"The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him." And Jesus said that you have to be obedient so your words aint enough. You need baptism if your regeneration is from God. Amen.
@07braves , you said - " regeneration is of the spirit..h2o cannot do this, nor does the very act of h2o baptism save anyone. "
Of course baptism alone saves no one, it requires faith. A nonbeliever being baptized would do nothing.
Water alone also does nothing, it is the Word comprehended in and with the water that effects the water in making it a Christian baptism. It MUST be done in the name of the Father, The Son and the Holy Ghost
" As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, and instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we pray and fast with them. Then they are brought by us where there is WATER and are REGENERATED in the same manner in which we were ourselves REGENERATED. .... " continued ...
continued ..." For, in the name of God, the Father . . . and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit , they then receive the WASHING WITH WATER . For Christ also said, ‘Unless you are born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’
@o7braves - you said - " @Bobsblues ..THAT was a singular event for the express purpose of showing Peter that the Gentiles would now also be part of the new covenent , without this miracle Peter would never have believed this . This is your own perception my friend.. "
Not just my perception , but that of Ireneaus also, and he explains this in the following quote...
" Neither [in that case] would they have had such a tenor with regard to the first covenant, as not even to have been willing to eat with the Gentiles. For even Peter, although he had been sent to instruct them, and had been constrained by a vision to that effect, spake nevertheless with not a little hesitation, saying to them: " continued ..
continued .. “Ye know how it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company with, or to come unto, one of another nation; but God hath shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean. Therefore came I without gainsaying;” indicating by these words, that he would not have come to them unless he had been commanded. .." continued
continued ".. Neither, for a like reason, would he have given them baptism so readily, had he not heard them prophesying when the Holy Ghost rested upon them. And therefore did he exclaim, “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?” ..." continued
continued "..He persuaded, at the same time, those that were with him, and pointed out that, unless the Holy Ghost had rested upon them, there might have been some one who would have raised objections to their baptism . "
@07braves - you said -" @Bobsblues ...may i ask you..how did people of the book of acts (10:43-48,...11:14-16)..speak in tongues and glorify God...BEFORE they were h2o baptized ?... answer = they were already BORN AGAIN..."
In the following quotes from Acts 8 and Acts 19 we see that people were NOT recieving the Holy Ghost just by belief alone, they had to be baptized and have hands laid upon them in order for this to happen.
13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.
14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: continued ..
1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. ... continued ..
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
@07braves you said - @Bobsblues ..".may i ask you..how did people of the book of acts (10:43-48,...11:14-16)..speak in tongues and glorify God...BEFORE they were h2o baptized ?... answer = they were already BORN AGAIN... "
THAT was a singular event for the express purpose of showing Peter that the Gentiles would now also be part of the new covenent , without this miracle Peter would never have believed this .
@Bobsblues ..THAT was a singular event for the express purpose of showing Peter that the Gentiles would now also be part of the new covenent , without this miracle Peter would never have believed this . This is your own perception my friend..through the book of acts..there is many ways the Holy Spirit came upon people..in which all is correct of course..again what i am stating and you have proven my point..h2o is NOT what regenerates the person..this does NOT bring the rebirth
" Not that in the waters we obtain the Holy Spirit; but in the water, under (the witness of) the angel, we are cleansed, and prepared for the Holy Spirit. "
@07braves- You said -" Jesus is THE BAPTIZER..not a man..thus..it is SPIRITUAL BAPTISM."
Yes it IS a spiritual baptism,in that the Holy Spirit now is imparted to a baptized person, but ONLY to those baptized. Just because it now brings the Holy Spirit does not end the need for an actual physical baptism of water, whic is exactly what the Apostles and early church continued to do .
@07braves- You said -" Jesus is THE BAPTIZER..not a man..thus..it is SPIRITUAL BAPTISM."
Yes it IS a spiritual baptism, the Holy Spirit now is imparted to a baptized person, but ONLY to those baptized. Just because it now brings the Holy Spirit does not end the need for an actual physical baptism of water, whic is exactly what the Apostles and early church continued to do .
@Bobsblues ..i agree with h2o baptism..what i am stating is that h2o baptism is NOT what regenerates a person..regeneration is of the spirit..h2o cannot do this, nor does the very act of h2o baptism save anyone.
@Bobsblues ....YES , to have a proper Baptism, one MUST be baptized in the NAME of the Father, The Son, and the Holy Ghost
agreed!...BUT SPIRITUALLY!..baptized is IMMERSED into Christ..upon BELIEF..by BELIEF are you immersed into Christ. this is why there are verses in which state..FAITH that saves you...with no mention of h2o baptism.
@07braves - John's baptism did not impart the Holy Ghost to a person because the Holy Ghost had not yet been sent, but after Jesus death the Holy Ghost was sent and could now be imparted to those who partook of baptism. The mode of baptism didnt change, it was still a Water baptism. Not only did the Apostles still give water baptism but so did the early church in the generations after the Apostles. If people were getting the Holy Ghost without baptism it would have been impossible not to notice.
@Bobsblues ...may i ask you..how did people of the book of acts (10:43-48,...11:14-16)..speak in tongues and glorify God...BEFORE they were h2o baptized ?... answer = they were already BORN AGAIN...they were already SPIRIT FILLED! The water spoken of what cleanses a persons conscience is NOT h2o..it is the WORD of GOD..FACT!..ephesians 5:26...with the WASHING of WATER by the WORD!..Is JESUS the WORD?...yes!..are we IMMERSED (baptized)..into CHRIST..YES! Is Christ h2o?...NO!
@Bobsblues ..of course the Holy spirit was not yet given in john the baptist time when he spoke of Jesus baptism...BUT that does NOT discount the difference in which John baptised (immersed) of h2o and Jesus would baptize (immerse) with the HOLY SPIRIT and FIRE. John made it clear..the difference between the 2. one is an ordinance and a work of righteousness of man..the other Jesus ,baptism is that which SAVES a person. Jesus is THE BAPTIZER..not a man..thus..it is SPIRITUAL BAPTISM.
It is in the hands of God Who leads every christian first to repentance and then to baptism and after those things they get the GIFT HOLY SPIRIT. You are not born again with out Holy spirit and that is a fact. What do you think that happened in Acts 2? First God did John.6:44-45 and so on and then acts2:38-39. John Piper is wrong here I am sorry but still God Bless in the name and blood of Jesus Christ.
@TheMarkSmithers ..i ask you..the thief was NOT baptized and yet CHRIST brought him with HIM. # 2 John the baptist said..i indeed baptise (immerse) you with water (h2o)...BUT...look at it again please.."BUT"..HE (JESUS) will baptise (immerse)..you with the HOLY SPIRIT and FIRE. A clear cut difference in what you are baptized into and whom is the baptizer. Jesus is the baptizer of the new birth...by the WATER (the word of GOD)...IN JESUS..whom is THEE WORD, and by his blood REV. 1:5.
