolic.

Comments and questions are welcome. I would like to see your reactions to the Word of God.

Some questions to condsider:

Book of 1 John

1 John 5:13 “ I write these things to you who believe in the Name of the Son of God, so that you may know you have eternal life.”

First, can a person have eternal life without as you say “having their sins washed away?” According to the Scriptures it would seem no a person cannot have eternal life if their sins are not washed away (which I agree with).

Now, if this is the case, a person cannot have eternal life without having their sins washed away (which I agree with), why in the book of 1 John, a book he wrote explicitly (in his own words) so that people would know that they have eternal life, why did John no where in his book even mention the word baptism? So if water baptism washes sins away, and one cannot have eternal life without having their sins removed/washed, why then does John not mention water baptism in a book he wrote specifically so that people would be able to know if they had eternal life?

Acts 15

Acts 15:10 “No! We believe it is through the grace of our Lord Jesus that we are saved, just as they are.”

Acts 15 is the Jerusalem council, all the elders of the early church are meeting to discuss what to do with all the Gentile converts, do they have to become Jews or not essentially. The council in verse 10 affirms that it is by grace that the Gentiles are saved just like the Jewish Christians. Now as we saw in my discussion of 1 John above, one cannot be saved (have eternal life) without having their sins removed/washed. Now if baptism as you assert washes/removes sins which is a component of having eternal life/being saved, then why do the spiritual leaders not mention baptism at all in that passage?

Anyway, just some questions to ponder in your spiritual journey.

Shalom brother……………… :wave:

WesWoodell

15th April 2005, 12:37 PM

It should be noted that both of these verses state that believers are "buried with" Christ, not "like" Christ. This in itself should convince us that these passages have nothing to odo with water baptism. In Gal. 2:20 we read that we have been "curcified with Christ," and it is clear that this was not accomplished by submission to any religious ceremony. Just as a believer has been "crucified with Christ" (Gal. 2:20) by simple faith, so also he has been buried-and raised-with Christ, "through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised Him from the dead" (See Col. 2:12 again). This cannot refer to water baptism, for if we must be physically buried to be "buried with Christ," must we not also be physically crucified to be crucified with Christ?

I believe we are crucified with Christ. When a person makes the decision to turn away from their sinful nature and turn to God - that is to die to self and live for Christ - their old self is crucified. Their old self dies. A person has to be dead before we bury them - I believe the same principle applies here.

Dispy

15th April 2005, 01:16 PM

I believe we are crucified with Christ. When a person makes the decision to turn away from their sinful nature and turn to God - that is to die to self and live for Christ - their old self is crucified. Their old self dies. A person has to be dead before we bury them - I believe the same principle applies here.

If one does not have to go through a religious ceremony to be crucified, then why would one have to go through a religious ceremony to by buried with Christ?

If the same principle applies then one wouldn't have to go through a religious rite to be buried with Christ.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

Stinker

15th April 2005, 01:39 PM

Quote:http://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-top-right.gif http://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-by-left.gifOriginally Posted by: WesWoodell http://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-by-right.gifhttp://www3.christianforums.com/images/quotes/quot-top-right-10.gifI believe we are crucified with Christ. When a person makes the decision to turn away from their sinful nature and turn to God - that is to die to self and live for Christ - their old self is crucified. Their old self dies. A person has to be dead before we bury them - I believe the same principle applies here.

If one does not have to go through a religious ceremony to be crucified, then why would one have to go through a religious ceremony to by buried with Christ?

If the same principle applies then one wouldn't have to go through a religious rite to be buried with Christ.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

The mix up I had when I was in the Church of Christ, was that I thought that the physical act with the physical burying element (water) occurred simultaneously with the spiritual burial & resurrection. In other words, our spirit or soul was still sin stained until enough water could be found or arranged to bury our body to demonstrate a physical burial and resurrection. Only at that time could any spiritual act have occurred....so I was taught

western kentucky

15th April 2005, 01:51 PM

If one does not have to go through a religious ceremony to be crucified, then why would one have to go through a religious ceremony to by buried with Christ?

