No announcement yet.

The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to be Saved! (HOF thread)

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31

    Attacking others is not the solution.

    You embrace a false baptism and you believe that in order to be saved you have to be baptized, this is a false teaching. I'm not sure where you get all this other stuff from. You are in a make believe world and that my friend is dangerous. I urge to come back to Biblical Christianity.

    I warn you with Scripture: If anybody is preaching to you a Gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemend (Galatians 1:9). O2bewsie, you are the one Paul is warning us of. You preach "another Gospel" and a false Jesus.

    You deny that Jesus is eternal God. This alone places you in the kingdom of Satan. I would urge you to surrender your life to the right Jesus and the not the wrong Jesus before you die. There is but One Jesus (the one who is eternal God) who can forgive you of all your sins. Begin a relationship with Him right now.


    Answer the question please. Did Paul mention baptism in 1 Cor. 15? Your answer will help those reading these posts. Paul did not believe that Baptism was part of the Gospel hence him saying "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel,..." (1 Cor. 1:17). He made a difference between baptism and the Gospel. Do you see it or are you blinded like O2bewise?


    • #32
      Baptism and the Christian?

      Is water baptism necessary FOR the Christian? If so why, if he is saved by faith alone? The answer lies in WHAT baptism symbolizes or pictures.According to Paul in Rom 6:3-4 it is a symbol of the believer being BURIED WITH CHRIST and being RAISED to a NEW LIFE.Also in Gal 3:27 Paul say that in baptism we PUT ON Christ.These verses are HIGHLY significant and not to be taken lightly.So what does this all mean?

      It is like you sign up for the army.You raise your right hand to take the oath to serve your country and the army.That pictures your faith.Now you go and get your uniform.You PUT it on.That shows the world and those around you that you wear the uniform of the US Army and CHOSE to do so.This is what baptism represents.When you are immersed in the waters of baptism you are IDENTIFYING yourself with Jesus Christ, but at the same time you are PUBLICALLY showing everyone seeing you that you have chosen to be identified with Jesus.Baptism doesn't offer any salvation, but it confrms the reality of of you genuineness to become a Christian and wanting to be identified with Christ.


      • #33

        Thank you for your comments however you are you wrong.

        The fact is heretics of our day desire to promote a belief that baptism will somehow save you. This is a lie from the pit of hell. The Apostle Paul made it clear "justification is by faith" (Romans 5:1).


        • #34

          I will not be responding to you anymore because you lack any theological knowledge which makes it hard for anyone to discuss these issues with you. Good Luck with your life.


          • #35

            Answer the question please. Did Paul mention baptism in 1 Cor. 15? Your answer will help those reading these posts. Paul did not believe that Baptism was part of the Gospel hence him saying "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel,..." (1 Cor. 1:17). He made a difference between baptism and the Gospel. Do you see it or are you blinded like O2bewise?
            NOW I see what you are asking. When you asked me if I've read 1 Cor. 15, I took that as chapter 15, not 1 Cor. 1:15. Could you be more precise in the future so I don't spend time answering the wrong passage? Thanks.

            Now, I will address your question concerning 1 Cor. 1:15. When Paul says that "Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel" (verse 17), he was not in any way shape or form implying that baptism isn't necessary. Not at all. If you look at the context of chapter 1 in it's entirety, the reason behind verse 17 is quite clear.

            Starting at verse 10 it says:

            10) Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions amoung you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

            Paul is pleading with the brethren at Corinth not to become divided. Divided over what? Verses 12-13 hold this answer:

            12) 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."
            13) Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

            The Corinthian brethren were being divided over who actually baptized them. They were placing spiritual importance on the person that baptized them, as if the people who where baptized by Paul had a better baptism than somebody who was baptized by Apollos.

            We as Christians are commanded to be baptized into Jesus Christ, and not into anybody else. That's why Paul asked them "Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?", because these people were missing the whole point of baptism. We are all baptized into Christ regardless of who does the actual baptizing. But the Corinthian brethren didn't see it that way, and were being divided, based on the person that baptized them, which is why Paul is rebuking them.

            Paul's displeasure with them is evident in verses 14 and 15:

            14) I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius,
            15) lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name.

            Paul said this because if he had baptized more people than he already did, the problem would be even bigger, having more people saying "I am of Paul".

