JFJ Forums

(… cont)
Regarding my interpretation of 1 Tim 3:15….  This is not my personal interpretation of scripture - it was made under the guidance of the Holy Spirit.  How can it be wrong?  If you read the verse in context you will see that Paul is clearly talking about the characteristics of the leaders of the church.  The word “church” is analogous to “qahal” and means assembly of people.  It does not mean the mystical spiritual unity of all believers.  The “qahal” had a leadership structure with authority granted by Christ himself.  You have spiritualized away the plain and simple meaning of this passage to fit with your protestant tradition.

Thank you for taking a firm stand on infant baptism.  Baptism is specifically mentioned in the Great Commission (“part 2” is often overlooked by evangelicals and fundamentalists because Jesus is actually telling his Apostles to perform water baptism as part of the Great Commission):  “Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit” (there you go Steadfast Mt 28:19 – not in Jesus name only).  Scripture makes no distinction between adult and infants or between entire households and only those in the household who are of a certain age.  Rejection of the graces of baptism for infants is a man made tradition that surfaced after the reformation in only a subset of Protestantism.  I’m still waiting for someone to produce a pre-reformation writing that shows the Holy Spirit inspired pre-reformation Christians to interpret scripture differently.

Questions you’ve left unanswered from previous posts…
-Why can your Holy Spirit guided interpretation of baptism be truth and still differ from other protestant interpretations also guided by the Holy Spirit?
-Where did you get the term “papist” from?
-Were the teachings of the 11 Apostles fallible prior to the recording of their teachings in scripture?
-Do you acknowledge there are no pre-reformation writings that support a “symbolic” vs. regenerative understanding of baptism?

Regarding Jesus’ baptism ….

Of course Jesus did not need regeneration.  He was sinless.  He was baptized to “fulfill all righteousness” and to point the way to our baptism.  My interpretations are straight from scripture as are yours.  The difference is my interpretation of scripture has been inspired by the Holy Spirit for nearly 2000 years and I have writings to prove it.  Your man made tradition came on the scene 1500 years later.  Show me a pre-reformation writing that proves otherwise!

I know that Jesus was baptized in the Jordan River.  This is significant because throughout scripture, God uses water in a very tangible means for the salvation of his people.  The Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters (Gn 1:2), the very waters that would be the source of life.  The waters are parted to allow for the land.  But sin enters into the world and the earth is covered again with water to cleanse it from sin.  “In it only a few, that is eight souls, were saved through water.  It is the baptism corresponding to this water which saves you now, not the washing off of physical dirt but the pledge of a good conscience given to God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pt 3:19ff).  The waters of the flood (a type/anti-type relationship to baptism according to scripture) destroyed sin and saved Noah’s family.  Was the flood symbolic or did God actually use water to destroy sin and save Noah and his family?  Did Noah and his family earn this or was it God’s unmerited grace?  Did the waters save all of Noah’s family or only those old enough to repent or old enough to profess faith in God?

How was Israel saved from bondage to Egypt?  The Red Sea was literally parted, Israel passed through the saving waters and their enemies were crushed.  The water that washes away the army of Egypt, which enslaved Israel, represents the waters of baptism which wash away the sin that enslaves God’s people. Paul echoes this very teaching in 1 Cor 10:1-4.  Was the parting of the Red Sea symbolic or did God actually use water to free his people from bondage, to allow them to worship in freedom, and to allow them to enter into the Promised Land?  Did Israel earn this or was it God’s unmerited grace?  Was all of Israel saved or was it only those who were old enough to repent or old enough to profess faith in God?
(cont …)

(… cont)
When Israel was dying of thirst in the desert, how did God save his people?  Through water struck from the rock.  Was it just symbolic or did saving water actually come forth from the rock?  Was all of Israel allowed to drink from this fountain of life or was it only those old enough to profess faith in God?  Likewise, what happens when the Rock is struck by the sword as he hung on the cross?  Life saving blood and water flow from his side.  (The Catholic and I believe the E.O. church see this as symbolic of the two sacraments of baptism and communion).

