Is Baptism Necessary for Salvation? 2/4

[iiiEMOTIONiii]

The exemptions we find in the Holy Scriptures about people who did not experience baptism such as the criminal on cross whom Jesus promised paradise did not have to be baptized to confirm their faith. HOWEVER, IF THAT CRIMINAL IN HIS EXPERIENCE OF FORGIVENESS WAS ALLOWED TO LIVE LONGER HE WOULD HAVE SOUGHT TO EXPERIENCE CONFIRMING HIS FAITH IN JESUS CHRIST THROUGH BAPTISM AS A SYMBOL OF OUR COVENANT RELATIONSHIP WITH HIM IN DYING TO SIN & RESURRECTED TO A NEW LIFE IN CHRIST THROUGH THE SPIRIT.

[iiiEMOTIONiii]

BAPTISM IS NOT THE MEANS OF SALVATION. RATHER, IT IS A RESULT OF SALVATION. It is not the "CAUSE FOR" Salvation, it is rather, the "EFFECT OF" Salvation!!!

I would not dare say that "THE BIBLE TEACHES THAT BAPTISM IS NOT NECESSARY". It is part of the process... however, one should understand its place in the process: IT IS NOT THE CAUSE, IT IS THE EFFECT. IT IS NOT THE ROOT, IT IS THE FRUIT. IT IS NOT THE MEANS, IT IS THE RESULT...

To say it is not necessary is misleading...

[Laplois]

I love this video and this man has the TRUTH in his mouth, BAPTISM IS NOT NECESSARY for SALVATION, FAITH ALONE SAVES!!! BAPTISM IS ONLY SYMBOLIC AND AN EXTERNAL EXPRESSION....

[JaeZ76]

McGrifdr, a better verse to give in regards to what the Apostles were to do would be Matthew 28:19 where Jesus instructed the Apostles to baptize believers, spreading the Gospel (or, Good News) everywhere. If this isn't a huge tell-tale sign that we as believers are to be baptized then I don't know what is.

[mcgrifdr]

Doesn't the word epistle mean letter and if we think about it letters are addressed to some one in particular. Well if we look through the word then we see that Paul was speaking to the saints in romans 1:7, 1corth. 1:1,2corth 1:1, Ephesians 1:1,phillipans1:1, colossians 1:2 Paul is speaking to the saints directly. We are not saints before we come to God we are creatures. so we must find out how we go from being creatures to saints. Mark 16:15 tells us what the disciples were supposed to do wit

[WorldBibleUnion454]

catholic(dot)com

[Ilovetoplayjazz]

watch?v=lRkC8MUZzLg&feature=re­lated

[Sirduke62]

The argument that "unbelievers can't praise God," appeals to a confusion of two different uses of the term "believers." One are the saved and the other are those who stipulate to the existence of God the Creator or even Jesus as Messiah. The OT has lots of examples of people acknowledging God apart from a clear reading of their salvation. Acknowledging God or Jesus and making Jesus Lord are not identical. If baptism can't save, praise can't either. 5/5

[Sirduke62]

The context of 1Cor 1:14ff is found in vs 11-13. Clearly, baptism in this context is a proxy for partisanship. There is no suggestion that people shouldn't be, baptized or that it is optional. Paul uses the happenstance that he didn't baptize many of them as a ground for neutrality to condemn partisanship. Drawing a supposition concerning the efficacy of baptism is not warranted, because efficacy doesn't touch on the reasoning. 3/5

[lllannallll]

@Sirduke62 I'd submit that the statement in I Cor 1: 17 "For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect" is an understood ellipsis. "For Christ sent me (not only) to baptize, but (also) to preach the gospel ..." The same principle is seen in I Tim 5: 23: "Drink no longer (not only) water, but (also) use a little wine for thy stomach's sake and thine often infirmities."

[Sirduke62]

@lllannallll Very interesting observation. The range of possibilities could reasonably be wide. "For Christ sent me (not primarily) to baptize, but (primarily) to preach the gospel ..." Remember in John 3 & 4 Jesus let others baptize into the teaching that he was ushering in the kingdom of God. A kind of forerunner to Christian baptism. A good president of a primary teacher delegating baptism to others.

