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

[Praxeas]

Regeneration and repentance are not the same thing? OF course they are not the same thing. What is the point to that?

BTW if remission of sins (Forgiveness) really happens AT and By baptism then we'd see rebaptisms in the bible everytime someone sins

[Sam]

Originally Posted by jfrog

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

In Acts 8 when Philip encountered the Ethopian eunuch and presented Jesus to him, Philip required a profession of faith from him before he would consent to baptizing him.

35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him. 36 Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, “See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?”
37 Then Philip said, “If you believe with all your heart, you may.”
And he answered and said, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.”
38 So he commanded the chariot to stand still. And both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water, and he baptized him. 39 Now when they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord fell upon the eunuch and an angel of the Lord caught Philip away, so that the eunuch saw him no more; and he went on his way rejoicing. 40 But Philip was found at Azotus. And passing through, he preached in all the cities till he came to Caesarea.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Regeneration and repentance are not the same thing? OF course they are not the same thing. What is the point to that?

BTW if remission of sins (Forgiveness) really happens AT and By baptism then we'd see rebaptisms in the bible everytime someone sins

If remission of sins happens at baptism it could be said that baptism accomplishes two things. It remits all past sins and brings one into the body of Christ. Now once one is in the body of Christ there is another method of forgiveness for sins committed after baptism. 1 John 1:9 says "If we confess our sins, he is faithful and just to forgive us our sins, and to cleanse us from all unrighteousness." Therefore those that are already baptized would not need to be rebaptized to obtain forgiveness for any sins they committed after their initial baptism.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by 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.

I agree in a general sense. However the Lord Jesus did say that MEN do have a part in baptism.

19: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Matt. 28:19

The Apostles were commanded by Jesus to BAPTIZE BELIEVERS INTO THE NAME.

So what the baptizer does is also important. Yet the convert "calling on the name" is the high point.

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Regeneration and repentance are not the same thing? OF course they are not the same thing. What is the point to that?

BTW if remission of sins (Forgiveness) really happens AT and By baptism then we'd see rebaptisms in the bible everytime someone sins

nope and I pointed out why we don't in the other thread about the cross with Adino etc...

[TheLegalist]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

I agree in a general sense. However the Lord Jesus did say that MEN do have a part in baptism.

19: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Matt. 28:19

The Apostles were commanded by Jesus to BAPTIZE BELIEVERS INTO THE NAME.

So what the baptizer does is also important. Yet the convert "calling on the name" is the high point.

Yep which is using the name by which any authority exists. JESUS!

[Jermyn Davidson]

I know this is about baptism, but what about communion?

Could it be that Biblically understanding the role of communion in one's salvation will lead to the Biblical understanding of water baptism as well?


I've hardly heard anyone tie communion or the lack thereof to someone's eternal soul's salvation, but if you take the Bible literally, isn't that exactly what the Bible does?



So if the lack of communion is something that, "our just God will understand", what about baptism? If the lack of water baptism is something that, "our just God will understand", does the mode matter?



The slope is so slippery!

Sometimes, it's just better to make a stand and be done with it.

[Jermyn Davidson]

We are saved by Jesus Christ.

He is the Author and Finisher of our faith (Hebrews 12:2).

I need to point out that Hebrews 12:2 is not a reference to each individual Christian's personal faith in Jesus Christ that leads to salvation for our eternal souls. The "faith" refererenced in this chapter is the Gospel of Christ-- the basis for our faith.

Literally speaking, if we were saved by the actions and faith of Jesus Christ alone, then no one would be lost because the works and faith of Christ is sufficient for the salvation of all of humanity.

Yet all of humanity will not be saved. The Bible implies that more will be damned than saved (Matthew 7:14).

Why will this happen? 2nd Timothy 3:13 states that, "... evil men and seducers shall wax worse and worse, deceiving, and being deceived."

The commands of Christ and the interpretation of those commands by the actions of His Apostles are not mere good ideas or suggestions. They are commands to be obeyed out of a heart of love and reverence for the Author and Finisher of the Good News that saves our never dying souls.


I am of the camp that the act of baptism by itself is not salvational. I hope I am clear in my statement when I say that it is the faith of the One Author and Finisher that saves and water baptism is His command to us-- those who follow Him out of love and reverence into life everlasting.

One can not Biblically believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ and refuse water baptism. Neither can one Biblically believe the Gospel of Jesus Christ and not repent.


I would like to do more studying on the concept of "passive" Biblical commands-- potentially making the experience of the infilling of the Holy Ghost to be an experience that is to be preached and taught as an experience that EVERY BELIEVER MUST SEEK AFTER AND EXPERIENCE FOR ETERNAL SALVATION.

[Aquila]

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple

I agree in a general sense. However the Lord Jesus did say that MEN do have a part in baptism.

19: Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Matt. 28:19

The Apostles were commanded by Jesus to BAPTIZE BELIEVERS INTO THE NAME.

So what the baptizer does is also important. Yet the convert "calling on the name" is the high point.

I agree. I think sometimes we put more emphasis on what a man is saying over the repentant believer than the believer themselves calling on the name of the Lord. Conceivably, a man could simply tell the repentant to call on the name of the Lord for remission, and then baptize them, the baptizer saying nothing at all.... and it be effectual.

There then opens a can of worms however. This would mean that if 100 Apostolic ministers screamed "In the name of Jesus!" at a person's water baptism, it's ineffectual if the one being baptized isn't calling on the name of the Lord seeking remission.

On the flip side... you could have 100 Trinitarian ministers screaming "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit!", yet if the one being baptized is calling on the name of the Lord for remission it will indeed be effectual, remitting their sin. For it's predicated upon their faith and calling on the Lord... not the oration, "formula", or "liturgy" spoken by the baptizer.

If this is true... we might be surprised when we see non-Apostolics in Heaven that we thought wouldn't make it... and not see so many Apostolics that we thought were certain to make it. I know many Apostolics place their trust in the words of the minister... not necessarily their own cry to the name for remission.

The notion is truly sobering.

[Jeffrey]

Scripture never officially established a "mode."