Do you believe John the Baptist was baptizing people with water?
John 1:26
Do you believe Jesus was baptized with water?
Jesus' disciples were baptizing lots of people before Pentecost, but Jesus did not baptize anyone.
John 4:1 Now Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that he was gaining and baptizing more disciples than John— 2 although in fact it was not Jesus who baptized, but his disciples.
Acts 8:36 As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being
baptized?” 38 And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him. 39 When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing.
Hey bling
I'm not sure what your point of contention is here. Elaborate on it if you have one. Right now I'm only guessing. Yes, all those verses say water baptism. Do you agree that Jesus did and still does baptize with the Holy Spirit in response to a genuine faith, which "places us" in Him, a spiritual "immersion" that makes us one with Him, the Body, the true Church? You'll notice that anything that I wrote that is between "quotation marks" are used in place of the word baptism, because they mean the same thing. Example....
1 Corinthians 12:13 For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body--whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free--and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.
My translation: For by one Spirit we were all "placed into" into one body--whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free--and have all been made to drink into one Spirit.
another....
Matthew 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
My interpretation: I indeed "immerse" you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will "immerse" you with the Holy Spirit and fire.
I specifically in my post: Water baptism is not a “requirement” for salvation, since God does the saving, but is something Christians get to do to help them and others.
Sorry, it sounded to me like you're playing both sides of the fence. So many today are wrongly taught that water baptism is what initiates the Spiritual baptism. If you're being water baptized, you already have faith, and are already spiritually baptized by Jesus with the Holy Spirit before you hit that water. Agree?
1 Peter 3:...In it only a few people, eight in all, were saved through water, 21 and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
The water (and Peter is talking about real water here) is not to cleanse (wash the body), but the water (coming up out of the water) represents Christ resurrection.
Sorry bling, I disagree. I believe that the water represents God's judgment. That's what the flood was. "In Christ", our Arc, we are protected from that Judgment just like Noah and family were. It's a perfect picture of our Spirit baptism. Not the removal of filth from the flesh is just like saying not water baptism. Just so there was no misunderstanding.
Circumcision was not done away with (replaced) on Pentecost water baptism. Paul never said Jews should not be circumcised and/or baptism replace circumcision. I think we can agree John's water baptism stopped, so did Christian water baptism replace John's baptism?
Again water baptism does not save you, but does it help you?
Hey bling, the circumcision's comment was just a point of possible interest that I threw in there.
OT water baptism was simply identifying with a persons teachings publicly. That's all it is. A public testimony. That idea carried over to the NT. It pictured outwardly what had already happened inwardly as a result of faith. It identified us with Christ Jesus publicly. Some were baptized only into the name of Jesus because the Holy Spirit and the Father were already understood to be a part of them. The point of contention with the public testimony of these OT believers would have been the name Jesus. Others, found it better to publicly identify with the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit, since they were never believers in the OT.
OT believers were baptized into the name of the teacher they were under. Remember Paul confronting the Corinthians for arguing about being baptized by Paul or Apollos? It all came from that. The one true baptism is the one BY Jesus with the Holy Spirit. It's a spiritual baptism initiated by faith. Water baptism comes after that fact as a public testimony. Paul even finished by saying that "Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel". That would be a very, very odd thing to say if water baptism had anything to do with anything beyond a public testimony.
1 Corinthians 1:12-17 Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," or "I am of Apollos," or "I am of Cephas," or "I am of Christ." Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other. For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.
bling, I've seen this with Catholicism before, they are not really doing what they are doing, and not really saying what they are saying. You're language just sounded very familiar to the kind of language that they so often use, hence the "playing both sides of the fence" comment. Sorry if I misunderstood.
Dave