[lllannallll]

@Sirduke62 Either "take" is acceptable grammatically, and BOTH are superior to the idea that "Christ sent me not to baptize", so baptism is unnecessary. This much is true: if THAT is what the verse means, then Paul DISOBEYED when he did baptize. If the verse means what this guy in the video believes, then Paul sinned every time he baptized anyone.

[Sirduke62]

@lllannallll Hard to argue with that.

[morgancole95]

@Sirduke62 not if you open your Bible and your eyes.

[Sirduke62]

Cor 2:12 says the work of baptism is by God. In 1 Cor 15:1-4, Rom 1:16 the gospel saves, but so does faith. No one is questioning if the gospel saves. If this passage doesn't speak to salvation by faith, then it doesn't speak to baptism either, it is simply irrelevant. Other verses tell us what saves us, and make no mention of the gospel. Baptism is part of the Gospel proclamation on Pentecost. Gospel, limited by 1 Cor 15:1-4? Not stated not implied. All those Corinthians were baptized. 2/5

[Sirduke62]

You are quite right to raise the issue of Col 2:11-12, particularly 12 but you say that "baptism replaces the circumcision." The text doesn't say that. Circumcision is used as a typology, namely cutting something off. The thing cut off is the "body of sin." This is a comparison of symbolism, of the 2, not a substitution of rituals. We do participate in the blood of Christ in baptism, his blood is there. Paul had this in mind in Romans 6:3 when he said we are "baptized into [Christ's] death." 1/5

[lllannallll]

@Sirduke62 "You are quite right to raise the issue of Col 2:11-12, particularly 12 but you say that "baptism replaces the circumcision." That statement, sir, identified him as a smatterer. Immersion in water never REPLACED anything. This guy (carmvideos) makes weak arguments - virtually the same ones attempted for years, and shores them up with such statements as "baptism replaced circumcision." He correctly points out that "girls aren't circumcized", but moves right along - unbothered.

[Sirduke62]

@lllannallll The idea that connecting baptism to salvation results in "salvation by works," in the meaning of Rom 3:28; is a very hard notion to shake, if one ever falls into it. All this strained exegesis then becomes a necessity. He feels he has to say something about the most obvious passages regarding Christian baptism, that effectively reverses the meaning. Dr. Robert H. Stien of SBTS Louisville figured out that baptism is related to salvation; no small stipulation for a Baptist.

[javypez]

@lllannallll Colossians is speaking of Spirit baptism . Notice first, that “through faith” one is “buried with Him in baptism”. This baptism is the “circumcision made without hands” (verse 11). When a believer is baptized in water, hands are definitely involved. When one believes on Christ and is baptized with the Holy Spirit, he becomes circumcised in heart, compare Acts 7:51. Colossians 2:13 parallels with Ephesians 2:5-8. The whole passage of Colossians 2:11-14 is “through faith”.

[lllannallll]

@javypez Col 2: 11-14: "When one believes on Christ and is baptized with the Holy Spirit, he becomes circumcised in heart." "Colossians is speaking of Spirit baptism." Very well. " .... Baptism, WHEREIN also ye are RISEN with him." If you desire the element of Col 2: 12 to be the Holy Spirit - if it refers to "immersion" in the Spirit - then the latter segment of the verse refers to an emersion out of the Spirit. That won't do, will it? Not to mention there is ONE baptism.

[javypez]

@lllannallll "wherien also ye are risen with him" is the exact equivelant of 2 Cor 5:17. We are "made alive" and "born of the Spirit"

[lllannallll]

@javypez "The whole passage of Colossians 2:11-14 is “through faith”. Yes, but it's not through "faith alone", "faith only", "faith without further acts of obedience." You are teaching and practicing two or more baptisms - Holy Spirit baptism and water baptism. And the word "baptism" typically refers to water baptism: such is the ordinary meaning, unless otherwise implied by the context.

[javypez]

@lllannallll The “one baptism” of Ephesians 4:5 is the baptism of the Holy Spirit. First, consider that one cannot come to Christ unless he is called by God (John 6:65, 1 Corinthians 12:3). Second, consider that when one believes on the Lord he is baptized with the Holy Spirit (Acts 11:15-17, Ephesians 1:13). Finally, consider that when one comes to Christ he now has access to the Father (John 14:6).