If the same principle applies then one wouldn't have to go through a religious rite to be buried with Christ.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

Consider Romans 6:1-7.

In baptism, one is buried with Christ and "(..) raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead" (Col. 2:12). Just as Christ overcame death by resurrecting from the dead, one overcomes spiritual death when he raises up out of the water in baptism (recieving the forgiveness of his/her sins (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16). This is the point of baptism.

Dispy

16th April 2005, 08:26 AM

Dispy

16th April 2005, 12:39 PM

Consider Romans 6:1-7.

In baptism, one is buried with Christ and "(..) raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead" (Col. 2:12). Just as Christ overcame death by resurrecting from the dead, one overcomes spiritual death when he raises up out of the water in baptism (recieving the forgiveness of his/her sins (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16). This is the point of baptism.

Col.2:12 "Buried WITH (NOT LIKE) Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God, who has raised him from the dead."

It appears to me that you are telling me that I am not saved unless I get myself "buried" in a water ceremony. Your phrase "...one overcomes spiritual death when he raises up out of the water in baptism" indicates that. I for one don't believe that. I believe that one is saved the moment one puts their faith and trust in the Cross work of Christ for their salvation.

The blood of bulls and goats, or works never saved anyone so why does one have to go through a water ceremony to get saved. Water never saved anyone either.

Col.2:12 tells me that I am "risen with him through the faith of the operation of God." Don't see a drop of water in that.

Water baptism originated back when the Aaronic/Levitical priests had to be washed (baptized) in order to become priests. Believing Israel is to become a nations of priests. John the Baptist was the forerunner of Christ to prepare Israel to become that nation of priests through which Israel was to bless the nations. When the Kingdom is established Isreal will be that nation of priests that will bless the nations.

Jesus came to "...confirm the promises made to the fathers" (Romans 15:8). The promises to the fathers were that a Messiah would come and establish an everlasting kingdom. That is what John the Baptist was commissioned to do. John, Jesus and the 12 preached "the gospel of the kingdom."

BUT Israel, as a nation rejected their King and His Kingdom. Therefore God set Israel aside, along with all of her promises, and raised up Saul/Paul to go to the Gentile, Kings and Jews with "the gospel of the grace of God."

Peter, at Pentecost was still preaching what John the Baptist preached - "repent and be baptized." At Pentecost the baptism of the Holy Ghost is a fulfillment of what John preached in Matthew 3:11 "I indeed baptized you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier then I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: HE SHALL BAPTIZE YOU WITH THE HOLY GHOST, and with fire."

In the above verse, Jesus is the baptizer and it is not with water. Today it is the Holy Ghost (Spirit) is the baptizer into the Body of Christ (1Cor.12:13). That is the only baptism in effect today, and is the "one baptism" of Epehsians 4:5. One does not have to go through a water ceremony to receive salvation. It is by FAITH ALONE (see Ephesians 2:8-10). There is nothing we can do to earn it. Jesus did it all.

In Acts 22:16 Paul is just recounting his conversion. He is saying what he did, not what one has to do for salvation. At the time he was converted, water baptism was still a requirement.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

western kentucky

18th April 2005, 01:14 AM

Col.2:12 "Buried with (not like) Him, in baptism, wherein alse ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised Him from the dead."

The above passage tells me that we are Buried with Christ through faith in the operation of God. That is not a physical burial in water. To believe that one must read that into the verse.

Relook at the verse - - "(...)Having been buried with Him in baptism(...)" The verse stands. One is not buried with Christ in faith but in baptism.

In Acts 2:38, the repentant convert had to be water baptized in order to be receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. The Holy Ghost baptism was performed by Jesus. That baptism was a result of the water baptism for the remission of sins.

In acts 22:16 Paul is recounting his conversion of Acts 9. At that time water baptism was still part of the "economy" of salvation at that time.

