The Context of 1 Peter 3:21 (Christ, Isaiah, Matthew, prophecy)
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
There was nothing figurative about Noah being saved through WATER. Peter says baptism which now saves you corresponds to that.
You can't take water out of this passage.
Blessings,
Katie
Katiemygirl, Noah was never saved through WATER. Noah is saved through Faith. And that water was indeed figurative (Bible Typology) for the Holy Spirit. Remember Cornelius received the Holy Spirit BEFORE he was baptised. Peter was so amazed that he went back to report to the other Apostles and they understood that the water baptism (repentance) was therefore also granted by obtaining the Holy Spirit. You see they were still learning of the process of salvation even themselves.
Act 11:18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.
Remember in Christ we are not under the Yoke of Necessity.
Katiemygirl, Noah was never saved through WATER. Noah is saved through Faith. And that water was indeed figurative (Bible Typology) for the Holy Spirit. Remember Cornelius received the Holy Spirit BEFORE he was baptised. Peter was so amazed that he went back to report to the other Apostles and they understood that the water baptism (repentance) was therefore also granted by obtaining the Holy Spirit. You see they were still learning of the process of salvation even themselves.
Act 11:18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.
Remember in Christ we are not under the Yoke of Necessity.
Actually, Noah was saved by the blood of Jesus.
However, Peter tells us that Noah was brought safely through water. He says baptism, which corresponds to this now saves you. That is precisely what the Scriptures says.
Peter goes on to qualify how baptism saves you. He says it is an appeal to God for a good conscience. He says it is by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
There is nothing figurative about the water. Peter compares Noah being brought safely through the flood water to our being brought safely through the waters of baptism.
Water is the context of the passage. It is your opinion that the passage is figurative.
Just because Cornelius received the Holy Spirit prior to being baptized does not prove he was saved. The Holy Spirit works through the saved and sinner alike. This is proven in Scripture with the storied of Caiaphas, the High Priest, who prophesied while plotting to kill Jesus. It is proven with Saul, the King, who prophesied while planning to kill David. And then of course, we know a little donkey spoke in tongues. God will use anyone or anything to accomplish His purposes.
The apostles were not still learning the process of salvation by the time they got to Cornelius' house. Jesus gave them the entire process. It's all right there in the gospels. He said we must have faith. We must repent. We must confess His name, and we must be baptized.
Again, Matthew calls them thieves. I agree about baptism into Christ wasn't until after His death. I seriously doubt he was baptized on the cross as well, especially since baptism means immersion, and that's how they baptized then, not by throwing water on someone, sprinkling it on their forehead, or what have you.
I agree as well that they were under the old Law.
Thanks for pointing that out Jamie. It's funny how you can read something so many times, yet it doesn't register.
However, Peter tells us that Noah was brought safely through water. He says baptism, which corresponds to this now saves you. That is precisely what the Scriptures says.
Peter goes on to qualify how baptism saves you. He says it is an appeal to God for a good conscience. He says it is by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.
There is nothing figurative about the water. Peter compares Noah being brought safely through the flood water to our being brought safely through the waters of baptism.
Water is the context of the passage. It is your opinion that the passage is figurative.
Just because Cornelius received the Holy Spirit prior to being baptized does not prove he was saved. The Holy Spirit works through the saved and sinner alike. This is proven in Scripture with the storied of Caiaphas, the High Priest, who prophesied while plotting to kill Jesus. It is proven with Saul, the King, who prophesied while planning to kill David. And then of course, we know a little donkey spoke in tongues. God will use anyone or anything to accomplish His purposes.
The apostles were not still learning the process of salvation by the time they got to Cornelius' house. Jesus gave them the entire process. It's all right there in the gospels. He said we must have faith. We must repent. We must confess His name, and we must be baptized.
God bless you,
Katie
Katie, here is my problem with what you stated. You said that if someone has the Holy Spirit it doesn't necessarily prove they are saved.
Rom 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
Now it seems to me that we are seeing here that the Holy Spirit is LIFE.
While robbers or thieves my be a translation, thieves were not regularly crucified. Crucifixion was a Roman sentence reserved for murders, insurrectionist and traitors. If they were 'thieves' they were of the type that severely beat and kill their victims, such as would be dangerous to the trade and economics of the Roman empire. Let us not think that these 'thieves' were simply those that steal things, they were violent men that caused the Roman Empire levy the most sever death upon their crimes, that of crucifixion.
Katie, here is my problem with what you stated. You said that if someone has the Holy Spirit it doesn't necessarily prove they are saved.
Rom 8:10 And if Christ be in you, the body is dead because of sin; but the Spirit is life because of righteousness.