            So finally, that leads us to verse 17:

            17) 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.

            Paul is simply saying that baptism is not his main focus, not that baptism isn't necessary. Paul's main focus was to preach the word of God. Notice, however, that everybody spoken about in these verses were indeed baptized. It's just too bad that these people were making a big deal about who baptized them, or else Paul would have no need to rebuke them about this. Why would Paul preach that baptism isn't necessary when it was commanded by Jesus in Matthew 28:19,20?

            A perfect example of what I'm talking about can be found in John 4:1-2:

            1) Therefore, when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John
            2) (though Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples)

            See the similarity? Based on verse 2, because Jesus didn't baptize people Himself (just like Paul's main focus was not to baptize people himself), would you make the assertion that baptism isn't necessary, just because He (Jesus) didn't do the act? If so then explain to me why Jesus Himself went on to say in Mark 16:16 that "he who believes AND is baptized will be saved". Also explain to me why He commanded it in the great commission (Matt. 28:19,20).

            Freak, I have asked you two times and you haven't answered, so I will ask again:

            Knowing that baptism is commanded by our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (Matt. 28:19,20), who are you say that baptism isn't necessary?? If we don't obey Jesus's commandments, then He is NOT the author of eternal salvation to that person, because Heberws 5:9 states:

            9) And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.

            It clearly states that He is the author of salvation to who? All who obey Him. Where do you think that leaves the people that don't obey Him? I'll spell it out just so there's no confusion: HELL.

            So again, who are you to say that baptism is not necessary, when the Lord has commanded it? Answer that question please.
            Last edited by Kevin; September 9th, 2001, 04:47 PM.
            Praise be to God!


            • #36

              As usual Freak is the Opposite of Graciousness to his fellow Christian.

              Too bad that he has not developed any Fruits of the Holy Spirit.

              Freak does not know that a person

              has to have Faith before he is Baptized.

              But it is not easy to change the mind of a Stiff necked person.


              • #37
                You guys, this isn't that difficult. Baptism by the Holy Spirit is what saves since the Holy Spirit washes away our sins. Anyone can be dunked under water but it's the Holy Spirit that saves. Baptism is a cerimony and is symbolic as it is used today. Baptism of the Holy Spirit, I believe, comes on someone the moment they are saved.

                There are 2 different types of baptism being used on this board. One physical, the other spiritual. One symbolic, the other is the is when one becomes saved.


                • #38

                  You guys, this isn't that difficult.
                  I agree, it's crystal clear to me.

                  Baptism by the Holy Spirit is what saves since the Holy Spirit washes away our sins. Anyone can be dunked under water but it's the Holy Spirit that saves.
                  The gift of the Holy Spirit saves us, but water is a crucial part of the baptism of Jesus, not just of John. I am aware that John said "I baptize with water, but He who comes after baptizes with the Holy Spirit", but John isn't saying that water won't be necessary. The only reason John said that is because John, or any other human, was incapable of baptizing with the Holy Spirit since it hadn't come yet. After all, who could be the perfect lamb of God but Jesus? All John could do was the water part. The gift of the Holy Spirit (salvation) had not yet come.

                  John 3:5 states:

                  5) Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless on is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

                  As you said earlier, this isn't that difficult. That verse is clearly speaking about the requirements for being reborn, and it includes water, as well as the Holy Spirit. Anybody who teaches that water isn't necessary goes against this verse, and thus Jesus.

                  That's why the Bible has examples like Phillip baptizing the Ethiopian. Look for yourself in Acts 8:35-36:

                  35) Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him.
                  36) Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, "See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?"

                  This isn't the baptism of John... no siree, this is the baptism of Jesus Christ mentioned here (verse 35). The fact that the eunuch asked "See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?" proves that Phillip instructed baptism with water, or why would the enuch mention water at all? Phillip was instructing the eunuch about baptism, which is what Jesus commanded in the great commission (Matt. 28:19-20), and it inlcudes water. This passage and the "unless you are born of water and Spirit" passage proves that water is involved.

                  Another example of Jesus's baptism requiring water is in Acts 10:47-48:

                  47) Can anyone forbid water that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?"
                  48) And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.

                  I couldn't say it any plainer. Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized?