@07braves Situation was different then when Jesus were on the cross than it was after He was risen. After that He blow the Holy Spirit to apostles... And Jesus said you must born again through the WATER and the SPIRIT. And if you read the whole chapter acts2 I bet you cant find there anything else than born again in very clear order. If you can be bon again with out baptism why you still are baptising people?
@TheMarkSmithers ..what is that which cleans a person?...john 15:3..Now ye are CLEAN, through the WORD..which i have SPOKEN. Ephesians 5:26..that he might sanctify and CLEANSE it with the WASHING of WATER..by the WORD. WHOM IS THE WORD incarnate?..JESUS!..Ever heard of BAPTIZED INTO JESUS?..So tell me how h2o is JESUS? Isaiah 44:3..for I (GOD) will pour WATER upon him that is THIRSTY and FLOODS upon dry ground (h2o?)..I (GOD) will POUR OUT MY SPIRIT upon thye seed..etc.. SPIRITUAL..no h2o!
@07braves Only way to new birth and salvation goes through God. God will do the whole thing. In this work by God we can find 4 things: repent, believe in Lord Jesus, baptism in water and receive the Holy Spirit. If God saves any one He will keep sure that they go through the whole thing or we are not talking about the work of God. But in the end it is enough for me if we preach the Gospel and baptise all that hear it. Bless.
@TheMarkSmithers ...friend..i was baptized 4 times..in joining churches ...NONE of them including the 1st one saved me. Christ saved me...through HIM..not h2o and i became BORN AGAIN at an altar in a church..BUT i could have been born again also,... anywhere in the earth. He baptizes (IMMERSES) me with HIS SPIRIT..anywhere HE pleases. i agree with the h2o baptism itself as a command of Christ..but again h2o doesnt touch the spirit..the HOLY SPIRIT falls where HE wants, when HE wants.
@07braves My friend. Situation on the cross was different than the situation after the cross... One good place to read is: 1.Peter.3;21-22. +I know the theology you mean here but I just dont buy it. Bible is clear about this thing. And yes: Baptism is allways believers baptism. You cant find infant baptism from the Bible you gotto put it there. I am just a christian so my theology comes from the Bible not from any school and so on... God Bless in the name and blood of Jesus Christ.
I don't care what the church of christ or any other denomination has to say about baptism. I received christ by my bedside and I have had this unbelievable thirst for Gods word every since to the point of no explanation. Truly not of my own desires given the fact that prior to accepting jesus as my lord and savior I had absolutely no feelings for the things of God. People might respond by saying you can't go on feelings. But the holy spirit does not give you that option.
They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which FOR A WHILE BELIEVE , AND IN TIME OF TEMPTATION FALL AWAY . "
Ephesians 4:4 says there is one baptism...In Acts 8 The ethiopian Eunuch says heres water what henders me from being baptized. so unless you're saying the Bible is contradicting itself than a water baptism is the one baptism.
Also Acts 2:38, After the people asked what can they do to be saved, Peter said "Repent and be baptized for the forgivemess of sins and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." This would be redundant to think a person repents and is baptized with the Holy Spirit and then receives the Holy Spirit.
Acts 1:5,8 Jesus promised "the apostles" this power or "baptism into the Holy Sprit" in Jerusalem Acts 2 shows that the apostles were given a special baptism of the Holy Sprit to witness to the whole world.
You saying that all you have to do is believe is a false statement read james 2;19 even demons believe are you saying demons are saved too? You are contradicting yourself...and about acts 16 why did u stop reading? It says IMMEDIATELY they were baptized...faith and belief require action the bible says faith without works is dead....still waiting on your comment about john 3:5...because that verse pretty much negates everything your saying
What about john 3:5? Jesus says right there one "must be born of WATER and of the Spirit to enter into the kingdon of heaven" read acts 8:26 till the end of the chapter philip meets and ethiopian eunuch on a road and when he was confused about what he was reading philip preach to him about Jesus and the eunuch said "here's water what henders me frombeing baptized?" So they went into the water and philip baptized him...also read acts 16:30-34
@darkdf2011 let me ask you ..does a person have to believe in Christ to be saved....before their h2o baptism? Can a person be h2o baptised and NOT be born again?...YES...they just got wet. For a person to be BORN AGAIN..you 1st must believe..in whom?...JESUS..in his NAME...you are IMMERSED in the HOLY SPIRIT..NOT h2o..baptized means..immersed, washed..not just h2o..in which people think when they think of baptsim..ever heard of being baptised in FIRE?
@darkdf2011 acts 16:30-34.."sirs .what must i do to be saved?"..they said..BELIEVE on the LORD JESUS CHRIST and thou shalt be saved...RIGHT AT THAT MOMENT..conversion happened. he was born again..in the moment he believed on CHRIST..not his h2o baptism..this was AFTER he believed. here is difficult verses for you to get around on h2o baptism..acts is speaking of men that were speaking in tongues and glorifying GOD..and they were not h2o baptised yet?..how is that?...they were born again already
And what's your excuse for john 3:5? Jesus Himself wanted john to baptize Him in water as an example for us. I'm not saying that baptism is the only thing that saves you but it is part.
@darkdf2011 the LORD was baptised by John to fulfill the law..but the baptism of JOHN (h2o) is no longer the baptism in which you are BORN AGAIN..for John himself said...Jesus will baptise (immerse) you with the Holy Spirit and FIRE..not h2o.
Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:16,John 3:5, 1 Peter 3:21, Galations 3:27 are a few verses that tell us baptism is required for salvation. Whether God says it once or 1,000 times don't you think we should listen to Him? Please read for yourself and don't trust someone else to tell you what you should do. Everyone can throw their own opinions around all day long but when it comes down to it it doesnt matter what i say or what you say, it's what the Bible (God's own Word) says.
@darkdf2011 baptism into what or WHOM...and WHO is the baptizer? # 1 baptism is SPIRITUAL, water h2o cannot and does NOT regenerate the spirit. JESUS is the BAPTIZER of and for REGENERATION..John said..i baptise you with water (h2o)...BUT HE (JESUS)..will baptise you with the HOLY SPIRIT AND FIRE!...a CLEAR difference..if you think h2o baptism saves you..you have now trusted in your baptism and NOT Christ. YOU are baptized INTO HIM..through his BLOOD..its spiritual rebirth!..
we must remember whom the baptizer is..in whom the apostles said and John the baptist stated..JESUS!... WILL BAPTIZE YOU WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT AND FIRE!...this is the regeneration..the BAPTISM of the SPIRIT..not into water (h2o)..but by the water (THE WORD OF GOD)...by THEE WORD MADE FLESH ..CHRIST..and baptized into HIM..through his blood as he WASHES US FROM ALL SIN..SPIRITUALLY! that which is SPIRIT IS SPIRIT!
