Is water Baptism essential for salvation?

[-57]

I don't think you were paying attention, it doesn't necessarily omit it at all, that is if you really believe on the son..

Kenny, the mention of baptism is missing from the second half of the verse.
I was simply asking why.

 

[ByTheSpirit]

As I just asked Kenny...
Can you find several verses that tell us what water baptism actually does?

There you go!

 

[Kenny'sID]

Kenny, the mention of baptism is missing from the second half of the verse.
I was simply asking why.

I'm not sure how that is a reply to what you quoted?

 

[Kenny'sID]

Maybe I should be asking why you oppose water Baptism?

 

[ByTheSpirit]

I see you agree with the save your own butt salvation.
That is you work to save your own butt.

No I agree with God's Way of salvation. Doesn't it strike you as odd that the very first time someone asks what they needed to do to be saved in scriptures they are told to repent AND be baptized for the remission of sins? I guess the Holy Spirit got it wrong huh?

You probably removed James 2:14-26 from your Bible huh?

BTW your exegetical skills need refined. In your OP you quote Acts 2:21 as part of your proof that baptism isn't necessary, while apparently forgetting that merely 17 verses later in the very same passage Peter says "BE BAPTIZED for the remission of sins".

Such a classic pick and choose what scriptures to believe approach

 

[yeshuaslavejeff]

I would understand that to mean you can't.

As usual.
No worries.
Have to wait (for YHWH) ....

 

[Tsquared]

So, you read the Bible as a whole? Can you show me were "born of water" means baptism by water?

Now, keep in mind...John 3:16 wasn't the only verse that omitted water baptism. The OP contains two there verses.

In your post you said....Also, I want to be like Jesus, he was baptized, so that's reason enough for me....OK. That's fine. But Jesus wasn't baptized as part of a salvation formula.

I see what you are trying to say, however, I do not agree in this case. When we look at Matthew 16:19, Jesus says to Peter " And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven"...What do keys do? Presumably, keys get you in to somewhere...in this case, Heaven. So it cannot be argued that Peter was not given the keys to the kingdom because Jesus said that he was going to give them to him. So when the Holy Ghost is poured out in Acts Chapter 2, people want to know what is going on and they literally ask the clear-cut question "what shall we do", Peter tells them to repent, be baptized, and then they will receive the gift of the Holy Ghost...All of Jesus' disciples had this experience, and when they went out preaching, this was the message they were giving to the lost, it does not change throughout the New Testament. Why would Peter tell people they must be baptized, Jesus tell people in Matthew 28:19 that they must be baptized, if it were not a requirement? it would seem like a waste of time for Jesus to say those words before resurrecting if they were not important.
It is important for us to believe, but we also must take action. For instance, I can believe that my house is on fire, but if i don't get up and do something about it I will go down with the house. This is not saying that it is my works that save me, rather, that I am acting on what Jesus Christ accomplished at the cross so I can be saved...It's all about what he did so I have the opportunity to turn my life around. Again, I am not arguing here just for the sake of debating, I really do believe that this is necessary. I understand your point of view, hopefully you also can see mine.

 

[StevenBelievin]

The thief on the cross next to Jesus wasn't baptized, but Jesus said today you will be with me in paradise.

 

[-57]

The thief on the cross next to Jesus wasn't baptized, but Jesus said today you will be with me in paradise.

Agreed. There are several instances in the Bible in which people were saved first....then baptized.

 

[Kenny'sID]

I see you agree with the save your own butt salvation.
That is you work to save your own butt.

Not sure why it is always termed we are trying to be saved by works or to put it less elegantly, "save our own butts", but that is not the case, never has been. It's just how things are termed/twisted to make those who choose to follow Gods word look bad. It's a trick, and something one would expect from anyone who chooses "always saved no mater what I do our how I act"

Just one point to be taken from that is, if one believes they don't have to be good/act right, they won't be.

Faith AND works, it's biblical, look it up, read it, remember it, and live it.

 

[TheSeabass]

The Bible presents scripture which mention salvation... and baptism with water isn't mentioned.
John 3:16 is perhaps the most famous....“For God so loved the world, that he gave his only Son, that whoever believes in him should not perish but have eternal life.....no mention of water.

Same with Acts 2:21....And it shall come to pass that everyone who calls upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.’

Romans 10:13. For “everyone who calls on the name of the Lord will be saved.”

NOTICE.....no mention of water baptism. None. If water baptism is so essential for one's salvation...why is it omitted?

(1) There are many many verses that do mention water baptism, so the question is why did you choose to ignore and not post those?

None of the verses you cited specifically mention 'grace', the blood of Christ, repentance does that mean these things have nothing to do with salvation? Why were these things omitted? Why is 'grace' or the 'blood of Christ' not specifically mentioned in all the verses that deal with salvation? Since they are not, does that make them non-essential?

It would be a very very rare thing to find one verse that exhausts all there is to know about a subject. Yet when it comes to the salvation, it is impossible to have one verse that tells us all we need to know about salvation for there are dozens in not hundreds of verses that deal with salvation. Paul once said he did not shun to declare "all the counsel of God" Acts 20:27. Therefore one must examine all the verses that deal with salvation and not pick out 3 while purposely ignoring the verses that deal with repentance, confession and baptism Luke 13:3; Matthew 10:32-33; Mark 16:16.

(2) There is a common figure of speech called a synecdoche where a part stands for the whole. In some places therefore the verb "believe" is the part that also stands for repentance confession and baptism. Peter said baptism doth also now save us. Peter did not say baptism alone saves us, but Peter used baptism as a synecdoche where it INCLUDES belief, repentance and confession.