We see the Exodus completed when Joshua prepares to lead Israel into the Promised Land.  The waters of the Jordan River, where Jesus was baptized, are parted and Israel is allowed to enter into the Promised Land.  The Land Promises made to Abraham are fulfilled.  The language used in Joshua 4 is “pass over” – the Exodus is complete.  The 12 stones are placed as a reminder, likely the very stones John the Baptist mentions to the Pharisees and Sadducees who approach him.

There’s even more: the laver in the temple, the ceremonial cleansings, the relationship between baptism and circumcision as part of a covenant relationship, etc.  Perhaps we can get into this later.
(cont …)

(… cont)

There are many more examples throughout the O.T. of how God quite literally and physically uses water to save and give life to His people.  Nothing symbolic about it.  It is all quite real and tangible.  There’s nothing earned, purely unmerited grace upon grace, not withheld from anyone!

Finally, we see that all of this was to prepare Israel and the nations to understand what God would do through the waters of baptism.  Here is what God has to say about baptism through the prophet Ezekiel (Ez 36:25ff, NIV):

I will sprinkle clean water on you, and you will be clean; I will cleanse you from all your impurities and from all your idols.  I will give you a new heart and put a new spirit in you; I will remove from you your heart of stone and give you a heart of flesh. And I will put my Spirit in you and move you to follow my decrees and be careful to keep my laws. You will live in the land I gave your forefathers; you will be my people, and I will be your God.

So here is how the true Messianic Jew would see baptism based on the experiences of Israel as recorded in scripture:
Water saves
Water cleanses
Water gives life
Water destroys sin and death
Water gives us a new heart, turning it from stone to flesh
Water gives us a new spirit
Water is part of the initiation into a covenant relationship: You will be my people and I will be your God.

Is it any wonder that baptism is part of the Great Commission? (Mt 28:19f, NIV)
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. And surely I am with you always, to the very end of the age."

So DavidJ, I have a hard time understanding how you can make the claim that I am “hammering you with unscriptural tradition”.  This is all straight from scripture and I haven’t even delved into the N.T. yet.  Perhaps in time I will and then I will follow it up with what the early church had to say about baptism.

Very correct for the Old Testament times; God had not poured out His Spirit on all flesh (Joel 2:28-29). Born again bible believers are no longer under the Old Covenant; they are under a New Covenant!

Under the New Covenant, it is Holy Spirit baptism rather than water baptism which is universal to salvation since the Day of Pentecost. This is the “promise of the Father” mentioned by Jesus (Acts 1:4-8). Notice that when Cornelius and his household were saved, they received the Holy Spirit (as evidenced by speaking in an unknown language) prior to baptism. It is clear from Peter's recollection of the events that the baptisms that took place were in response to that which God had already initiated, i.e., granting the Holy Spirit to the Gentiles; something which surprised the Jews then in attendance (Acts 10:44-45,47; 11:15-18). Peter referred to this as “repentance unto life”  and made no mention of the subsequent baptisms when recounting the events before his skeptical brethren.

You should be careful to note that the means of salvation has always been regeneration by the Holy Spirit. Holy Spirit baptism in the Church Age does not substitute for this work of the Holy Spirit. However, following the Day of Pentecost and the giving of the Holy Spirit (John 7:38-39) Holy Spirit baptism is concurrent with regeneration placing all believers into the Body of Christ.

We also see from numerous other passages that it is Spirit baptism which is emphasized over water baptism. We note that although John the Baptist's ministry centered on repentance and water baptism, he indicated that a Greater would follow and baptize with the Holy Spirit (Matthew 3:11; Mark 1:8). Jesus Himself echoed these priorities (Acts 1:5) and did not water baptize any of His followers (John 4:2). In his letter to the Church at Corinth, Paul also indicated that baptism was not an essential element of his ministry, viz., "...Christ didn't send me to baptize, but to preach the Good News..." (1 Corinthians 1:17).

Would it not be extremely strange for water baptism to be essential for salvation, yet John, Jesus, and Paul all downplay its importance. Thee are many more scripture passages which make it plain, under the New Covenant, that it is faith which is the essential ingredient for salvation, not an external rite such as water baptism.

David

Ws I had offer quote a source that The church  delay baptism until the person understood the creeds about jesus.
that from 100-300 ad it was a practice to delay baptism for 2-3 yearsuntill the new convert understood things about jesus.
even Justin marty confirms this.


That practise is not scriptural...