And yet John Piper believes that only the elect are baptized into the body of Christ
through a monergistic, sovereign and supernatural induction of faith. That simply means that they are saved without faith prior to their salvation but receive it as a gift AFTER their electoral regeneration/justification.This doctrine is even worse than baptismal regeneration.
" And Crispus, the Chief Ruler Of The Synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and MANY of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were Baptized. "
So then, if Paul himself had baptized only a few , it is obvious that Paul had others with him that were doing the baptizing. Paul had an uncommon ability to preach , which was his mission, but we see that baptism wasnt neglected, it was just assigned to others among his companions.
As for the issue of Paul baptizing amongst the Corinthians, it is rather interesting WHO it was that he did choose to Baptize, The Chief Ruler of The Synagogue , and Stepanas, who we see took on the position of Ministering to the saints.
And Crispus, the Chief Ruler Of The Synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were Baptized.
15 I beseech you, brethren, ( ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and that They Have Addicted Themselves To The Ministry Of The Saints,)
@ Gateroadmusic - "There is no sermon of Paul's recorded anywhere in the Bible where he ever commanded a lost Gentile to be " baptized in order to be saved " , - There's not ??? What do you think occured in Acts 19 ? where these disciples "saved'" prior to Paul rebaptizing and laying hands on them . If so , then explain why they didnt have the Holy Spirit. And WHO did that baptizing ?
The phrase " not (only) to baptize, but to (also) preach the Gospel " would be a problem for me if I were a baptismal remission apologist. Here's why. I would not separate the two, as the phrase as written does.There would be no such thing as something not being a " primary" part of the Gospel, since every part is essential, especially water baptism.This is an oxymoron to baptismal remission theology if correct.Why did Paul separate the two? Because they are not one and the same.
@gateroadmusic "would be a problem for me if I were a baptismal remission apologist." Not nearly the problem - an unsolvable one, at that - that having Paul NOT sent to baptize AT ALL presents. The reason for a major difficulty is, of course, that (Premise 1) "Paul was sent to baptized" - pretty plain, (Premise 2) "Paul DID baptize, so (Premise 3) Paul disobeyed Christ to the extent that he baptized.
@gateroadmusic "I would not separate the two, as the phrase as written does." The phrase, as written, means the primary activity of Paul was to SPEAK ... to PREACH ... to DEBATE ... to REASON. That's not hard to understand. ANYONE - new converts, uninspired men, etc - could baptize, but not ANYONE could preach with inspiration as Paul did. There's the difference.
@gateroadmusic "There would be no such thing as something not being a " primary" part of the Gospel" Nobody said a word about a "primary part of the gospel." Paul spoke of his "primary DUTY", not "primary" and "secondary" parts of the gospel.
@gateroadmusic Actually the passage does the opposite of what you intend. Why? Because to be baptized "in name of Paul" would make one to be "of Paul." Most definately, Paul showed that to be "of Paul", one must have been baptized in Paul's name - and he objected to the Corinthians for saying they were "of Paul" for this reason: he had baptized only a few of them. But to be "of Christ", one must have been baptized in the name of Christ. So baptism makes one "of Christ."
@gateroadmusic Besides, the average denominationalist makes Paul to say, "Thank God so few of you were baptized." He thanked God that HE baptized so few of them - lest they falsely accuse him of baptizing in his own name. That's all. If baptism had been nonessential and unimportant, they WHY in the world would Paul CARE one way or another. He DID baptize a few of them, and in so doing did not disobey "Christ sent me not (only or primarily) to baptize. That's all there is to that.
@gateroadmusic "Why did Paul separate the two? Because they are not one and the same." You're right: preaching - speaking - teaching all nations is a DIFFERENT ACT than baptizing them in the name .... One person can preach and teach, another can baptize. There a handful of inspired men who could "preach it" as Paul did, but any one of thousands could administer baptism. Hence, "sent not (only or primarily) to baptize, but (also or primarily) to preach the gospel. Paul preached baptism.
If Paul was to preach a Gospel that included being baptized to remit sins, surely there would be the strongest evidence for this in His messages. There is not. It is not in Acts 9:20,13:16-41,14:1,14:14-18,16:25-32,17:1-4,17:22-31,19:1-7,etc. Paul should have clearly told someone inquiring about Salvation that this lost person should be baptized to have their sins remitted. The evidence is to the contrary. When Paul was asked a clear question in Acts 16:30, He gave a clear answer in Acts 16:31
The Bible tells us in Acts chapter nine what Paul was to do for Christ. He was to 1. bear Christ's name before the Gentiles( verse 15 ),and 2. Suffer for Christ ( verse 16 ).Paul immediately preached that Christ is the son of God in the synagogue. There is no sermon of Paul's recorded anywhere in the Bible where he ever commanded a lost Gentile to be " baptized in order to be saved ". The evidence of the Bible agrees with Paul's words in 1 Cor.1:17, and not a presupposed theology scheme.
The point of Romans 6:3-7 is that the point of the new life is as you are risen from the grave of baptism. Symbolic but necessary to be obediant to the Gospel of Christ . Even Paul said by his own words He was instructed to arise and wash away his SINS through baptism. Cant let feelings overrule the Word of God.
@johnnymiller1954 If Paul was saved by water baptism He sure did a poor job of sharing it with others. The answer given to the Philippian jailor to the question " What must I do to be saved?" did not involve the statement " arise and wash away thy sins". If Paul was saved by water baptism He must have changed His mind when He preached to the Corinthians because He told them " Christ sent me NOT TO BAPTIZE, but to preach the Gospel" ( 1 Cor. 1:17).
@gateroadmusic "If Paul was saved by water baptism He must have changed His mind when He preached to the Corinthians because He told them " Christ sent me NOT TO BAPTIZE, but to preach the Gospel" ( 1 Cor. 1:17)" That's an implied ellipsis: Christ sent me not (only or merely) to baptize, but (also or primarily) to preach ... Evidence of this fact is that Paul DID baptize! So when he did, if Christ sent him NOT to baptize, then according to you, Paul DISOBEYED.
@lllannallll The only problem with this conclusion is that the Bible does not make the same one. The word " only " was not written down by the original writer and is added by the reader just as some baptismal remissionists add " to be saved " to Acts 2:38. If Paul wanted to say " primarily ",He most certainly would have written it down. We have to deal with the words that are actually on the page, not phantom words that are perceived by the reader.
@gateroadmusic Then if you deny the implied ellipsis (which you do) then I'll say that Paul evidentally sinned when he baptized believers (which, of course, he did): that would be the conclusion if we "deal with the words that are actually on the page, not phantom words that are perceived by the reader." Truth is that Paul was, as I said, sent not only to baptize, but primarily to preach the gospel. That is the import of the passage because Paul DID baptize.
@gateroadmusic Without the ellipses, I'll also say that you teach that (1) believing on Christ equals NOT believing on Christ, (2) followers of Jesus are not to work for their food, and (3) Timothy was not to drink water. I'll also say that, without the ellipsis, Jesus nullified the Great Commission in Paul's case. The twelve were positively sent to preach, teach, and baptize, but, somehow, Paul was not under that commission - or he was under 2/3rd's of it.