Now it seems to me that we are seeing here that the Holy Spirit is LIFE.
Romans 8:10 refers to those who are in Christ. Cornelius was not in Christ. You may assume that, but it doesn't make it so.
Romans 8:10 does not prove Cornelius was saved before baptism. Nowhere in the Cornelius story does it say he was SAVED prior to his baptism. The word saved isn't used in the entire passage. This is strictly an assumption on your part.
I will have to respectfully disagree on the salvation event. It is not the ritual baptism that is the saving event, rather it is the repentance and confession of sin that is the saving event.
Paul clearly taught that salvation event was not baptism, rather it was confession. The only place that baptism might seem like a requirement for salvation (you can't separate the cause from the event) is in Acts 3:28, where, if you follow the grammatical logic, everyone in the area had to be baptized in order for even one person to have remission of sin. Of course, the are volumes that argue the Greek 'eis' in that passage. Since Peter is the only one to include baptism to be required for the remission of sin, and only here in this passage, it seems rather week to told to that view when the other passages mention nothing about the requirement to be baptized.
Thank you for your post. I won't have time to address it all right now..
"It is also written..." (Matthew 4:7)
If the only verse we had about the process of salvation were Romans 10:9-10, I would agree with you. However, there are many verses, which pertain to our initial salvation. One only need to look a little further down the page to see that those who call on the name of the Lord will be saved. Repentance is not mentioned in the Romans passage, nor is baptism, yet we know that Jesus commanded those as well, and each is connected to salvation.
Whether you believe that baptism is with the Holy Spirit or you believe baptism is immersion in water, it is the saving event, the time we are saved. Not only does 1 Peter 3:21 say so, but so does Romans 6:3-5, Colossians 2:11-14. We are saved WHEN we are set free from sin.
In the Romans passage faith and confession are paired. Here are some other pairings you need to consider. And notice that each one uses "eis" or unto.
eis = in order to receive
"For with the heart man believeth unto (eis) righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto (eis) salvation." (Romans 10:10)
"Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto (eis) remission of your sins... (Acts 2:38)
The same "eis" word is used in the following verse.
"This is my blood of the covenant, which is poured out for many unto (eis) the remission of your sins. (Mathew 26:28)
Faith, repentance, confession and baptism have exactly the same relationship to salvation. All are necessary.
The blood of Jesus relates to the remission of sins and is the cause of our salvation.
Please note the following pairings in Scripture.
"Repent ye, and believe in the gospel." (Mark 1:15)
"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." (Mark 16:16)
"Repent ye and turn again that your sins may be blotted out." (Acts 3:19 )
All of these conditions mentioned in the pairs collectively are requirements laid down in the word of God for salvation.
Hebrews 6:1-2 calls them the foundation of christianity.
6 Therefore, leaving the discussion of the elementary principles of Christ, let us go on to perfection, not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works and of faith toward God, 2 of the doctrine of baptisms, of laying on of hands, of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. 3 And this we will do if God permits.
All of the conversions recorded in Acts, without exception, make it clear that there was only one way to become a christian. They heard the word. They believed. They repented. They were baptized. The pattern is exactly the same over and over again.
Quote:
At least we agree that there is only one baptism, there is that. But we definitely disagree with that that one baptism is. It is true that the baptism to which Jesus referred in Matthew 28:18 -20 is water baptism, but he did not command to be baptized, rather he stated that the in making disciples, we baptize them. There may not be a big difference to you in the phraseology of the command, but it is significant, especially when you consider there is only one imperative in the passage, that is to 'make disciples', the other verbs in the passages are participles, which in this case are things that happen as a result of making disciples: going, baptizing and teaching.
Disciples are made by baptizing them, and by teaching them to do everything Jesus commanded. Disciples are followers of Jesus. How can one be a disciple if he/she is not baptized or if he/she does not follow the commands of Jesus?
If you agree that there is one baptism, then why do you practice two? Either baptism with the Holy Spirit must go or baptism in water must go. Which one is it? There can be only one.
Quote:
You perhaps may object and refer to Mark 16:16, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned." But I actually agree with the wording here, which does not state exactly what baptism is. If you believe and are baptized into Christ by the Holy Spirit, based on your repentance and confession, you are saved. But many bible either do not contain the greater part of Mark 16 or bracket it out of the rest of the text because it is a questionable part of Mark's gospel account, not showing up until much later in the manuscript time line. I wouldn't base any doctrine on anything form that part of Mark 16 that isn't also in the rest of scripture, which wouldn't need that part of Mark 16 anyway.