After Peter's speech the men asked how to be saved...Peter replied

Act 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Act 2:39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, [even] as many as the Lord our God shall call.
Act 2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
Act 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added [unto them] about three thousand souls.
Looks immediatly to me no waiting period.

Act 8:36 And as they went on [their] way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, [here is] water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?  
Act 8:38 And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.  

no waiting period...same with Cornelius and his family

man's tradition says wait...God say what hindereth thee?

When a person feels he is ready for baptism then he should repent of his sins and be baptised IMMEDIATLY not 2 to 3 yrs later.

as for for that post WS read this please


http://www.biblestudymanuals.net/jn3v18.htm#V

it deals with the bible verse you quoted and thiis site also goes deep into the greek meaning of the NT

as for evidence prior to the formation of people not agreeing with the RCC about some of there doctrines I will give you real names and the time they live and what they spoke against.

I have to wait until I;m home to get my book out which is called Jesus freaks but it basic a timeline fro christians being killed under the RCC pagan ruling and atheist communism.

(note that this and the following post should have preceded post #30.  This should be 1 of 3)

Regarding Jesus’ baptism ….

Of course Jesus did not need regeneration.  He was sinless.  He was baptized to “fulfill all righteousness” and to point the way to our baptism.  My interpretations are straight from scripture as are yours.  The difference is my interpretation of scripture has been inspired by the Holy Spirit for nearly 2000 years and I have writings to prove it.  Your man made tradition came on the scene 1500 years later.  Show me a pre-reformation writing that proves otherwise!

I know that Jesus was baptized in the Jordan River.  This is significant because throughout scripture, God uses water in a very tangible means for the salvation of his people.  The Spirit of God was moving over the face of the waters (Gn 1:2), the very waters that would be the source of life.  The waters are parted to allow for the land.  But sin enters into the world and the earth is covered again with water to cleanse it from sin.  “In it only a few, that is eight souls, were saved through water.  It is the baptism corresponding to this water which saves you now, not the washing off of physical dirt but the pledge of a good conscience given to God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ” (1 Pt 3:19ff).  The waters of the flood (a type/anti-type relationship to baptism according to scripture) destroyed sin and saved Noah’s family.  Was the flood symbolic or did God actually use water to destroy sin and save Noah and his family?  Did Noah and his family earn this or was it God’s unmerited grace?  Did the waters save all of Noah’s family or only those old enough to repent or old enough to profess faith in God?

How was Israel saved from bondage to Egypt?  The Red Sea was literally parted, Israel passed through the saving waters and their enemies were crushed.  The water that washes away the army of Egypt, which enslaved Israel, represents the waters of baptism which wash away the sin that enslaves God’s people. Paul echoes this very teaching in 1 Cor 10:1-4.  Was the parting of the Red Sea symbolic or did God actually use water to free his people from bondage, to allow them to worship in freedom, and to allow them to enter into the Promised Land?  Did Israel earn this or was it God’s unmerited grace?  Was all of Israel saved or was it only those who were old enough to repent or old enough to profess faith in God?
(cont …)

(… cont)
(this should be 2 of 3 and post #30 should have been 3 of 3)
When Israel was dying of thirst in the desert, how did God save his people?  Through water struck from the rock.  Was it just symbolic or did saving water actually come forth from the rock?  Was all of Israel allowed to drink from this fountain of life or was it only those old enough to profess faith in God?  Likewise, what happens when the Rock is struck by the sword as he hung on the cross?  Life saving blood and water flow from his side.  (The Catholic and I believe the E.O. church see this as symbolic of the two sacraments of baptism and communion).

We see the Exodus completed when Joshua prepares to lead Israel into the Promised Land.  The waters of the Jordan River, where Jesus was baptized, are parted and Israel is allowed to enter into the Promised Land.  The Land Promises made to Abraham are fulfilled.  The language used in Joshua 4 is “pass over” – the Exodus is complete.  The 12 stones are placed as a reminder, likely the very stones John the Baptist mentions to the Pharisees and Sadducees who approach him.

There’s even more: the laver in the temple, the ceremonial cleansings, the relationship between baptism and circumcision as part of a covenant relationship, etc.  Perhaps we can get into this later.
(cont …) (see post #30 for conclusion)