@gateroadmusic John 12: 44: "He that believeth on me" ... what? ... "believeth NOT on me, but on Him that sent me." How about supplying the ellipsis? "He that believeth on me believeth not on me (only), but (also) on Him that sent me." I Tim 5: 23: "Drink no longer water but use a little wine ..." How about "Drink no longer water (only), but also use a little wine"? Jn 6: 27: "Labor not (only) for the mean that perisheth, but (also or primarily) for that which endureth ..." Common grammar.
I agree with you that the "one baptism" of Eph 4 is the believer's union with Christ as seen in Col 2. where the circumcision "without hands" is the same as the identification with Christ in his "death" baptism on the cross. Your failing to recognize the distinctive new Pauline revelation received from the ascended Christ ends up legalizing the Church of His body. Just as the circumcision of Col 2 is "without hands" so is the baptism the operation of God and has nothing to do with water.
Paul was also circumcised and kept the law as a Pharisee of the Pharisees...but times have changed with the further revelation of the "one" baptism. You bring in legalism and self-glorification and destroy the unity that Paul talks about in Eph. 4. There is no "bond of peace" when the 7 unities are not kept. This is why there is so much strife within Christendom over the issues of baptism. Paul was not working under the "great commission" he received a greater commission in II Cor. 5:18.
In Eph 4: 4,5 Paul says there is one baptism. In Rom. 6 and Col. 2, Paul makes it clear that the one baptism is the baptism of the Holy Spirit which occurs the moment one accepts Christ. If you believe in the baptism of the Holy Spirit AND water baptism THEN you have two baptisms!! You need to keep the UNITY by following Eph 4 and the LIST of 7 "ones" which creates unity with the Body of Christ.
Jesus commanded the 12 and believers of that day to "do whatsoever I have commanded you." This included raising the dead and healing as well...not just water baptism. But we have to distinguish between what the earthly Jesus commanded the 12 and what he gave by revelation to the Apostle to the Gentiles (Paul) . Paul received new revelations from the ascended Christ for the Body of Christ. My question for you is: How many baptismS do you believe in? Spirit (upon belief), water, etc...?
John Piper is right! Baptism not necessary AND should not be practiced. Let your doctrine be updated by the revelation the ascended Christ gave to the Apostle Paul. In Eph 4: 4,5 Paul says there is one baptism. In Rom. 6 Paul makes it clear that the one baptism is the baptism of the Holy Spirit which occurs the moment one accepts Christ. If you believe in the baptism of the Holy Spirit AND water baptism THEN you have two baptisms!! You need to keep the UNITY by following Eph 4.
In other words, just because someone believes in Baptismal Regeneration DOES NOT mean they think that faith in Christ is optional. It isn't. Without faith in Christ salvation is not possible - not even after having been regenerated in baptism. Piper is wrong to imply that those who believe in Baptismal Regeneration try to base their salvation on baptism alone apart from Christ. We don't. In all the years I taught Catholic theology I never once heard anyone say what Piper implies.
Actually I teach Catholic theology. Yes - Baptism washes away Original Sin. However, Catholics do NOT teach that Baptism, of and by itself, will save someone. Rather, we agree that people who presume on their baptism and do not have faith in Christ - they will not be saved. That being said, Piper makes a false dichotomy when he claims that belief in baptismal regeneration can lead one to hell. Rather, it is belief in anything (including baptism) TO THE EXCLUSION of Christ that is damning.
I know exactly what Piper is teaching. Piper asserts some people wind up in hell because they (mistakenly) believe their baptism is all that is necessary for salvation (and thus they disregard faith and presume on their baptism alone). However, Piper ignores that NO Christian faith teaches that Baptism alone (apart from faith) saves in the first place. If people go to hell it is due to their rejection of faith. They need to embrace faith, not reject the truth of baptismal regeneration.
The answer to the question at the end of this video is simple: there are ZERO people in hell today because they believed they were regenerated in baptism. If they are in hell (and there are surely plenty of people in hell) it is because they were not faithful to the covenant they had joined. I know of no baptismal regeneration-believing Christian faiths who also teach "cheap grace" - but I know of many "once saved always saved" believers who do - and THAT is dangerous.
You seem to have forgotten Catholicism. Their baptism doctrines state that original sin is washed away after baptism.
I'm sure there are many independents and individuals within protestantism who believe the same thing.
I assure you, Piper wouldn't have said it for no reason. He is saying that no one is saved by baptism, and if baptism is the foundation for their faith and not Christ, they are in hell.
"The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:Who is gone into heaven, and is on the right hand of God; angels and authorities and powers being made subject unto him." And Jesus said that you have to be obedient so your words aint enough. You need baptism if your regeneration is from God. Amen.
TheMarkSmithers 3 months ago
@07braves , you said - " regeneration is of the spirit..h2o cannot do this, nor does the very act of h2o baptism save anyone. "
Of course baptism alone saves no one, it requires faith. A nonbeliever being baptized would do nothing.
Water alone also does nothing, it is the Word comprehended in and with the water that effects the water in making it a Christian baptism. It MUST be done in the name of the Father, The Son and the Holy Ghost
Bobsblues 3 months ago
" As many as are persuaded and believe that what we [Christians] teach and say is true, and undertake to be able to live accordingly, and instructed to pray and to entreat God with fasting, for the remission of their sins that are past, we pray and fast with them. Then they are brought by us where there is WATER and are REGENERATED in the same manner in which we were ourselves REGENERATED. .... " continued ...
Bobsblues 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
continued ..." For, in the name of God, the Father . . . and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit , they then receive the WASHING WITH WATER . For Christ also said, ‘Unless you are born again, you shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven’
Justin Martyr
Bobsblues 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@o7braves - you said - " @Bobsblues ..THAT was a singular event for the express purpose of showing Peter that the Gentiles would now also be part of the new covenent , without this miracle Peter would never have believed this . This is your own perception my friend.. "
Not just my perception , but that of Ireneaus also, and he explains this in the following quote...
Bobsblues 3 months ago
" Neither [in that case] would they have had such a tenor with regard to the first covenant, as not even to have been willing to eat with the Gentiles. For even Peter, although he had been sent to instruct them, and had been constrained by a vision to that effect, spake nevertheless with not a little hesitation, saying to them: " continued ..
Bobsblues 3 months ago
continued .. “Ye know how it is an unlawful thing for a man that is a Jew to keep company with, or to come unto, one of another nation; but God hath shown me that I should not call any man common or unclean. Therefore came I without gainsaying;” indicating by these words, that he would not have come to them unless he had been commanded. .." continued
Bobsblues 3 months ago
continued ".. Neither, for a like reason, would he have given them baptism so readily, had he not heard them prophesying when the Holy Ghost rested upon them. And therefore did he exclaim, “Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?” ..." continued
Bobsblues 3 months ago
continued "..He persuaded, at the same time, those that were with him, and pointed out that, unless the Holy Ghost had rested upon them, there might have been some one who would have raised objections to their baptism . "
{ Irenaeus ]
Bobsblues 3 months ago
@07braves - you said -" @Bobsblues ...may i ask you..how did people of the book of acts (10:43-48,...11:14-16)..speak in tongues and glorify God...BEFORE they were h2o baptized ?... answer = they were already BORN AGAIN..."