Acts 2:41 "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized..."
Acts 2:44 "And all that believed were together,..."

In verse 44, who were the ones that are said to have "believed"? THe ones that accepted Peter's words and were baptized or the ones that rejected Peter's word and not baptized? Obviously the ones that "believed" were the ones that were baptized. Therefore "believed" in verse 44 is used as a syecdoche where it includes being baptized. (Note that the language of v41 implies one accepts the gospel when he is baptized or that one is rejecting the gospel word by rejecting being baptized)

In Acts 16:34 we are told about the jailer "And he brought them up into his house, and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, with all his house, having believed in God." The participle phrase "having believed" would INCLUDE all the jailer had just done in verse 33 repentance by washing their stripes and being baptized. Therefore "believed" here INCLUDES repentance and baptism.

(3) the phrase calling on the name of the Lord means doing what the Lord says to do (Luke 6:44).

Peter quotes Joel's prophecy in Acts 2:21 and that prophecy was fulfilled in Acts 2:38"

verse 21------call upon the name of the Lord>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>saved
verse 38------repent and be baptized>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>remission of sins

Since there is just one way to be saved/have sins remitted, then calling upon the name of the LORD means to repent and be baptized as the LORD said, Luke 13:3; Mark 16:16

Paul--------call upon the name of the LORD>>>>>>>>>>saved - Romans 10:13
Paul---------believe and confess>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>saved - Romans 10:9,10

Again, one way to be saved, no alternatives, then calling on the name of the LORD means to believe and confess.

All together, calling on the name of the LORD means to believe, repent, confess and be baptized as the Lord said John 3:16; Luke 13:3; Matthew 10:32-33; Mark 16:16.

 

[Dave-W]

So I don't guess wrong ...who is the whom?

That would answer the question for you. I will give you a hint: Matt 28.

 

[Dave-W]

Why is baptism left out of the second half of the verse?

Because if you don't believe, getting wet does you no good.

 

[SoldierOfTheKing]

The thief on the cross next to Jesus wasn't baptized, but Jesus said today you will be with me in paradise.

He would have been if he could have been...

 

[Dave-W]

Water baptism is strictly ceremonial of washing away sin, and I doubt I'll find anything other than that.

Au Contraire Mon Capitan!

You should watch the video teaching on what water baptism does by Derek Prince for a well rounded summary.

 

[Tsquared]

Because if you don't believe, getting wet does you no good.

Exactly, it is just going swimming if it isn't mixed with belief...couldn't agree more!

 

[-57]

I see what you are trying to say, however, I do not agree in this case. When we look at Matthew 16:19, Jesus says to Peter " And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven"...What do keys do? Presumably, keys get you in to somewhere...in this case, Heaven. So it cannot be argued that Peter was not given the keys to the kingdom because Jesus said that he was going to give them to him. So when the Holy Ghost is poured out in Acts Chapter 2, people want to know what is going on and they literally ask the clear-cut question "what shall we do", Peter tells them to repent, be baptized, and then they will receive the gift of the Holy Ghost...All of Jesus' disciples had this experience, and when they went out preaching, this was the message they were giving to the lost, it does not change throughout the New Testament. Why would Peter tell people they must be baptized, Jesus tell people in Matthew 28:19 that they must be baptized, if it were not a requirement? it would seem like a waste of time for Jesus to say those words before resurrecting if they were not important.
It is important for us to believe, but we also must take action. For instance, I can believe that my house is on fire, but if i don't get up and do something about it I will go down with the house. This is not saying that it is my works that save me, rather, that I am acting on what Jesus Christ accomplished at the cross so I can be saved...It's all about what he did so I have the opportunity to turn my life around. Again, I am not arguing here just for the sake of debating, I really do believe that this is necessary. I understand your point of view, hopefully you also can see mine.

With all due respect....I believe your taking Matt 16:19 out of context. It really has nothing to do with baptism.
....I will give you the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatever you bind on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatever you loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven.”...

Later you asked...."Why would Peter tell people they must be baptized". Where is the word MUST used? In the opening post I presented you with 3 verses that omitted a MUST for baptism. In fact baptism wasn't even mentioned.

 

[Dave-W]

The thief on the cross next to Jesus wasn't baptized, but Jesus said today you will be with me in paradise.

The thief died under the Mosaic covenant (assuming he was a Jew) so being baptized would have been irrelevant.

 

[Kenny'sID]

The thief on the cross next to Jesus wasn't baptized, but Jesus said today you will be with me in paradise.

Let's see, what analogy to use?

Actually I really don't need one, because I give God/Christ enough credit to know when something is possible and when it's not, or to recognize extenuating circumstances. Christ is certainly not going to demand the impossible from anyone.

So ask yourself, what is the difference bestrewn the OP and the thief?

That thief is often used as an excuse with "no works" doctrine. "Well the thief didn't do any works and he went to heaven, that means none of us have to do works." No, that's just wishful thinking.

It was not possible for the thief to do works, just as it would not be possible for any death bed confession, but it's still required of those to whom it is possible.

All kinds of neat stuff showing up in this thread.

 

[-57]

The thief died under the Mosaic covenant (assuming he was a Jew) so being baptized would have been irrelevant.

So, God changed the requirement for salvation? Do you honestly think you can support that view?

 

[ByTheSpirit]

The thief died under the Mosaic covenant (assuming he was a Jew) so being baptized would have been irrelevant.

DING DING DING! Winner!!!