[lllannallll]

@javypez (1) "The “one baptism” of Ephesians 4:5 is the baptism of the Holy Spirit." <-- that's YOUR assertion, yet, strangely, you practice water baptism. So that's two. (2) "First, consider that one cannot come to Christ unless he is called by God." True, as long as you mean that the MEANS - the modus operandi - is the WORD of God, and not some little vague voice IN ADDITION to the all-sufficient Word of God. The question is not IF God calls, but HOW.

[javypez]

@lllannallll Yes as you said, the Word of God. "Faith comes by hearing".

[lllannallll]

@javypez "Second, consider that when one believes on the Lord he is baptized with the Holy Spirit." LOL No, he isn't. Whatever you may think the gift of the Holy Spirit is, it FOLLOWS repentance and baptism. "Repent ye, and be baptized ... ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2: 38) According to you, they shoulda already had "it." And you can't (and you won't) get away from the fact that you practice two or more baptisms.

[javypez]

@lllannallll I am baptized with the Holy Spirit once. I will never be baptized with the Holy Spirit again.

[lllannallll]

@javypez "I am baptized with the Holy Spirit once. I will never be baptized with the Holy Spirit again." And as goes the proposition (you received Holy Spirit baptism), so goes the demonstration. I can easily read the evidences of Holy Spirit baptism in the case of the apostles on Pentecost. But I predict you'll have no evidence of Holy Spirit baptism: in which foreign tongue did you ever speak? Chinese? "These signs shall follow them that believe."

[lllannallll]

@javypez "Second, consider that when one believes on the Lord he is baptized with the Holy Spirit" Your passages (Acts 11, Eph 1) won't hold up. Cornelius received the Spirit before he believed - not to prove salvation - but to prove that he (and the Gentiles) were acceptable to God as gospel subjects. Anyway, feel free to explain the order of things in Acts 2: 35-40 in a way that fits your doctrine. I'd love to see that!

[javypez]

@lllannallll In Acts 11:17 Peter is retelling the account of Cornelius. Peter says "God gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ" and this is in reference to the baptism of the Holy Spirit- see verse 16. In Acts 15:7-11 Peter is again retelling the account of Cornelius. In verses 8 and 9 Peter says "giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, and made no distiction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith".

[lllannallll]

@javypez "Peter is retelling the account of Cornelius. Peter says "God gave them the same gift as He gave us when we believed on the Lord Jesus Christ". It was a "like" gift, and fell upon Cornelius just as Peter began to speak - not after he finished his sermon. It was not then - nor was it ever - given as evidence of pardon, but to demonstrate to those prejudiced, suspicious Jews that the Gentiles were acceptable subjects of gospel conversion.

[javypez]

@lllannallll Acts 2:41 says "Then those who gladly received his word were baptized". Notice that the "word" was "received" and "then" they "were baptized". The "word" they received was everything Peter said from Acts 2:14-40. They received Jesus as Christ and Lord (v. 36) and called on His name for salvation (v 21) before water baptism. Verse 44 says, "all who believed were together".

[lllannallll]

@javypez "Acts 2:41 says ... " Yeah, Acts 2 SAYS - in this ORDER - (1) believe - "let all the house ... know", (2) repent, (3) be baptized, and (4) receive the gift of the Spirit. Your order is (1) believe and repent at the same time, I suppose ... or repent and believe, (2) receive the gift of the Spirit, then (3) be baptized. Looks like you'd observe that the order of events/promises in Acts 2 is just a tad different than the order which you propose.

[lllannallll]

@javypez "They received Jesus as Christ and Lord (v. 36) and called on His name for salvation (v 21) before water baptism." Blah. (1) Repent ye, (2) let be baptized every one of ye, (3) unto the remission of sins, (4) receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.  Those old Jews trusted in Christ, repented of their sins, then were baptized - why? "unto the remission of sins". According to you, they were baptized for anything BUT "unto the remission of sins."

[javypez]

@lllannallll Im justified by faith (Romans 5:1) without works (Romans 4:5). What about you? What will get you into heaven?

[lllannallll]

@javypez "What will get you into heaven?" Answer: the grace of God, that's what. I won't be saved by some WORK - such as faith, repentance, or baptism - in a way that places God in position of debtor. Now you can deal with the exact order of events in Acts 2, with particular reference to "reception of the gift of the Spirit" FOLLOWING baptism.