In the following quotes from Acts 8 and Acts 19 we see that people were NOT recieving the Holy Ghost just by belief alone, they had to be baptized and have hands laid upon them in order for this to happen.
Bobsblues 3 months ago
Acts 8
13 Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.
14 Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
15 Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: continued ..
Bobsblues 3 months ago
16 (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
18 And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money,
19 Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.
Bobsblues 3 months ago
Acts 19
1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism. ... continued ..
Bobsblues 3 months ago
Continued
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.
Bobsblues 3 months ago
@07braves you said - @Bobsblues ..".may i ask you..how did people of the book of acts (10:43-48,...11:14-16)..speak in tongues and glorify God...BEFORE they were h2o baptized ?... answer = they were already BORN AGAIN... "
THAT was a singular event for the express purpose of showing Peter that the Gentiles would now also be part of the new covenent , without this miracle Peter would never have believed this .
Bobsblues 3 months ago
@Bobsblues ..THAT was a singular event for the express purpose of showing Peter that the Gentiles would now also be part of the new covenent , without this miracle Peter would never have believed this . This is your own perception my friend..through the book of acts..there is many ways the Holy Spirit came upon people..in which all is correct of course..again what i am stating and you have proven my point..h2o is NOT what regenerates the person..this does NOT bring the rebirth
07braves 3 months ago
" Not that in the waters we obtain the Holy Spirit; but in the water, under (the witness of) the angel, we are cleansed, and prepared for the Holy Spirit. "
{ Tertullian }
Bobsblues 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@07braves- You said -" Jesus is THE BAPTIZER..not a man..thus..it is SPIRITUAL BAPTISM."
Yes it IS a spiritual baptism,in that the Holy Spirit now is imparted to a baptized person, but ONLY to those baptized. Just because it now brings the Holy Spirit does not end the need for an actual physical baptism of water, whic is exactly what the Apostles and early church continued to do .
Bobsblues 3 months ago
@07braves- You said -" Jesus is THE BAPTIZER..not a man..thus..it is SPIRITUAL BAPTISM."
Yes it IS a spiritual baptism, the Holy Spirit now is imparted to a baptized person, but ONLY to those baptized. Just because it now brings the Holy Spirit does not end the need for an actual physical baptism of water, whic is exactly what the Apostles and early church continued to do .
Bobsblues 3 months ago
@Bobsblues ..i agree with h2o baptism..what i am stating is that h2o baptism is NOT what regenerates a person..regeneration is of the spirit..h2o cannot do this, nor does the very act of h2o baptism save anyone.
07braves 3 months ago
@07braves- You said - "Ever heard of BAPTIZED INTO JESUS?.."
YES , to have a proper Baptism, one MUST be baptized in the NAME of the Father, The Son, and the Holy Ghost.
Bobsblues 3 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@Bobsblues ....YES , to have a proper Baptism, one MUST be baptized in the NAME of the Father, The Son, and the Holy Ghost
agreed!...BUT SPIRITUALLY!..baptized is IMMERSED into Christ..upon BELIEF..by BELIEF are you immersed into Christ. this is why there are verses in which state..FAITH that saves you...with no mention of h2o baptism.
07braves 3 months ago
@07braves - John's baptism did not impart the Holy Ghost to a person because the Holy Ghost had not yet been sent, but after Jesus death the Holy Ghost was sent and could now be imparted to those who partook of baptism. The mode of baptism didnt change, it was still a Water baptism. Not only did the Apostles still give water baptism but so did the early church in the generations after the Apostles. If people were getting the Holy Ghost without baptism it would have been impossible not to notice.
Bobsblues 3 months ago
@Bobsblues ...may i ask you..how did people of the book of acts (10:43-48,...11:14-16)..speak in tongues and glorify God...BEFORE they were h2o baptized ?... answer = they were already BORN AGAIN...they were already SPIRIT FILLED! The water spoken of what cleanses a persons conscience is NOT h2o..it is the WORD of GOD..FACT!..ephesians 5:26...with the WASHING of WATER by the WORD!..Is JESUS the WORD?...yes!..are we IMMERSED (baptized)..into CHRIST..YES! Is Christ h2o?...NO!
07braves 3 months ago
@Bobsblues ..of course the Holy spirit was not yet given in john the baptist time when he spoke of Jesus baptism...BUT that does NOT discount the difference in which John baptised (immersed) of h2o and Jesus would baptize (immerse) with the HOLY SPIRIT and FIRE. John made it clear..the difference between the 2. one is an ordinance and a work of righteousness of man..the other Jesus ,baptism is that which SAVES a person. Jesus is THE BAPTIZER..not a man..thus..it is SPIRITUAL BAPTISM.
07braves 3 months ago
It is in the hands of God Who leads every christian first to repentance and then to baptism and after those things they get the GIFT HOLY SPIRIT. You are not born again with out Holy spirit and that is a fact. What do you think that happened in Acts 2? First God did John.6:44-45 and so on and then acts2:38-39. John Piper is wrong here I am sorry but still God Bless in the name and blood of Jesus Christ.
TheMarkSmithers 3 months ago
@TheMarkSmithers ..i ask you..the thief was NOT baptized and yet CHRIST brought him with HIM. # 2 John the baptist said..i indeed baptise (immerse) you with water (h2o)...BUT...look at it again please.."BUT"..HE (JESUS) will baptise (immerse)..you with the HOLY SPIRIT and FIRE. A clear cut difference in what you are baptized into and whom is the baptizer. Jesus is the baptizer of the new birth...by the WATER (the word of GOD)...IN JESUS..whom is THEE WORD, and by his blood REV. 1:5.
07braves 3 months ago
@07braves Situation was different then when Jesus were on the cross than it was after He was risen. After that He blow the Holy Spirit to apostles... And Jesus said you must born again through the WATER and the SPIRIT. And if you read the whole chapter acts2 I bet you cant find there anything else than born again in very clear order. If you can be bon again with out baptism why you still are baptising people?
TheMarkSmithers 3 months ago
@TheMarkSmithers ..what is that which cleans a person?...john 15:3..Now ye are CLEAN, through the WORD..which i have SPOKEN. Ephesians 5:26..that he might sanctify and CLEANSE it with the WASHING of WATER..by the WORD. WHOM IS THE WORD incarnate?..JESUS!..Ever heard of BAPTIZED INTO JESUS?..So tell me how h2o is JESUS? Isaiah 44:3..for I (GOD) will pour WATER upon him that is THIRSTY and FLOODS upon dry ground (h2o?)..I (GOD) will POUR OUT MY SPIRIT upon thye seed..etc.. SPIRITUAL..no h2o!