God Bless.
Love Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

In Acts 2:38, Peter instructed the people to repent and be baptized for the remission of their sins. In Acts 22:16, Paul was instructed to get up and be baptized and wash away his sins - - this idea harmonizes with Col. 2:12 and Romans 6:1-6. You mentioned that water baptism was still part of the "economy" of salvation at that time. Please, explain your reasoning.

western kentucky

18th April 2005, 01:37 AM

Col.2:12 "Buried WITH (NOT LIKE) Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God, who has raised him from the dead."

It appears to me that you are telling me that I am not saved unless I get myself "buried" in a water ceremony. Your phrase "...one overcomes spiritual death when he raises up out of the water in baptism" indicates that. I for one don't believe that. I believe that one is saved the moment one puts their faith and trust in the Cross work of Christ for their salvation.

The blood of bulls and goats, or works never saved anyone so why does one have to go through a water ceremony to get saved. Water never saved anyone either.

Col.2:12 tells me that I am "risen with him through the faith of the operation of God." Don't see a drop of water in that.

Water baptism originated back when the Aaronic/Levitical priests had to be washed (baptized) in order to become priests. Believing Israel is to become a nations of priests. John the Baptist was the forerunner of Christ to prepare Israel to become that nation of priests through which Israel was to bless the nations. When the Kingdom is established Isreal will be that nation of priests that will bless the nations.

Jesus came to "...confirm the promises made to the fathers" (Romans 15:8). The promises to the fathers were that a Messiah would come and establish an everlasting kingdom. That is what John the Baptist was commissioned to do. John, Jesus and the 12 preached "the gospel of the kingdom."

BUT Israel, as a nation rejected their King and His Kingdom. Therefore God set Israel aside, along with all of her promises, and raised up Saul/Paul to go to the Gentile, Kings and Jews with "the gospel of the grace of God."

Peter, at Pentecost was still preaching what John the Baptist preached - "repent and be baptized." At Pentecost the baptism of the Holy Ghost is a fulfillment of what John preached in Matthew 3:11 "I indeed baptized you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier then I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: HE SHALL BAPTIZE YOU WITH THE HOLY GHOST, and with fire."

In the above verse, Jesus is the baptizer and it is not with water. Today it is the Holy Ghost (Spirit) is the baptizer into the Body of Christ (1Cor.12:13). That is the only baptism in effect today, and is the "one baptism" of Epehsians 4:5. One does not have to go through a water ceremony to receive salvation. It is by FAITH ALONE (see Ephesians 2:8-10). There is nothing we can do to earn it. Jesus did it all.

In Acts 22:16 Paul is just recounting his conversion. He is saying what he did, not what one has to do for salvation. At the time he was converted, water baptism was still a requirement.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

This is just a brief reply to your post. Hopefully tomorrow I will have more time to reply in greater detail.

Here's a few thoughts:

Peter was not preaching the same message of John the baptist. The baptism of John was for repentance (Matt. 3:3); the baptism in the name of Jesus Christ was for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16). Consider Acts 18:24-28. The baptism of the Holy Spirit was to confirm the message of the apostles (Heb. 2:3-4; Mark 16:17-20)

Also consider Acts 10:34-48. The Gentiles recieved the Holy Spirit and were then commanded by Peter to be water baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Why were they then commanded to be water baptized in the name of Jesus Christ after they had recieved the Holy Spirit. Consider Acts 2:38 - - because the baptism in the name of Jesus Christ was for the remission of sins.

You mentioned that one is saved by grace and that there is nothing one can do to earn it (Eph. 2:8). Consider the context in which you are mentioning grace. Look at Eph. 2:5-6 and then compare it with Col. 2:12. It's interesting to note that baptism is mentioned in the context of grace. One does not earn grace, but one must obey the commands of God to recieve grace ((Luke 17:10; James 2:14-26 (referring to works of obedience)).

Dispy

18th April 2005, 02:52 AM

Relook at the verse - - "(...)Having been buried with Him in baptism(...)" The verse stands. One is not buried with Christ in faith but in baptism.

My Bible doesn't say ""Having been" buried with HIm in Baptism (...)"

Also, you posted: "In baptism, one is buried with Christ and "(..) raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead" (Col. 2:12). Just as Christ overcame death by resurrecting from the dead, one overcomes spiritual death when he raises up out of the water in baptism (recieving the forgiveness of his/her sins (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16). This is the point of baptism."