[javypez]

@lllannallll Ephesians 4:4 says “one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling”. Verse 4 is speaking of the calling by the Holy Spirit into the body of Christ. Verse 5 which is the passage under consideration is speaking of the baptism of the Holy Spirit which takes place when we trust in the Lord Jesus Christ. Verse 6 says “one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all”. In verse 6 we now have access to the Father through Jesus

[lllannallll]

@javypez "Verse 5 which is the passage under consideration is speaking of the baptism of the Holy Spirit" It seems to me that that's just another assertion. Grant that it is Holy Spirit baptism (which it isn't), why on earth do you practice water baptism? I know there is one church - and it aint the Baptist church. There is one Lord - and it aint Mohammed or Buddha. And there is one baptism - not two or three or four.

[javypez]

@lllannallll when we place our trust on the Lord Jesus for salvation, we are sealed (baptized) with the Holy Spirit “once”. We cannot lose our seal (salvation) and then be sealed again, see Hebrews 6:4-6. Furthermore, Hebrews 10:10 says “we have been sanctified…once”. Hebrew 10:14 says “He has perfected forever those who are being sanctified”.  The “one baptism” of Ephesians 4:5 is the baptism of the Holy Spirit.

[firefighter40ish]

wow you do dance and clearly dont understand the Bible .. and you clearly reject scripture . so chirst got baptised to just get wet i guess . you talk of faith only well your wrong .

[upperoom120]

carmvideos ,  You quote scripture , then you dance around what it means.

[horseman528]

In the book of Acts, infants were never baptized only believers. In Acts 8, the Etheopian eunech asked Phillip, what hinders me from being baptized? Phillip answered, "You may if you believe." Paul said he did not baptize because others were doing it for him. He didn't downplay it or exclude it, you have. The Holy Spirit was given to Cornelius to show Peter that he was now included in those which could be saved. Prior to that, they only evangelized other Jews.I

[pgfracing]

If they were saved before they were baptized then why did they get bapitzed just a couple verses later?

[miket1m]

This man is preaching a false doctrine. He will tell you Mark 16:16 is not in the Bible. He says it was put there by someone else. Who Matt? Who put it there. This is a foolish man

[lllllannalllll]

@miket1m Welllll, what would YOU do if your entiire theology was ruined by Mark 16: 16? At least he seems sincere. Sincerely wrong, but still sincere, but I guess the Paul also was - when he was persecuting Christians.

[miket1m]

@lllllannalllll I love this guy seriously. He is great at apologetics. I thought maybe he is right, let me do some more research. No, he's wrong. Its ok, he's human, but he is definitely wrong on this. I was trying to hold a discussion with him or somebody else on his web site and they were incredibly rude to me. I can't believe he actually told me Mark 16:16 is not in the Bible. I couldn't believe they said that. I asked him why he refused to acknowledge it and I got no response.

[gustavovallejos]

@miket1m Baptism is not necessary to be saved however it is step of faith.

[miket1m]

@gustavovallejos Mark 16:16

Look at Romans 6:3-4 "Baptized into Christ" means baptized into (participation in) Jesus' death. We are buried with Him through baptism (participation) and raised (participation) Jesus' death: blood of Christ (Ephesian 1:7) "New life" means being born again.

How can someone be "born again" die and be buried in baptism (because baptism is a death as well as a birth) then come up out of the water "born again" again?

[gustavovallejos]

@miket1m Look I'm not trying to argue... I should not make the first comment to begin with and I accept my responsibility and I apologize for that... but if YOU have to ADD anything to your salvation it will mean that you GAINED it and we know that can not be... I'm not trying to argue we as followers of Christ have a different work to do.

[miket1m]

@gustavovallejos I'm not arguing with you either bro. I agree that we are saved by our faith, but when does that faith manifest itself itself in us, before or after we obey God? The great command states that we should go out and baptized all nations. I don't know what to tell you, you either believe this and obey or you don't James 2:24 "faith without works is dead." I'm not talking about regeneration baptism either as I know that is a false doctrine. God commands us to be baptized thats it.