                  If you think that they were saved in verse 44 when the Holy Spirit fell on them in the miraculous measure, then explain to me Numbers 11:25. It states:

                  25) Then the Lord came down in the cloud, and spoke to him, and took of the Spirit that was upon him, and placed the same upon the seventy elders; and it happened, when the Spirit rested upon them, that they prophesied, although they never did so again.

                  In both Acts 10:44 and Numbers 11:25 the Holy Spirit fell upon people and the result was the same: the people were given miraculous spiritual gifts. The people in Numbers prophecied, while the people in Acts spoke with tongues. My point is this: If the falling of the Holy Spirit is what saved those people in Acts 10:44 then the people in Numbers 11:25 were saved also, becuase the same thing happened to both parties. And if the people in Numbers were saved, then that means there was salvation before Christ, and that just isn't possible.

                  The people in Acts 10:44 had the Holy Spirit poured upon them so that the Jews would know that salvation was available to the Gentiles as well as the Jews. That's why the Jews were amazed (verse 45). Once it was proven to the Jews by miraculous measure that the Gentiles also found favor in God's eyes, the Gentiles were baptized into Christ Jesus with water. And the baptism of Jesus is the difference between spiritual life and death (Romans 6:3-6).
                  Last edited by Kevin; September 10th, 2001, 12:41 AM.
                  Praise be to God!


                  • #39

                    Do I believe baptism is commanded of course I do just as loving one another is commanded.

                    But loving people will not get you to heaven. Neither will baptism. Baptism is just that baptism. The blood of Christ however will save you (Hebrews 1:7).

                    Instead of putting your trust in a act put your trust in a living Person-The Lord Jesus Christ.

                    The main difference between me and you is this: I tell others it is Jesus that saves. You tell others it Jesus (as if He is not enough) AND baptism.


                    • #40
                      ANY COMMENTS????????

                      I posted this a while ago, but no-one commented:

                      Salvation is the work of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the sinner, whereby he is given new spiritual life. Certainly baptism is commanded, but it is for the believer, already saved, already with new life from the dead, already quickened. It is the cleansing of the conscience, the application of the blood of the sacrifice, the blood of the covenant, (Heb. 9 & 13) as the Lord's Supper is the partaking of the sacrifice.

                      Baptism is understood by evangelical Christians in various ways.
                      1. "Covenant baptism" equivalent to circ-umcision, therefore applied to babies within the church.

                      2. "Believers' baptism" administered to new believers as a sign of various spiritual blessings (see above.) Baptism is normally required for church membership. It is not considered essential for salvation, because it is for believers. THe mode of baptism is not important. (My position.)

                      3. Baptism by immersion required for remission of sins and therefore salvation. A person is considered unsaved until he is so baptised. Immersion is inferred from several texts, but not in fact specified. I reject this understanding.

                      While I do not hold with infant baptism, I cannot reject it as invalid, because that would mean rejecting as unbelievers many godly Christians alive & dead. Most of those responsible for our translations, commentaries, and the proclaiming of the Gospel down the ages have held this position against the baptist position. Most also accept baptism by sprinkling.

                      Sprinkling can be understood from Hebrews 9:10 where "various baptisms" refers to Old Covenant sprinklings with water & ashes, water & blood, etc. THe Passover lamb blood was sprinkled on the door posts. With this understanding, Peter's reference to "sprinkled blood" becomes a reference to baptism. (1 Peter 1:2)

                      When we refer to the LXX we find Naaman baptising himself in the Jordan. (2 Kings 5:14) THe LXX word translated dipped is "ebaptisato" from the Heb. "tabal". Tabal is used a number times to dip, as in dip (LXX "bapsei") & sprinkle, e.g.
                      Num 19:18 And a clean person shall take hyssop, and dip [it] in the water, and sprinkle [it] upon the tent, and upon all the vessels, and upon the persons that were there, and upon him that touched a bone, or one slain, or one dead, or a grave:
                      THis is part of the "red heifer" ritual referred to in Hebrew 9. Thanks, for easy access to Hebrew & Greek.

                      From this I understand a dip and pour/sprinkle method to be valid baptism. John could quite easily have stood in the Jordan and baptised by scooping water by dipping cupped hands or a vessel to apply to the head of the penitent sinner. It would have made it possible for 3000 people to be baptised on the day of Pentecost without taking over the public water supply. (Courtesy of the Roman & Jewish authorities who had just crucified the one in whose name the baptisms were taking place!) Sprinkling with a sprig of hyssop would have been possible also.