I stand by what I previously stated:

"Col.2:12 "Buried WITH (NOT LIKE) Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God, who has raised him from the dead."

It appears to me that you are telling me that I am not saved unless I get myself "buried" in a water ceremony. Your phrase "...one overcomes spiritual death when he raises up out of the water in baptism" indicates that. I for one don't believe that. I believe that one is saved the moment one puts their faith and trust in the Cross work of Christ for their salvation.

The blood of bulls and goats, or works never saved anyone so why does one have to go through a water ceremony to get saved. Water never saved anyone either.

Col.2:12 tells me that I am "risen with him through the faith of the operation of God." Don't see a drop of water in that.

Water baptism originated back when the Aaronic/Levitical priests had to be washed (baptized) in order to become priests. Believing Israel is to become a nations of priests. John the Baptist was the forerunner of Christ to prepare Israel to become that nation of priests through which Israel was to bless the nations. When the Kingdom is established Isreal will be that nation of priests that will bless the nations.

Jesus came to "...confirm the promises made to the fathers" (Romans 15:8). The promises to the fathers were that a Messiah would come and establish an everlasting kingdom. That is what John the Baptist was commissioned to do. John, Jesus and the 12 preached "the gospel of the kingdom."

BUT Israel, as a nation rejected their King and His Kingdom. Therefore God set Israel aside, along with all of her promises, and raised up Saul/Paul to go to the Gentile, Kings and Jews with "the gospel of the grace of God."

Peter, at Pentecost was still preaching what John the Baptist preached - "repent and be baptized." At Pentecost the baptism of the Holy Ghost is a fulfillment of what John preached in Matthew 3:11 "I indeed baptized you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier then I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: HE SHALL BAPTIZE YOU WITH THE HOLY GHOST, and with fire."

In the above verse, Jesus is the baptizer and it is not with water. Today it is the Holy Ghost (Spirit) is the baptizer into the Body of Christ (1Cor.12:13). That is the only baptism in effect today, and is the "one baptism" of Epehsians 4:5. One does not have to go through a water ceremony to receive salvation. It is by FAITH ALONE (see Ephesians 2:8-10). There is nothing we can do to earn it. Jesus did it all.

In Acts 22:16 Paul is just recounting his conversion. He is saying what he did, not what one has to do for salvation. At the time he was converted, water baptism was still a requirement."

In Acts 2:38, Peter instructed the people to repent and be baptized for the remission of their sins. In Acts 22:16, Paul was instructed to get up and be baptized and wash away his sins - - this idea harmonizes with Col. 2:12 and Romans 6:1-6. You mentioned that water baptism was still part of the "economy" of salvation at that time. Please, explain your reasoning.

Prior to Paul's conversion, the Law was still in effect and "the gospel of the kingdom" was still being preached . That is the gospel that John the Baptist, Jesus and the 12 preached. The "economy" for salvation, at that time was "repent and be baptized for the remission (washing away) of one's sins. The purpose of the Cross was still unknown, and "the gospel of the grace of God" were still future revelation to Paul. John the Baptist, Jesus and the 12 never preached it. During all this time there was still a "middle wall of partition" between the Jew and Gentile. "Salvation is of the Jews..." (John 4:22) was still the economy. For one that was a Gentile that wanted to serve the true and living God, that one had to become a Jew, and place themselves under the Laws of Moses.

So when Paul was converted in Acts 9, Ananias told Paul to do exactly what what required in that "economy" at that time.

Prior to the setting aside of Israel, there was a wall of seperation between the Jew and Gentile. The word "Jew" just means "non-Gentile." Today, God is no respector of persons, in His eyes, we are all the same - non-Jews.

During all of Paul's ministry he never once required a convert to be baptized. Yes Paul did baptize some, but that was before he received the "full knowledge" of the mystery "which was kept secret since the world began."