[polopowers1]

God cannot be satisfied by any holy characteristic except it be equal and one to His own Nature.God is love,mercy,truth,compassion,ho­liness,etc.For equal justice to God's Nature the judgment must be of equal or one perfectly to that Nature,hence,Jesus Christ. The only One whom can satisfy God's justice.Adding baptism satisfies nothing of the Nature of God for justice to impute righteousness

[exdesertrat]

The speaker correctly points out that the gospel is the death, burial, and ressurection (1 Cor.15:1-4). Those are the facts of the gospel. We cannot obey facts, we can only obey commands. Yet, we are told the fate of those who do not obey the gospel (2Thes.1:8; 1Pet.4:17). What command might we obey that would be obeying the death, burial, and ressurection (i.e. the gospel)? ANSWER: BAPTISM!!! (Ro. 6:3-8) Why do like Paul did and arise, be baptized and wash away your sins (Acts 22:16).

[CodeWolf2000]

You forgot to complete your 1 Corinthians 15 quote - The part you left out - "and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. Then he appeared to more than five hundred brothers at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep." - The full quote shows that Christ appearing to them is also part of the gospel. At that time, Jesus, himself, commanded that they baptize those who believe. You may wish to ignore that command, but I certainly won't.

[dragonstyle88]

Thank u Matt, u helped me a lot. I am not baptised, still I believe in Jesus Christ, the holy trinity and in the way of the orthodox christianity. But still I am not baptised, and however now I have a little more peace in me, knowing that it is not necessary to be baptised to get salvation from god. Thank u very much.

Greetings Mark

[Judgement220]

@dragonstyle88 lol...cynics, you got to luv' em.

[foreveralive]

@dragonstyle88 Bless you, Mark. But still--get baptized, my friend, because the Master has commanded you to do so. It's a matter of disobedience to refuse to do so. Do so, because it fulfills all righteousness and it further strengthens your personal witness. Don't place yourself in the postion of having to explain to others why you've never submitted yourself to baptism but yet claim to be spiritually born again. Seek the Lord, and ask Him what He would have you to do at this point.

[Judgement220]

Act 10:43-48 showed you can get the holy ghost before you get baptized. This is in contradiction to Acts 2:38. Why is that?

[07braves]

@Judgement220 repentance is the begining of salvation..correct?..be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ..whos' name are you saved by..JESUS..repent, come unto JESUS for your remission of your sins..what are you baptized into..remember John the baptist said "i baptiize you of water for the remission of sins"..then he said JESUS will baptize you of the HOLY SPIRIT and fire. So its not what you are baptized into , it is WHO you are baptized into for the remission of sins..JESUS REV. 1:5 cont..

[07braves]

@07braves cont.. REV. 1:5..and WASHED us from our sins in his OWN BLOOD. this is spiritual of course..so why would anyone think it is through WATER baptism, 1 our remission of sin is through Christ blood, no LONGER OF WATER, and John clearly told us of a different baptism..one water..one blood..take a look at Isaiah 44:3 "for i will POUR WATER upon him that is thirsty and floods upon dry ground, i will POUR MY SPIRIT upon thy seed ..etc... WATER =the SPIRIT OF GOD, not h2o. cont..

[Judgement220]

@07braves I agree 100%. What a lot of Baptism Regenerationists don't understand is that when Christ was healing people during his ministry he always said this "My son(or daughter) your faith has healed you"  this was a foreshadow of how we will attain salvation. Its too easy for folks to think that simply believing in the death and ressurection of Christ is the only requirement for salvation.

[07braves]

@Judgement220 i agree..the problem is they think the water h2o is the true baptism when i have showed them it is Christ, not water, the water is poured upon us at the moment of believing , repentance, and accepting Christ as personal savior..then we are BAPTISED into him..what is born of the spirit is spirit..how can h2o give rebirth.

[Judgement220]

@07braves What you have to understand is look to at catholic transubstantiation with communion when catholics literally think that bread has become the flesh and the wine becomes the actual blood of Christ. They turn to Romans Chapter 6 and Co 2:12 showing that when you baptized God is doing a spiritual work to wash you sins away, thus reaffirming Acts 22 and Acts 2:38. People don't believe that you can be saved by believing only, that's too easy, so they fool themselves think baptism will.

[bsiemon82]

bad theology. baptism is not an extension of circumcision. wow.

[reedishappy111408]

So if circumcision was a sign of the abrahamic covenant and baptism replaced that, and the child who was not circumcised was not under the covenant untill he had been circumcised, doesn't that mean that we are not under the blessings of Christ (i.e in an unsaved state) untill we have been baptised, as Mark 16:16, Acts 2:38,22:16, and many more passages say?