Many of the church fathers use verses from Mark 16:9-20. They never questioned its authenticity. Their writings date back to as early as 70 A.D. Irenaus, who is much older than any of our existing manuscripts , quotes verse 19 as part of the gospel of Mark. The epistle of Barnabas, the Shepherd of Hermes, and Justin Martyr to name a few also use Mark 16:9-20. Justin Marty made four direct references to the passage.
I don't doubt the genuineness or authenticity of the passage. It is found in nearly all Greek manuscripts and has been accepted in the church from the Second Century A.D.
More importantly, nothing in these verses contradicts anything in the rest of the Scriptures
I'm wondering if you also reject John 7:53-8:11? Do you apply your same rule?
Sorry, I'll have to address the rest of your post at another time.
God bless you,
Katie
Last edited by MissKate12; 02-18-2013 at 11:26 AM..
While robbers or thieves my be a translation, thieves were not regularly crucified. Crucifixion was a Roman sentence reserved for murders, insurrectionist and traitors. If they were 'thieves' they were of the type that severely beat and kill their victims, such as would be dangerous to the trade and economics of the Roman empire. Let us not think that these 'thieves' were simply those that steal things, they were violent men that caused the Roman Empire levy the most sever death upon their crimes, that of crucifixion.
Blessings in Christ,
Matthew
You may be right Matthew, and what you write makes sense to me, but it doesn't change the fact that we don't know whether the thief had ever been baptized by John previously. A good case could be made that he was, and a good case could be made that he wasn't. I don't think we have the right to say he was or wasn't. We just don't know for sure, and to teach people that baptism isn't necessary for salvation based on the thief not being baptized is dishonest and not found in Scripture.
Romans 8:10 refers to those who are in Christ. Cornelius was not in Christ. You may assume that, but it doesn't make it so.
Romans 8:10 does not prove Cornelius was saved before baptism. Nowhere in the Cornelius story does it say he was SAVED prior to his baptism. The word saved isn't used in the entire passage. This is strictly an assumption on your part.
Peace,
Katie
The Holy Spirit is only promised to those who are saved. Those who are baptized into Jesus' death, having the expectation to live in the newness of His life. Cornelius received the Holy Spirit before he was baptized in water. This shows us that the act of going under the water doesn't do anything in itself.
This is why after a little studying on my part, the act of baptism is a rite of passage for the believer, yet the act itself isn't necessary for salvation. The act is an outward identification of who you are in Christ. You see Jesus commanded the apostles to make disciples, "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit". It was an identification for who we are, yet Jesus never said anything about necessity for salvation. Do you see the emphasis is on who are we baptizing them in, instead of the act of baptism?
Look at the situation where Phillip spoke to the ethiopian eunuch. Acts 8 verses 36-37 states...
"As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch *said, “Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?” And 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.”
Do you see where the emphasis is? It's not on the act of baptism, it is on where you put your faith. Baptism in the name of Jesus was how we identified ourselves. It was an outward expression of who we were. A new creature in Christ.
You may be right Matthew, and what you write makes sense to me, but it doesn't change the fact that we don't know whether the thief had ever been baptized by John previously. A good case could be made that he was, and a good case could be made that he wasn't. I don't think we have the right to say he was or wasn't. We just don't know for sure, and to teach people that baptism isn't necessary for salvation based on the thief not being baptized is dishonest and not found in Scripture.
Blessings,
Katie
Even if he was baptized by John, it is of a different type than we have in the church. That is why it doesn't matter whether the man was baptized or not, he was under the Law, not the church age. His baptism, if he ever was baptized, was prior to the church and thus not truly part of the whole baptism argument, except that if he was saved (and I believe he was) he was saved the same as any saint is saved, through his faith and nothing more. So the argument isn't 'dishonest and not found in Scripture' because the argument is found therein.
This is Paul's whole argument in Romans 4, How was Abraham made righteous? Was it through circumcision, or any other physical ceremony? What is by any kind of act of an event that saved him? No. Abraham believe God and it was counted to him for righteousness. Where was baptism prior to the establishment of the church? Was the event of baptism required for salvation prior to the Church, was it the event even that made man righteous in the eyes of God from Adam up to the Cross? No, only faith, there was no 'event' of salvation, the event and the cause have always been the same, and that is the act and time of faith. Of those that are mentioned in Hebrews 11, how many were given believers baptism, the 'event' of salvation? How did they receive righteousness? Was it by being immersed in water? No, it was by faith. From the beginning salvation, the act of being found righteous before God has always been an by an act of faith apart from any 'event'.
What is dishonest and not found in scripture is the addition of any 'event' other than faith.
Blessings in Christ,
Matthew
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