This "dispensation of grace" in which we now live, is a "(parenthetical)" period within "the dispensation of the Law." When this dispensation ends, with the rapture of the Chruch the Body of Christ, the Law will again be in effect.

From the setting aside of Israel, after the stoning of Stephen, until Acts 28:28, we have a transition period from the dispensation of the Law to to dispensation of Grace. We find the Pentecostal "sign gifts" deminishing, as Paul said they would, as the knowledge of the mystery was being revealed to him. He did not receive it all at one time, for he says in 2:Cor.12:1 "I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord."

If one studies Paul writings that he wrote prior to Acts 28:28 (1&2 Thess., Gal., 1,2 Cor., Romans [?]) one will find references to signs, miracles, wonders, tongues and legal ceremonies. If one studies his writings after Acts 28:28 (Eph., Col., Phi., Heb. (?), Phill., Titus, 1,2 Tim., Romans [?]) there is no mention of any of the above references. They had vanished as Paul said they would. (I placed a [?] behind Romans because there is various views as to when it was written, and also behind Hebrews because there is much dispute as to who actually wrote the book.) Even if one studies the books that were written by Peter, James and John (placed behind the book of Hebrews) one cannot find any Pentecostal sign gifts.

As I have said in an earlier post, water baptism is associated with Israel. I do believe that after the rapture of the Church, the Body of Christ, water baptism will again be practised as it has to do with Israel becoming "a nation of priests" through which all the nations will be blessed, as promised to Abram back in Genes 12:1-3.

Hopes this helps you to see where I am coming from.

Wes, I do have a book that I would like to mail to you,AT MY EXPENSE, that would help you understand exactly where I am coming from. It is titled "The MYSTERY" by Joel Finck. In fact I will send a copy of that book to anyone who desires to have it. All I will need to know is your mailing address. You can e-mail that to me at jellema@alliancecom.net. I PROMISE to keep that information confidential, and not send any other unrequested literature.

The views that Joel presents are views that I have held long before I ever met him or read any of his literature.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

western kentucky

19th April 2005, 03:14 PM

My Bible doesn't say ""Having been" buried with HIm in Baptism (...)"

Also, you posted: "In baptism, one is buried with Christ and "(..) raised up with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead" (Col. 2:12). Just as Christ overcame death by resurrecting from the dead, one overcomes spiritual death when he raises up out of the water in baptism (recieving the forgiveness of his/her sins (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16). This is the point of baptism."

I stand by what I previously stated:

"Col.2:12 "Buried WITH (NOT LIKE) Him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God, who has raised him from the dead."

It appears to me that you are telling me that I am not saved unless I get myself "buried" in a water ceremony. Your phrase "...one overcomes spiritual death when he raises up out of the water in baptism" indicates that. I for one don't believe that. I believe that one is saved the moment one puts their faith and trust in the Cross work of Christ for their salvation.

The blood of bulls and goats, or works never saved anyone so why does one have to go through a water ceremony to get saved. Water never saved anyone either.

Col.2:12 tells me that I am "risen with him through the faith of the operation of God." Don't see a drop of water in that.

Water baptism originated back when the Aaronic/Levitical priests had to be washed (baptized) in order to become priests. Believing Israel is to become a nations of priests. John the Baptist was the forerunner of Christ to prepare Israel to become that nation of priests through which Israel was to bless the nations. When the Kingdom is established Isreal will be that nation of priests that will bless the nations.

Jesus came to "...confirm the promises made to the fathers" (Romans 15:8). The promises to the fathers were that a Messiah would come and establish an everlasting kingdom. That is what John the Baptist was commissioned to do. John, Jesus and the 12 preached "the gospel of the kingdom."

BUT Israel, as a nation rejected their King and His Kingdom. Therefore God set Israel aside, along with all of her promises, and raised up Saul/Paul to go to the Gentile, Kings and Jews with "the gospel of the grace of God."

Peter, at Pentecost was still preaching what John the Baptist preached - "repent and be baptized." At Pentecost the baptism of the Holy Ghost is a fulfillment of what John preached in Matthew 3:11 "I indeed baptized you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier then I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: HE SHALL BAPTIZE YOU WITH THE HOLY GHOST, and with fire."

