Are we saved by our mode of baptism or by Jesus Ch

[mizpeh]

I am a former UPC church member, and I can also say that although I still believe the Acts 2:38 message, I am more aware and sensitive on how I preach the message making sure that the love and grace of Jesus Christ is always at the forefront. If we are not careful, we can do damage to God’s plan of salvation, which is supposed to be a message of grace and regeneration, reducing it to a from of “doctrinal legalism” if I can use such a term. What I am saying is that we too easily dismiss people’s genuine faith and experience with God because they don’t exactly fit our textbook plan of salvation. I’ve always struggled with this because I know sincere regenerated people who love God and haven’t been baptized in Jesus Name but in the titles, for example. Are they not saved because of the way they were baptized ? Is that what the scriptures actually teach ? Are we saved by our mode of baptism or by Jesus Christ through baptism ? This is what I mean by doctrinal legalism. http://theosophical.wordpress.com/book-wish-list/

The things we don't see when someone is baptized is the most important of all...remission of sins. We don't see the circumcision made without hands by the Spirit of God at which time the blood of Christ is sprinkled upon our hearts and we are then "washed".

I like the sentiment behind what this man is saying in the quotes above but regenerated and repentance are not the same thing.

[TheLegalist]

I know a lot of very good loving of heart Jehovah witnesses they deny Jesus being God. they are blessed people and have wonderful families etc... Does it mean they are saved? Does believing Jesus is God matter either. My point is niceness and goodness of heart is a good thing but blessings and how good people are doesn't mean your saved. The blessings of God fall upon the just and the unjust. Nor does goodness and blessings determine doctrinal truths that could be or might not be damning.

[Sherri]

Although I believe in Jesus' name baptism, and I'm thankful that we've seen that in Scripture, and we will always baptize that way-------I would never say that other people are not saved who have not seen that truth. If they are baptized in the name of the Father, Son & Holy Ghost, in all sincerity, believing on Jesus as their savior, then I think they are saved. Once you get outside the walls of UPC and start seeing other believers that are so on fire and full of the Holy Ghost, you realize that MAYBE you don't have ALL TRUTH wrapped up in a box.

Having said that, we will continue to teach why we baptize in Jesus' name, and we will continue to practice that. No one seems to have an issue with what we say, except us.

[jfrog]

From the Summa Theologica
http://www.newadvent.org/summa/4068.htm#article1

Article 2. Whether a man can be saved without Baptism?

Objection 1. It seems that no man can be saved without Baptism. For our Lord said (John 3:5): "Unless a man be born again of water and the Holy Ghost, he cannot enter the kingdom of God." But those alone are saved who enter God's kingdom. Therefore none can be saved without Baptism, by which a man is born again of water and the Holy Ghost.

Objection 2. Further, in the book De Eccl. Dogm. xli, it is written: "We believe that no catechumen, though he die in his good works, will have eternal life, except he suffer martyrdom, which contains all the sacramental virtue of Baptism." But if it were possible for anyone to be saved without Baptism, this would be the case specially with catechumens who are credited with good works, for they seem to have the "faith that worketh by charity" (Galatians 5:6). Therefore it seems that none can be saved without Baptism.

Objection 3. Further, as stated above (1; 65, 4), the sacrament of Baptism is necessary for salvation. Now that is necessary "without which something cannot be" (Metaph. v). Therefore it seems that none can obtain salvation without Baptism.

On the contrary, Augustine says (Super Levit. lxxxiv) that "some have received the invisible sanctification without visible sacraments, and to their profit; but though it is possible to have the visible sanctification, consisting in a visible sacrament, without the invisible sanctification, it will be to no profit." Since, therefore, the sacrament of Baptism pertains to the visible sanctification, it seems that a man can obtain salvation without the sacrament of Baptism, by means of the invisible sanctification.

I answer that, The sacrament or Baptism may be wanting to someone in two ways. First, both in reality and in desire; as is the case with those who neither are baptized, nor wished to be baptized: which clearly indicates contempt of the sacrament, in regard to those who have the use of the free-will. Consequently those to whom Baptism is wanting thus, cannot obtain salvation: since neither sacramentally nor mentally are they incorporated in Christ, through Whom alone can salvation be obtained.

Secondly, the sacrament of Baptism may be wanting to anyone in reality but not in desire: for instance, when a man wishes to be baptized, but by some ill-chance he is forestalled by death before receiving Baptism. And such a man can obtain salvation without being actually baptized, on account of his desire for Baptism, which desire is the outcome of "faith that worketh by charity," whereby God, Whose power is not tied to visible sacraments, sanctifies man inwardly. Hence Ambrose says of Valentinian, who died while yet a catechumen: "I lost him whom I was to regenerate: but he did not lose the grace he prayed for."

Reply to Objection 1. As it is written (1 Samuel 16:7), "man seeth those things that appear, but the Lord beholdeth the heart." Now a man who desires to be "born again of water and the Holy Ghost" by Baptism, is regenerated in heart though not in body. thus the Apostle says (Romans 2:29) that "the circumcision is that of the heart, in the spirit, not in the letter; whose praise is not of men but of God."