07braves 3 months ago
@07braves Only way to new birth and salvation goes through God. God will do the whole thing. In this work by God we can find 4 things: repent, believe in Lord Jesus, baptism in water and receive the Holy Spirit. If God saves any one He will keep sure that they go through the whole thing or we are not talking about the work of God. But in the end it is enough for me if we preach the Gospel and baptise all that hear it. Bless.
TheMarkSmithers 3 months ago
@TheMarkSmithers ...friend..i was baptized 4 times..in joining churches ...NONE of them including the 1st one saved me. Christ saved me...through HIM..not h2o and i became BORN AGAIN at an altar in a church..BUT i could have been born again also,... anywhere in the earth. He baptizes (IMMERSES) me with HIS SPIRIT..anywhere HE pleases. i agree with the h2o baptism itself as a command of Christ..but again h2o doesnt touch the spirit..the HOLY SPIRIT falls where HE wants, when HE wants.
07braves 3 months ago
@07braves My friend. Situation on the cross was different than the situation after the cross... One good place to read is: 1.Peter.3;21-22. +I know the theology you mean here but I just dont buy it. Bible is clear about this thing. And yes: Baptism is allways believers baptism. You cant find infant baptism from the Bible you gotto put it there. I am just a christian so my theology comes from the Bible not from any school and so on... God Bless in the name and blood of Jesus Christ.
TheMarkSmithers 3 months ago
@TheMarkSmithers ..im not sure what you meant with the infant baptism comment there...i never said anything about infant baptism.
07braves 3 months ago
I don't care what the church of christ or any other denomination has to say about baptism. I received christ by my bedside and I have had this unbelievable thirst for Gods word every since to the point of no explanation. Truly not of my own desires given the fact that prior to accepting jesus as my lord and savior I had absolutely no feelings for the things of God. People might respond by saying you can't go on feelings. But the holy spirit does not give you that option.
newj34 4 months ago
Jesus states quite clearly that not Everyone who Believes is Saved in some fashion that they cannot fall from.
Luke 8:13
They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which FOR A WHILE BELIEVE , AND IN TIME OF TEMPTATION FALL AWAY . "
Bobsblues 4 months ago
Ephesians 4:4 says there is one baptism...In Acts 8 The ethiopian Eunuch says heres water what henders me from being baptized. so unless you're saying the Bible is contradicting itself than a water baptism is the one baptism.
darkdf2011 4 months ago
Also Acts 2:38, After the people asked what can they do to be saved, Peter said "Repent and be baptized for the forgivemess of sins and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." This would be redundant to think a person repents and is baptized with the Holy Spirit and then receives the Holy Spirit.
darkdf2011 4 months ago
Acts 1:5,8 Jesus promised "the apostles" this power or "baptism into the Holy Sprit" in Jerusalem Acts 2 shows that the apostles were given a special baptism of the Holy Sprit to witness to the whole world.
darkdf2011 4 months ago
You saying that all you have to do is believe is a false statement read james 2;19 even demons believe are you saying demons are saved too? You are contradicting yourself...and about acts 16 why did u stop reading? It says IMMEDIATELY they were baptized...faith and belief require action the bible says faith without works is dead....still waiting on your comment about john 3:5...because that verse pretty much negates everything your saying
darkdf2011 4 months ago
If what ur saying is true why are there so many examples of souls being saved thru a water baptism?
darkdf2011 4 months ago
What about john 3:5? Jesus says right there one "must be born of WATER and of the Spirit to enter into the kingdon of heaven" read acts 8:26 till the end of the chapter philip meets and ethiopian eunuch on a road and when he was confused about what he was reading philip preach to him about Jesus and the eunuch said "here's water what henders me frombeing baptized?" So they went into the water and philip baptized him...also read acts 16:30-34
darkdf2011 4 months ago
@darkdf2011 let me ask you ..does a person have to believe in Christ to be saved....before their h2o baptism? Can a person be h2o baptised and NOT be born again?...YES...they just got wet. For a person to be BORN AGAIN..you 1st must believe..in whom?...JESUS..in his NAME...you are IMMERSED in the HOLY SPIRIT..NOT h2o..baptized means..immersed, washed..not just h2o..in which people think when they think of baptsim..ever heard of being baptised in FIRE?
07braves 4 months ago 2
@darkdf2011 acts 16:30-34.."sirs .what must i do to be saved?"..they said..BELIEVE on the LORD JESUS CHRIST and thou shalt be saved...RIGHT AT THAT MOMENT..conversion happened. he was born again..in the moment he believed on CHRIST..not his h2o baptism..this was AFTER he believed. here is difficult verses for you to get around on h2o baptism..acts is speaking of men that were speaking in tongues and glorifying GOD..and they were not h2o baptised yet?..how is that?...they were born again already
07braves 4 months ago 2
And what's your excuse for john 3:5? Jesus Himself wanted john to baptize Him in water as an example for us. I'm not saying that baptism is the only thing that saves you but it is part.
darkdf2011 4 months ago
@darkdf2011 the LORD was baptised by John to fulfill the law..but the baptism of JOHN (h2o) is no longer the baptism in which you are BORN AGAIN..for John himself said...Jesus will baptise (immerse) you with the Holy Spirit and FIRE..not h2o.
07braves 4 months ago
Matthew 28:19, Mark 16:16,John 3:5, 1 Peter 3:21, Galations 3:27 are a few verses that tell us baptism is required for salvation. Whether God says it once or 1,000 times don't you think we should listen to Him? Please read for yourself and don't trust someone else to tell you what you should do. Everyone can throw their own opinions around all day long but when it comes down to it it doesnt matter what i say or what you say, it's what the Bible (God's own Word) says.
darkdf2011 5 months ago
Comment removed
07braves 4 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@darkdf2011 baptism into what or WHOM...and WHO is the baptizer? # 1 baptism is SPIRITUAL, water h2o cannot and does NOT regenerate the spirit. JESUS is the BAPTIZER of and for REGENERATION..John said..i baptise you with water (h2o)...BUT HE (JESUS)..will baptise you with the HOLY SPIRIT AND FIRE!...a CLEAR difference..if you think h2o baptism saves you..you have now trusted in your baptism and NOT Christ. YOU are baptized INTO HIM..through his BLOOD..its spiritual rebirth!..
07braves 4 months ago
we must remember whom the baptizer is..in whom the apostles said and John the baptist stated..JESUS!... WILL BAPTIZE YOU WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT AND FIRE!...this is the regeneration..the BAPTISM of the SPIRIT..not into water (h2o)..but by the water (THE WORD OF GOD)...by THEE WORD MADE FLESH ..CHRIST..and baptized into HIM..through his blood as he WASHES US FROM ALL SIN..SPIRITUALLY! that which is SPIRIT IS SPIRIT!