In the above verse, Jesus is the baptizer and it is not with water. Today it is the Holy Ghost (Spirit) is the baptizer into the Body of Christ (1Cor.12:13). That is the only baptism in effect today, and is the "one baptism" of Epehsians 4:5. One does not have to go through a water ceremony to receive salvation. It is by FAITH ALONE (see Ephesians 2:8-10). There is nothing we can do to earn it. Jesus did it all.

In Acts 22:16 Paul is just recounting his conversion. He is saying what he did, not what one has to do for salvation. At the time he was converted, water baptism was still a requirement."

Prior to Paul's conversion, the Law was still in effect and "the gospel of the kingdom" was still being preached . That is the gospel that John the Baptist, Jesus and the 12 preached. The "economy" for salvation, at that time was "repent and be baptized for the remission (washing away) of one's sins. The purpose of the Cross was still unknown, and "the gospel of the grace of God" were still future revelation to Paul. John the Baptist, Jesus and the 12 never preached it. During all this time there was still a "middle wall of partition" between the Jew and Gentile. "Salvation is of the Jews..." (John 4:22) was still the economy. For one that was a Gentile that wanted to serve the true and living God, that one had to become a Jew, and place themselves under the Laws of Moses.

So when Paul was converted in Acts 9, Ananias told Paul to do exactly what what required in that "economy" at that time.

Prior to the setting aside of Israel, there was a wall of seperation between the Jew and Gentile. The word "Jew" just means "non-Gentile." Today, God is no respector of persons, in His eyes, we are all the same - non-Jews.

During all of Paul's ministry he never once required a convert to be baptized. Yes Paul did baptize some, but that was before he received the "full knowledge" of the mystery "which was kept secret since the world began."

This "dispensation of grace" in which we now live, is a "(parenthetical)" period within "the dispensation of the Law." When this dispensation ends, with the rapture of the Chruch the Body of Christ, the Law will again be in effect.

From the setting aside of Israel, after the stoning of Stephen, until Acts 28:28, we have a transition period from the dispensation of the Law to to dispensation of Grace. We find the Pentecostal "sign gifts" deminishing, as Paul said they would, as the knowledge of the mystery was being revealed to him. He did not receive it all at one time, for he says in 2:Cor.12:1 "I will come to visions and revelations of the Lord."

If one studies Paul writings that he wrote prior to Acts 28:28 (1&2 Thess., Gal., 1,2 Cor., Romans [?]) one will find references to signs, miracles, wonders, tongues and legal ceremonies. If one studies his writings after Acts 28:28 (Eph., Col., Phi., Heb. (?), Phill., Titus, 1,2 Tim., Romans [?]) there is no mention of any of the above references. They had vanished as Paul said they would. (I placed a [?] behind Romans because there is various views as to when it was written, and also behind Hebrews because there is much dispute as to who actually wrote the book.) Even if one studies the books that were written by Peter, James and John (placed behind the book of Hebrews) one cannot find any Pentecostal sign gifts.

As I have said in an earlier post, water baptism is associated with Israel. I do believe that after the rapture of the Church, the Body of Christ, water baptism will again be practised as it has to do with Israel becoming "a nation of priests" through which all the nations will be blessed, as promised to Abram back in Genes 12:1-3.

Hopes this helps you to see where I am coming from.

Wes, I do have a book that I would like to mail to you,AT MY EXPENSE, that would help you understand exactly where I am coming from. It is titled "The MYSTERY" by Joel Finck. In fact I will send a copy of that book to anyone who desires to have it. All I will need to know is your mailing address. You can e-mail that to me at jellema@alliancecom.net. I PROMISE to keep that information confidential, and not send any other unrequested literature.

The views that Joel presents are views that I have held long before I ever met him or read any of his literature.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!

I will repeat my previous post because there was no response to it:

This is just a brief reply to your post. Hopefully tomorrow I will have more time to reply in greater detail.