                      I don't believe a believer who was not baptised as a baby who learnt about believers' baptism would refuse it. He has the Holy Spirit guiding him. Nor do I think one baptised in infancy & who refused believers' baptism is being disobedient to Christ's command, if he understands "covenant baptism."
                      Hebrews 13:20 Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant,
                      21 Make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom [be] glory for ever and ever. Amen.

                      In Christ,



                      • #41
                        Re: Freak's Own Words Accuse Him

                        Originally posted by o2bwise

                        Please dispense with doctrine (I mean this in a certain sense) and just be HONEST. Know something by its words and actions. (I realize in this case, we only have words).

                        When Freak opened up this topic, he denounced my views of baptism as heretical on the following basis.

                        1. Baptism is not mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15 (neither is Christ's blood by the way).

                        THAT was his point. The original post had NOTHING to do with whether or not the baptism I believe in is unto "another" Christ.

                        Just LOOK at the start of Freak's topic to find even a HINT of that. It won't be found.

                        THEN I brought up Romans 6:4. He then SWITCHED (LIED, DECEIVED). He tried to put on the appearance of ALL THE WHILE attacking my belief that baptism is part of the gospel NOT by claiming 1 Cor 15 and its not mentioning baptism, BUT by saying my view is heretical because I believe in a baptism unto "another" Christ.

                        That is just plain dishonesty.

                        Now, one thing I see often in these kind of forums is the sinful practise of preferring a person's words BECAUSE of what that person believes.

                        Such as:
                        o2 has this weird non-Trinitarian belief. Thus, I will typically find him to be wrong - no matter what.

                        Freak is Trinitarian and is a zealous defender of the truth (hooray!). Thus, I will typically defend him - no matter what.

                        The truth is, the words we offer contain their own innate veracity. Regardless of what Freak believes and regardless of what I believe, the words often stand, just as they are.

                        In this case, Freak is being a dishonest, deceiving LIAR.

                        Also in this case, sadly, you appear to be in the category of defending Freak because you like how he believes and dislike how I believe.

                        Freak's behavior, sometimes, is beneath the typical behavior of the heathens that post in this forum.

                        Nice "ally," huh?

                        O2bwise, I don't believe you can read minds and you have gone a little overboard with your understanding of my intent. My point is as I stated "If o2bwise believes that Christ is separate from the Father then who's Spirit are we baptized by? Is it the Spirit of God or the Spirit of Christ?". If I misunderstood Freak's point then I apologize to you and Freak.

                        This question is still to you..."Is it the Spirit of God or the Spirit of Christ" that baptizes spiritually.


                        • #42
                          Spot on Tralon!!!
                          This is what baptism represents.When you are immersed in the waters of baptism you are IDENTIFYING yourself with Jesus Christ
                          The following is what God does when He saves you:

                          He identifies you with the Lord Jesus. In His death your flesh has been judged at the cross. In His resurrection you have a new life with Him. You are baptised into Christ. "Baptism now saves you".

                          When a Christian asks to be baptised by water he should know that he is witnessing to the following position. He is dead in the flesh but alive in Christ. Christians should realize that the act of baptism is God's work, they are simply witnessing to that work by being baptised in water.

                          The receiving of the atonement results in God baptising you into Christ by the Spirit. The reason why Christians enter into a debate, whether Baptism is part of the Gospel message or not, is for the following reasons.
                          1) no distinction is made between the Gospel delivered to the Jew and the Gospel delivered to the Gentile.

                          2) A misconception that there is more than one baptism. The bible speaks only of one. (Eph 4 v 5 ) Note: although there seems to be 2 separate baptisms, water and Spirit, I have argued that our Baptism by the Spirit is the work of God to which we are positioned in Christ. Baptism by water does not achieve a new position. It should not be considered apart.

                          God saves. We can do no more but to witness to this.

                          In Him


                          • #43
                            But if baptism is required for salvation then Jesus lied to the thief on the cross.

                            Jesus assured the thief that he would be in paradise with him. He was never baptised. He was on the cross.