07braves 5 months ago
Piper is dead on CORRECT!
07braves 5 months ago
rant rant rant, his style is disgusting, and his style is his fruit
Strefanasha 7 months ago
And yet John Piper believes that only the elect are baptized into the body of Christ
through a monergistic, sovereign and supernatural induction of faith. That simply means that they are saved without faith prior to their salvation but receive it as a gift AFTER their electoral regeneration/justification.This doctrine is even worse than baptismal regeneration.
lessingtom 7 months ago
Acts 18:8
" And Crispus, the Chief Ruler Of The Synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and MANY of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were Baptized. "
So then, if Paul himself had baptized only a few , it is obvious that Paul had others with him that were doing the baptizing. Paul had an uncommon ability to preach , which was his mission, but we see that baptism wasnt neglected, it was just assigned to others among his companions.
Bobsblues 7 months ago
As for the issue of Paul baptizing amongst the Corinthians, it is rather interesting WHO it was that he did choose to Baptize, The Chief Ruler of The Synagogue , and Stepanas, who we see took on the position of Ministering to the saints.
Bobsblues 7 months ago
Acts 18:8
And Crispus, the Chief Ruler Of The Synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his house; and many of the Corinthians hearing believed, and were Baptized.
1 Corinthians 1:16
And I baptized also the household of Stephanas:
1 Corinthians 16:15-16
15 I beseech you, brethren, ( ye know the house of Stephanas, that it is the firstfruits of Achaia, and that They Have Addicted Themselves To The Ministry Of The Saints,)
16 That ye submit yourselves unto such, .."
Bobsblues 7 months ago
@ Gateroadmusic - "There is no sermon of Paul's recorded anywhere in the Bible where he ever commanded a lost Gentile to be " baptized in order to be saved " , - There's not ??? What do you think occured in Acts 19 ? where these disciples "saved'" prior to Paul rebaptizing and laying hands on them . If so , then explain why they didnt have the Holy Spirit. And WHO did that baptizing ?
Bobsblues 7 months ago
The phrase " not (only) to baptize, but to (also) preach the Gospel " would be a problem for me if I were a baptismal remission apologist. Here's why. I would not separate the two, as the phrase as written does.There would be no such thing as something not being a " primary" part of the Gospel, since every part is essential, especially water baptism.This is an oxymoron to baptismal remission theology if correct.Why did Paul separate the two? Because they are not one and the same.
gateroadmusic 7 months ago
@gateroadmusic "would be a problem for me if I were a baptismal remission apologist." Not nearly the problem - an unsolvable one, at that - that having Paul NOT sent to baptize AT ALL presents. The reason for a major difficulty is, of course, that (Premise 1) "Paul was sent to baptized" - pretty plain, (Premise 2) "Paul DID baptize, so (Premise 3) Paul disobeyed Christ to the extent that he baptized.
lllannallll 7 months ago
This has been flagged as spam show
@gateroadmusic "I would not separate the two, as the phrase as written does." The phrase, as written, means the primary activity of Paul was to SPEAK ... to PREACH ... to DEBATE ... to REASON. That's not hard to understand. ANYONE - new converts, uninspired men, etc - could baptize, but not ANYONE could preach with inspiration as Paul did. There's the difference.
lllannallll 7 months ago
@gateroadmusic "There would be no such thing as something not being a " primary" part of the Gospel" Nobody said a word about a "primary part of the gospel." Paul spoke of his "primary DUTY", not "primary" and "secondary" parts of the gospel.
lllannallll 7 months ago
@gateroadmusic Actually the passage does the opposite of what you intend. Why? Because to be baptized "in name of Paul" would make one to be "of Paul." Most definately, Paul showed that to be "of Paul", one must have been baptized in Paul's name - and he objected to the Corinthians for saying they were "of Paul" for this reason: he had baptized only a few of them. But to be "of Christ", one must have been baptized in the name of Christ. So baptism makes one "of Christ."
lllannallll 7 months ago
@gateroadmusic Besides, the average denominationalist makes Paul to say, "Thank God so few of you were baptized." He thanked God that HE baptized so few of them - lest they falsely accuse him of baptizing in his own name. That's all. If baptism had been nonessential and unimportant, they WHY in the world would Paul CARE one way or another. He DID baptize a few of them, and in so doing did not disobey "Christ sent me not (only or primarily) to baptize. That's all there is to that.
lllannallll 7 months ago
@gateroadmusic "Why did Paul separate the two? Because they are not one and the same." You're right: preaching - speaking - teaching all nations is a DIFFERENT ACT than baptizing them in the name .... One person can preach and teach, another can baptize. There a handful of inspired men who could "preach it" as Paul did, but any one of thousands could administer baptism. Hence, "sent not (only or primarily) to baptize, but (also or primarily) to preach the gospel. Paul preached baptism.
lllannallll 7 months ago
If Paul was to preach a Gospel that included being baptized to remit sins, surely there would be the strongest evidence for this in His messages. There is not. It is not in Acts 9:20,13:16-41,14:1,14:14-18,16:25-32,17:1-4,17:22-31,19:1-7,etc. Paul should have clearly told someone inquiring about Salvation that this lost person should be baptized to have their sins remitted. The evidence is to the contrary. When Paul was asked a clear question in Acts 16:30, He gave a clear answer in Acts 16:31
gateroadmusic 7 months ago
The Bible tells us in Acts chapter nine what Paul was to do for Christ. He was to 1. bear Christ's name before the Gentiles( verse 15 ),and 2. Suffer for Christ ( verse 16 ).Paul immediately preached that Christ is the son of God in the synagogue. There is no sermon of Paul's recorded anywhere in the Bible where he ever commanded a lost Gentile to be " baptized in order to be saved ". The evidence of the Bible agrees with Paul's words in 1 Cor.1:17, and not a presupposed theology scheme.
gateroadmusic 7 months ago
In the previous reply to @lllannallll, the verse is Acts 2:37, not 2:38.
gateroadmusic 7 months ago
I'm a Calvinist... and I like Luther... but take that, Lutherans!
jesusfreakrkg 1 year ago
The point of Romans 6:3-7 is that the point of the new life is as you are risen from the grave of baptism. Symbolic but necessary to be obediant to the Gospel of Christ . Even Paul said by his own words He was instructed to arise and wash away his SINS through baptism. Cant let feelings overrule the Word of God.
johnnymiller1954 1 year ago
@johnnymiller1954 If Paul was saved by water baptism He sure did a poor job of sharing it with others. The answer given to the Philippian jailor to the question " What must I do to be saved?" did not involve the statement " arise and wash away thy sins". If Paul was saved by water baptism He must have changed His mind when He preached to the Corinthians because He told them " Christ sent me NOT TO BAPTIZE, but to preach the Gospel" ( 1 Cor. 1:17).