Reply to Objection 2. No man obtains eternal life unless he be free from all guilt and debt of punishment. Now this plenary absolution is given when a man receives Baptism, or suffers martyrdom: for which reason is it stated that martyrdom "contains all the sacramental virtue of Baptism," i.e. as to the full deliverance from guilt and punishment. Suppose, therefore, a catechumen to have the desire for Baptism (else he could not be said to die in his good works, which cannot be without "faith that worketh by charity"), such a one, were he to die, would not forthwith come to eternal life, but would suffer punishment for his past sins, "but he himself shall be saved, yet so as by fire" as is stated 1 Corinthians 3:15.

Reply to Objection 3. The sacrament of Baptism is said to be necessary for salvation in so far as man cannot be saved without, at least, Baptism of desire; "which, with God, counts for the deed" (Augustine, Enarr. in Ps. 57).
-------------------------------------------

I especially thought the Reloy to Objection 3 was very on top for our discussion.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by Sherri

Although I believe in Jesus' name baptism, and I'm thankful that we've seen that in Scripture, and we will always baptize that way-------I would never say that other people are not saved who have not seen that truth. If they are baptized in the name of the Father, Son & Holy Ghost, in all sincerity, believing on Jesus as their savior, then I think they are saved. Once you get outside the walls of UPC and start seeing other believers that are so on fire and full of the Holy Ghost, you realize that MAYBE you don't have ALL TRUTH wrapped up in a box.

Having said that, we will continue to teach why we baptize in Jesus' name, and we will continue to practice that. No one seems to have an issue with what we say, except us.

COMPROMISE!!!

GREASY GRACE!!!

HERETIC!!!!

BAPTICOSTAL!!!

EASY BELIEVISM!!!!

Just Kidding.

That's the way I understand it also.

[Aquila]

I don’t believe that we are saved by our mode of baptism. In fact I don’t believe in a baptismal “mode”. I believe that the repentant believer is to “call upon the name of the Lord” (Acts 22:16) at their baptism, thus receiving the remission of sins. It doesn’t matter what any man says over them. It’s about them and Jesus.

[jfrog]

I think the baptism question is really is a big dilemma for Christianity.

Criterias for baptism...
1. We all find it to be a very important practice in the bible.
2. We all think that baptism is something that should be done with the converts understanding.

These two criteria conflict with each other... Because if baptism is important than surely it should be done quickly after repentance. However, since it is also important to understand baptism then it is important to wait a while after repentance to give a convert time to understand it.

Perhaps we can say that a converts desire to learn about baptism can suffice as baptism until they have learned of it enough to be properly baptized with understanding?

[Sam]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I think the baptism question is really is a big dilemma for Christianity.

Criterias for baptism...
1. We all find it to be a very important practice in the bible.
2. We all think that baptism is something that should be done with the converts understanding.

These two criteria conflict with each other... Because if baptism is important than surely it should be done quickly after repentance. However, since it is also important to understand baptism then it is important to wait a while after repentance to give a convert time to understand it.

Perhaps we can say that a converts desire to learn about baptism can suffice as baptism until they have learned of it enough to be properly baptized with understanding?

In reading the book of Acts, it seems baptism was soon after conversion. Like on the same day in Acts 2:41 and the same night in Acts 16:33. The way the account is given in Acts 16, children may have been baptized, but verse 32 says they preached to "all that were in his house" and verse 34 indicates that the jailer believed in God with all his house.

Mikveh was familiar to Jews and many pagans have some sort of cleansing ritual so baptism would not be completely unknown and unexpected to those who heard the Gospel in the first century.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by jfrog

I think the baptism question is really is a big dilemma for Christianity.

Criterias for baptism...
1. We all find it to be a very important practice in the bible.
2. We all think that baptism is something that should be done with the converts understanding.

These two criteria conflict with each other... Because if baptism is important than surely it should be done quickly after repentance. However, since it is also important to understand baptism then it is important to wait a while after repentance to give a convert time to understand it.

Perhaps we can say that a converts desire to learn about baptism can suffice as baptism until they have learned of it enough to be properly baptized with understanding?

All Ananias told Paul to do was to arise and be baptized washing away his sins, calling on the name of the Lord. Nothing more... nothing less. Obviously Paul studied the subject later and came to greater and greater understanding. However, initially that's all he was told.

Why not just tell someone who has repented, "Now you need to call on the name of the Lord in water baptism and have your sins washed away. Then you will be filled with the Holy Ghost."?

That should do it. They can grow into the deeper understandings of baptism as they develop in Christ Jesus.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Aquila

All Ananias told Paul to do was to arise and be baptized washing away his sins, calling on the name of the Lord. Nothing more... nothing less. Obviously Paul studied the subject later and came to greater and greater understanding. However, initially that's all he was told.

Why not just tell someone who has repented, "Now you need to call on the name of the Lord in water baptism and have your sins washed away. Then you will be filled with the Holy Ghost."?

That should do it. They can grow into the deeper understandings of baptism as they develop in Christ Jesus.

Then I suppose not everyone think they two criteria I mentioned above are important.

In which case I wonder why new converts aren't baptized they same day they repent. This is not generally the practice from my experience.