[joebow34345]

just to add these are notes i have saved for my stuides

[Photomagic26]

Mark 16:16 states He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. It is out of context to use the old testament since bapitism is never mentioned. It is only in the new testament it it found. It is there that there are several scriptures that pertain to baptism; some of which states it specifically. Where does it state that it is not necessary(be specific)? Also read Romans 6: 3-5

[joebow34345]

out of context then why did jesus expect john to know such things if the New testament was not even around? something to think about.

Paul tell us its by the mouth that we confess that confirms our salvation romans 10:9-10 paul also tells us we are seal with the holy spirit once not when we believe then baptism but once when we believe we are saved.

paul also tell us that we are all baptism into the body of Christ by one spirit not water but baptism by the spirit and water baptism

[joebow34345]

and water baptism resembles The Holy spirit the one that truly baptism you into Christ.

as for mark 16;16 its disbelief that condemns not being baptism. anyone who believe will be baptism because they already confess Christ but anyone who does not believe is not baptism because it plan and simple they did not already confess Christ.

People who try to push mark 16;16 to say water baptism saves commits the

Negative Inference Fallacy.

[gateroadmusic]

I hear people all the time say that Jesus COMMANDED water baptism in Mark16:16. They are reading a different Bible than I am, because the commandment is in verse 15; preach the Gospel. That's exactly what Peter did on the day of Pentecost. His sermon ended in verse 36 of Acts2 with the word " therefore"

[Photomagic26]

Nevertheless, I repeat again, HE said you must be born again. And how told us how. Whatever he did for the thief on the cross is between Jesus and the thief. I does not exempt us from doing what he told us. Be not deceived, God is not mocked. You can't try to use his words to justify no doing what he told us to do. If at any time, he told us to do something(hence a commandment), DO IT! Don't try to get around it.

[joebow34345]

= 'and [the] spiritual' which is directed by the verb and preposition 'gennEthE ex' = 'born out of'. The phrase 'kai pneumatos' indicates that one is born out of 'pneumatos' = 'the spiritual', i.e., the spiritual realm out of or by water. Thus when we view verse 6's statement that 'flesh gives birth to flesh but the Spirit gives birth to spirit' and the statement in v. 5 that we are born again out of the spiritual realm by 'water'; we are left with water being symbolic of God the HG himself

[joebow34345]

Let us look at the Greek text in v. 5. We have 'gennEthE ex hudatos kai pneumatos' = 'born out of water and [born out of] spirit or [the] spiritual. One clue as to what the word 'water' means in v. 5 comes from a careful examination of the phrase 'kai pneumatos' =

[joebow34345]

read Ez 36:24-27 Ref Isa 44:3]:

water is being used to describe the new spirit t hey shall receive unless you believe God is appealing to literal raining down water on people from above.

[Photomagic26]

In John 3:3-7, Jesus told Nicodemus that unless he is born again, he can not see the kingdom of heaven. How is a person born again, of WATER and the SPIRIT(not just one). Since this is so, what water is he reffering to if baptism isn't essential. He said you MUST BE, therefore it is a requirement. Even the scripture you gave in Acts 10:43-48. What happenned in verse 48; Peter commanded them to be baptised. Why? As Christ died, was buried, and rose again; we must do the same by baptism.

[joebow34345]

photomagic you need to study the Old testament water is ussed in symbolic way in the old testament.

[joebow34345]

to add water is used in symblic way to refer to the spirit

[gateroadmusic]

Since you require water baptism to be saved before the resurrection, you will also say that the thief did not get saved, since he was not baptized. Or were there 2 plans of salvation at this time; one for Nicodemus and one for the thief?

[fatmanfromthesouth]

1 Corinthians 15:1-4 relates the facts of the gospel: Christ died, was buried, and then rose again three days later according to the Scriptures. The Corinthians had believed this message and were saved by it. In 2 Thessalonians 1:8-9 Paul said we must obey the gospel. We do so by dying, being buried, and rising to newness of life. This occurs at baptism -- Romans 6:1-4.

[claytony91]

If I may ask a request: You mentioned 1 Cor. 1:14-17. You have used this passage out of context; Perhaps unknowingly. This passage in context does not insist that baptism is not necessary; if you would back up to verse 11, then read on through, you will see that Paul is talking about people giving him glory he is not due.