gateroadmusic 1 year ago
@gateroadmusic "If Paul was saved by water baptism He must have changed His mind when He preached to the Corinthians because He told them " Christ sent me NOT TO BAPTIZE, but to preach the Gospel" ( 1 Cor. 1:17)" That's an implied ellipsis: Christ sent me not (only or merely) to baptize, but (also or primarily) to preach ... Evidence of this fact is that Paul DID baptize! So when he did, if Christ sent him NOT to baptize, then according to you, Paul DISOBEYED.
lllannallll 7 months ago
@lllannallll The only problem with this conclusion is that the Bible does not make the same one. The word " only " was not written down by the original writer and is added by the reader just as some baptismal remissionists add " to be saved " to Acts 2:38. If Paul wanted to say " primarily ",He most certainly would have written it down. We have to deal with the words that are actually on the page, not phantom words that are perceived by the reader.
gateroadmusic 7 months ago
@gateroadmusic Then if you deny the implied ellipsis (which you do) then I'll say that Paul evidentally sinned when he baptized believers (which, of course, he did): that would be the conclusion if we "deal with the words that are actually on the page, not phantom words that are perceived by the reader." Truth is that Paul was, as I said, sent not only to baptize, but primarily to preach the gospel. That is the import of the passage because Paul DID baptize.
lllannallll 7 months ago
@gateroadmusic Without the ellipses, I'll also say that you teach that (1) believing on Christ equals NOT believing on Christ, (2) followers of Jesus are not to work for their food, and (3) Timothy was not to drink water. I'll also say that, without the ellipsis, Jesus nullified the Great Commission in Paul's case. The twelve were positively sent to preach, teach, and baptize, but, somehow, Paul was not under that commission - or he was under 2/3rd's of it.
lllannallll 7 months ago
@gateroadmusic John 12: 44: "He that believeth on me" ... what? ... "believeth NOT on me, but on Him that sent me." How about supplying the ellipsis? "He that believeth on me believeth not on me (only), but (also) on Him that sent me." I Tim 5: 23: "Drink no longer water but use a little wine ..." How about "Drink no longer water (only), but also use a little wine"? Jn 6: 27: "Labor not (only) for the mean that perisheth, but (also or primarily) for that which endureth ..." Common grammar.
lllannallll 7 months ago
I agree with you that the "one baptism" of Eph 4 is the believer's union with Christ as seen in Col 2. where the circumcision "without hands" is the same as the identification with Christ in his "death" baptism on the cross. Your failing to recognize the distinctive new Pauline revelation received from the ascended Christ ends up legalizing the Church of His body. Just as the circumcision of Col 2 is "without hands" so is the baptism the operation of God and has nothing to do with water.
markpianoman 2 years ago
Paul was also circumcised and kept the law as a Pharisee of the Pharisees...but times have changed with the further revelation of the "one" baptism. You bring in legalism and self-glorification and destroy the unity that Paul talks about in Eph. 4. There is no "bond of peace" when the 7 unities are not kept. This is why there is so much strife within Christendom over the issues of baptism. Paul was not working under the "great commission" he received a greater commission in II Cor. 5:18.
markpianoman 2 years ago
In Eph 4: 4,5 Paul says there is one baptism. In Rom. 6 and Col. 2, Paul makes it clear that the one baptism is the baptism of the Holy Spirit which occurs the moment one accepts Christ. If you believe in the baptism of the Holy Spirit AND water baptism THEN you have two baptisms!! You need to keep the UNITY by following Eph 4 and the LIST of 7 "ones" which creates unity with the Body of Christ.
markpianoman 2 years ago
Jesus commanded the 12 and believers of that day to "do whatsoever I have commanded you." This included raising the dead and healing as well...not just water baptism. But we have to distinguish between what the earthly Jesus commanded the 12 and what he gave by revelation to the Apostle to the Gentiles (Paul) . Paul received new revelations from the ascended Christ for the Body of Christ. My question for you is: How many baptismS do you believe in? Spirit (upon belief), water, etc...?
markpianoman 2 years ago
John Piper is right! Baptism not necessary AND should not be practiced. Let your doctrine be updated by the revelation the ascended Christ gave to the Apostle Paul. In Eph 4: 4,5 Paul says there is one baptism. In Rom. 6 Paul makes it clear that the one baptism is the baptism of the Holy Spirit which occurs the moment one accepts Christ. If you believe in the baptism of the Holy Spirit AND water baptism THEN you have two baptisms!! You need to keep the UNITY by following Eph 4.
markpianoman 2 years ago
Part 2
In other words, just because someone believes in Baptismal Regeneration DOES NOT mean they think that faith in Christ is optional. It isn't. Without faith in Christ salvation is not possible - not even after having been regenerated in baptism. Piper is wrong to imply that those who believe in Baptismal Regeneration try to base their salvation on baptism alone apart from Christ. We don't. In all the years I taught Catholic theology I never once heard anyone say what Piper implies.
MrNewMan99 3 years ago
Actually I teach Catholic theology. Yes - Baptism washes away Original Sin. However, Catholics do NOT teach that Baptism, of and by itself, will save someone. Rather, we agree that people who presume on their baptism and do not have faith in Christ - they will not be saved. That being said, Piper makes a false dichotomy when he claims that belief in baptismal regeneration can lead one to hell. Rather, it is belief in anything (including baptism) TO THE EXCLUSION of Christ that is damning.
MrNewMan99 3 years ago
No. He is saying just the opposite.
jkyleb 3 years ago
I know exactly what Piper is teaching. Piper asserts some people wind up in hell because they (mistakenly) believe their baptism is all that is necessary for salvation (and thus they disregard faith and presume on their baptism alone). However, Piper ignores that NO Christian faith teaches that Baptism alone (apart from faith) saves in the first place. If people go to hell it is due to their rejection of faith. They need to embrace faith, not reject the truth of baptismal regeneration.
MrNewMan99 3 years ago
The answer to the question at the end of this video is simple: there are ZERO people in hell today because they believed they were regenerated in baptism. If they are in hell (and there are surely plenty of people in hell) it is because they were not faithful to the covenant they had joined. I know of no baptismal regeneration-believing Christian faiths who also teach "cheap grace" - but I know of many "once saved always saved" believers who do - and THAT is dangerous.
MrNewMan99 3 years ago
Sir, with all due respect... I don't think you clearly understand what Piper is teaching. Watch:
/watch?v=o-tMI6b2E5M
CHEKA287 3 years ago
The link isn't working for me. If you send it to me via message I will be happy to watch it.
MrNewMan99 3 years ago
You seem to have forgotten Catholicism. Their baptism doctrines state that original sin is washed away after baptism.
I'm sure there are many independents and individuals within protestantism who believe the same thing.
I assure you, Piper wouldn't have said it for no reason. He is saying that no one is saved by baptism, and if baptism is the foundation for their faith and not Christ, they are in hell.
jkyleb 3 years ago
Comment removed
Zeowulf 3 years ago