                            Baptism doesn't mean salvation. I know several people who only went through baptism because they thought it was what people did. They cared nothing for God or even talking about Him. Only several years later did some of them actually admit this, even though we had kinda suspected, and commit their life to Christ. Baptism has no power if the person is not willing.


                            • #44
                              Whoa there, "Freak!"

                              There are so many conflicts and contradictions in what you've presented it's really hard to know where to start.

                              You cite scriptures mentioning salvation being given to the individual, but with no mention of baptism. For instance, Acts 16:31 - "Believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved, you and your household." According to your own logic, and your own use of the scriptures, if that is ALL that is necessary for one to be saved, then one can keep on being a liar, a thief, a fornicator, an adulterer, or even a murderer, and be saved only if he believes in the Lord Jesus. That is the NECESSARY CONCLUSION we must reach, and believe, according to YOUR logic - BECAUSE ACTS 16:31 SAYS NOTHING ABOUT REPENTANCE! Moreover, I can just ignore Rom. 10:10, which says, "with the mouth confession is made unto salvation," and believe and teach everyone else that they don't have to confess the name of Christ to be saved, because Acts 16:31 says all you have to do is "BELIEVE" in Him!

                              What do you think, Freak?

                              Also, please answer this: Why do you do a "patchwork" with the New Testament scriptures, picking and choosing the ones that fit what you believe, and conveniently dodging or detouring around others that say more on the subject of salvation? Like 1 Pet. 3:21, which says - "Baptism also now saves you"?

                              Those 5 words, inspired by the Holy Spirit, spoken by the apostle Peter, form an INDEPENDENT CLAUSE - a COMPLETE THOUGHT which STANDS ALONE. "Baptism" is the subject, "saves" is the verb, telling what baptism does, and "you" is the direct object of the verb - making "you" (all of those who obey the Lord in baptism) the direct object of the action being performed by baptism - which is being "SAVED!"

                              I await your comments, Freak!
                              God bless...



                              • #45
                                Hi EricU,

                                I appreciate what you said about the thief on the cross. But there's no contradiction at all about the theif being saved without baptism and the belief/teaching now that baptism IS necessary. Here's why...

                                First of all, Jesus had "authority on earth to forgive sins" (Mk. 2:10). Thus, as He went about healing the sick, at times he would say, "Son, your sins are forgiven" (eg. Mk. 2:5).

                                But AFTER THE CROSS the time came when Jesus would no longer be on the earth to forgive men of their sins as He had been doing. Instead, in His final hours, while with His disciples, He gave TO THEM the following 3-part, great commandment - "Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded you...." (Matt. 28:19-20).

                                Notice the 3 things that the Lord COMMANDED: (1) Make disciples (2) Baptizing them (3) Teaching them to obey everything.

                                The scope of the command was universal - "ALL NATIONS." And he COMMANDED his apostles to BAPTIZE those who would be His disciples - now watch this, EricU, and everyone else, please: Jesus not only COMMANDED these apostles to go and make disciples, baptizing them, He also told THEM to tell THOSE WHO HEARD THEM to obey EVERYTHING He had commanded - And He had just COMMANDED BAPTISM!

                                Therefore, people of "all nations" who wish to be a disciple of Jesus Christ have been COMMANDED by Christ, through His apostles, to be baptized: "make disciples of all nations, BAPTIZING THEM...and teaching them to OBEY EVERYTHING I have COMMANDED you...."F

                                The baptism of Christ had not been appointed yet when the thief was on the cross next to Jesus. Moreover, he could obviously do nothing, being nailed to a cross, in demonstrating his faith in the Lord except to do so verbally. At this point, Jesus still exercised His "authority on earth to forgive sins," so He forgave the thief because of the penitence he showed while hanging on the cross. It was ALL he COULD do.

                                But when Jesus gave the Great Commission to His apostles, and Luke states that "repentance and forgiveness of sins will be preached in his name among all nations beginning at Jerusalem" (Lk. 24:47).

                                And guess what was preached in the very first gospel sermon to the audience there, beginning at Jerusalem (Acts 2), for them to receive the forgiveness of their sins? Right! "Repent AND BE BAPTIZED, EVERYONE OF YOU [just as Jesus commanded his apostles in Matt. 28:19], in the name of Jesus Christ FOR THE FORGIVENESS OF YOUR SINS...." (Acts 2:38)
                                God bless...