Here's a few thoughts:

Peter was not preaching the same message of John the baptist. The baptism of John was for repentance (Matt. 3:3); the baptism in the name of Jesus Christ was for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16). Consider Acts 18:24-28. The baptism of the Holy Spirit was to confirm the message of the apostles (Heb. 2:3-4; Mark 16:17-20)

Also consider Acts 10:34-48. The Gentiles recieved the Holy Spirit and were then commanded by Peter to be water baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Why were they then commanded to be water baptized in the name of Jesus Christ after they had recieved the Holy Spirit. Consider Acts 2:38 - - because the baptism in the name of Jesus Christ was for the remission of sins.

You mentioned that one is saved by grace and that there is nothing one can do to earn it (Eph. 2:8). Consider the context in which you are mentioning grace. Look at Eph. 2:5-6 and then compare it with Col. 2:12. It's interesting to note that baptism is mentioned in the context of grace. One does not earn grace, but one must obey the commands of God to recieve grace ((Luke 17:10; James 2:14-26 (referring to works of obedience)).

Additional comments:

You have mentioned that water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins is in connection with Israel and that we now live in a dispensation of grace period (not requiring baptism).

Consider Titus 2:11; Now turn to Matt. 7:21-24. Conclusion: God's grace is offered to everyone, but we realize that everyone will not recieve God's grace. One simply claiming to believe in the Lord without obeying His commands will be rejected. Now turn to Mark 16:16....What does the Lord say about baptism?

Water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) is not in connection to Israel, but in connection to a Christian and his/her obedience to Christ. If baptism: Is to put on Christ (Gal. 3:27), saves us (1 Pet. 3:21), is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) and is to benefit from Christ's resurrection (Rom. 6:5), then what condition is one in before baptism?

Dispy

20th April 2005, 07:02 AM

I will repeat my previous post because there was no response to it:

This is just a brief reply to your post. Hopefully tomorrow I will have more time to reply in greater detail.

Here's a few thoughts:

Peter was not preaching the same message of John the baptist. The baptism of John was for repentance (Matt. 3:3); the baptism in the name of Jesus Christ was for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16). Consider Acts 18:24-28. The baptism of the Holy Spirit was to confirm the message of the apostles (Heb. 2:3-4; Mark 16:17-20)

Also consider Acts 10:34-48. The Gentiles recieved the Holy Spirit and were then commanded by Peter to be water baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Why were they then commanded to be water baptized in the name of Jesus Christ after they had recieved the Holy Spirit. Consider Acts 2:38 - - because the baptism in the name of Jesus Christ was for the remission of sins.

You mentioned that one is saved by grace and that there is nothing one can do to earn it (Eph. 2:8). Consider the context in which you are mentioning grace. Look at Eph. 2:5-6 and then compare it with Col. 2:12. It's interesting to note that baptism is mentioned in the context of grace. One does not earn grace, but one must obey the commands of God to recieve grace ((Luke 17:10; James 2:14-26 (referring to works of obedience)).

Additional comments:

You have mentioned that water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sins is in connection with Israel and that we now live in a dispensation of grace period (not requiring baptism).

Consider Titus 2:11; Now turn to Matt. 7:21-24. Conclusion: God's grace is offered to everyone, but we realize that everyone will not recieve God's grace. One simply claiming to believe in the Lord without obeying His commands will be rejected. Now turn to Mark 16:16....What does the Lord say about baptism?

Water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) is not in connection to Israel, but in connection to a Christian and his/her obedience to Christ. If baptism: Is to put on Christ (Gal. 3:27), saves us (1 Pet. 3:21), is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) and is to benefit from Christ's resurrection (Rom. 6:5), then what condition is one in before baptism?

Sorry I have missed you previous post. I have been quite busy lately being I will be having house guests all next week and have just had a 3-seasons room added to my home. Between getting that room and shape, yard work and other obligations, I haven't had as much time on the computer as I normally do. In fact I do have a doctors appointment at 8:30 this morning.

John the Baptist both preached "repent and be baptized." John, in Matthew 2:11 said that there was one coming after him that would baptize them with the Holy Ghost and with fire.

Peter and the 11 received the Holy Ghost in John 20:22, however, Jesus told them to wait in Jerusalem until they "be indued with power from on high."

Even thought the disciples had the indwelling of the Holy Ghost before Pentecost, they didn't receive its power until Pentecost.

So Peter and John preached the same message, but the promise of the Holy Ghost and its power, came at Pentecost in fulfillment of promise. Even though is says that John preached the repentance; when one repents it is to be forgiven of those sins in order that they may be remitted. Jesus was the baptizer with the Holy Ghost, and there was no water involved.

At the time John, Jesus and the 12 ministered upon the earth, the Law was still in effect. Deeds/works were required to demonstrate faith. When one repented of their sins, their FAITH was demonstrated by the act (work) of water baptism. Apollos only knew the baptism of John until Aquila and Priscilla straightened him out. He knew nothing about the Holy Ghost baptism of Pentecost. Even those in Ephesus, in chapter 19, were baptized by John, prior to Pentecost. That is why they had not recieved the gift of the Holy Ghost. However, after Paul laid hands on them, just like those in Acts 8:17, they did receive the HG gifts.

Mark 16:17-20 is another account of the "so called" great commission. Those are the Pentacostal gifts of the Holy Ghost that the disciples are to convince the "families of the earth" (nations) (Genesis 12:1-3) that they are of God and the families of the earth will be blessed through them. They were to prepare the way for the kingdom to be established.

However, since Israel, as a nation rejected their King and His Kingdom, there is no way that that commission can be carried out. The disciples recognized this when, in Galatians 2:9, they agreed with Paul that they would stay with the circumcision (Jews/Israel) while he went to the heathen (Gentiles).

The disciples were not out of the "will of God" as many believe. They understood that the kingdom program, based upon OT promises, has been interrupted and that Paul was commissioned to preach "the gospel of the grace of God" based on "the revelation of the mystery which was kept secret since the world began."

Colossians 2:22 "Buried with (not like] him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of god, who hath raised him from the dead."

IMHO there is no water mentioned in that baptism. That baptism is "through the faith of the operation of God." Just as in 1Cor.12:13 the baptism by the Spirit (Holy) into the Body of Christ is not a water ceremony. It happens the moment one puts their faith and trust in the Cross work of Christ for their salvation. It is the one baptism of Ephesian 4:5.

You said:
"Water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) is not in connection to Israel, but in connection to a Christian and his/her obedience to Christ."

At Pentecost there were only Jews and proselytes present (Acts 2:10). When you say "Christians" you are no doubt saying "members of the Body of Christ."

The Body of Christ, the Chruch for today was not formed until AFTER God set the nation of Israel aside. "The Body of Christ" consists of believing set aside Jews and Gentiles, on equal footing, without distinction and not under the Law. That condition did not exist at Pentecost.

Since the fall of man, God has always shown His grace in that He has always provided a means in which one could be saved/justified. It was by doing by believing/doing, FAITH, what God required at that point in time of human history.

"The gospel of the grace of God," that was committed to Paul, is a different doctrine from the doctrine of the "Law" that was given to Moses; for the children of Israel

Law and Grace are two opposing doctrines. Law is - Do as the Law requires or pay the penalty. Grace is - Unmerited favor - getting what we don't deserve.

Both are good workable doctrines but different, however, they were both based on FAITH. Those under the Law had to do the deed/works of the Law BY FAITH in ordered to be saved/justified.

In this "dispensation of GRACE" can only be saved/justified by placing our FAITH and trust in the Cross work of Christ for our salvation.

Those under the Law never knew the purpose of the Cross. That was not revealed until after the conversion of Saul/Paul.

One should never read the future revelations to Paul into the Gospels. that is like reading the Laws of Moses into the Garden of Eden, or the battles of WWII into the battles of WWI. It just doesn't make sense. Therefore, don't read future revelatons into past events.

By the same token, one should never try to mix the doctrine of Law with the doctrine of Grace. That only leads to confusion and denominations. Those that do each have a little formula by which they mix them.

God Bless.
Live Well, Laugh Often and Love the Lord!