We know of these verses most commonly used to support the "be dipped or damned" dogma (Mark 16:16, John 3:1-5, Acts 2:38, Romans 6:3-5, Galatians 3:27, 1 Peter 3:21, Titus 3:5, Acts 22:14-16), but I would like to see others verses besides these that prove this "be dipped or damned" dogma. Can you please cite them Kevin?

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), April 27, 2004

Answers

I really doubt you can, Kevin. But I just want to see if the Bible really stresses the "be dipped or damned" dogma.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), April 27, 2004.

David,

Are you talking about if someone is not baptized, they are not saved? Or is this referring to full immersion? Please define your phrase.

Thanks & God bless,

-- Emily (jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), April 27, 2004.

Hebrews 10:21-23 "and since we have a great priest over the house of God, let us draw near to God with a sincere heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled to cleanse us from a guilty conscience and having our bodies washed with pure water. Let us hold unswervingly to the hope we profess, for he who promised is faithful. "

-- Luke Juarez (not kevin) (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), April 27, 2004.

"Are you talking about if someone is not baptized, they are not saved? Or is this referring to full immersion? Please define your phrase." - emily

I'm talking about the only biblical baptism there is, for disciples alone. And I don't believe baptism (water) saves.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), April 27, 2004.

Emily,

For you information, Kevin believes that if one is not baptized, one is not saved. He is a Churches of Christ member.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), April 27, 2004.

Thanks David. I was trying to figure out if he was full-immersion- only or what? David, do you believe in infant baptism, or adults only? As I want to become Catholic, I suspect that you know I believe in infant baptism and that baptism (or baptism by desire) is necessary for salvation.

-- Emily (jesusfollower7@yahoo.com), April 27, 2004.

I believe in baptism for believers only. Babies do not believe.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), April 27, 2004.

Luke,

That's just one. There are about 7,959 verses in the New T.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), April 27, 2004.

Ephesians 5:25-27 "Husbands, love your wives, just as Christ loved the church and gave himself up for her to make her holy, cleansing her by the washing with water through the word, and to present her to himself as a radiant church, without stain or wrinkle or any other blemish, but holy and blameless."

-- Luke Juarez (still not kevin) (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), April 27, 2004.

1 John 5:5-7 "Who is it that overcomes the world? Only he who believes that Jesus is the Son of God. This is the one who came by water and blood--Jesus Christ. He did not come by water only, but by water and blood. And it is the Spirit who testifies, because the Spirit is the truth. For there are three that testify: the Spirit, the water and the blood; and the three are in agreement."

-- Luke Juarez (wonders what kevin looks like) (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), April 27, 2004.

Colossians 2:11-13 "In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead. When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ.

-- Luke Juarez (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), April 27, 2004.

The very context which that last verse falls in shows undoubtedly that baptism is not "salvation by works." The "works" or "deeds" that Paul spoke agains never included baptism.

-- Luke Juarez (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), April 27, 2004.

David, you are correct. The verse I posted from Hebrews is only one. There is an old approach to bible interpretation called consulto oppono. Ah that doesn't sound right, but it's close. Basically it means to weigh scripture literally, as if placing verses on a scale to measure. All one does is gather up every revelant scripture and sort them into the appropriate cases, and then measuring them. Whichever case or argument holds the greater amount of scripture automatically is deemed truth. There is little to no effort made in harmonizing anything.

As for the other verses, well their fate is dependant upon the judge's beliefs. If he believed that every word is the breath of God, then he couldn't simply toss out these verses. Instead, he would have to rely upon an external (out of bible) explaination of these. If, on the other hand, the judge simply believes what he wants, he produces The Reader's Digest Bible. *snicker*

-- Luke Juarez (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), April 27, 2004.

Umm...do you mean tota scriptura?

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), April 27, 2004.

I don't think so... I thought tota scriptura meant "all of scripture," which would be the opposite of this other method. Although both stock-up all scripture, ultimately, this other one discards certain parts. Tota scriptura ultimately holds that there are no contradictions, so everything fits together.

-- Luke Juarez (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), April 27, 2004.

Luke,

Ephesians 5:25-27 IS NOT talking about water baptism.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), April 27, 2004.

David, in the strictest sense, you are correct. This section is not about water baptism, but about marriage. Nevertheless, it says that "with water through the word did Christ make us holy and blameless."

By grace through faith. By water through the word.

-- Luke Juarez (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), April 27, 2004.

I figured you intended to exclude that one, but I had to post it just in case... hehehe

-- Luke Juarez (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), April 27, 2004.

Luke,

Thanks for filling in for me when I did not have time to answer.

David,

Before I get into this discussion with you, let me ask you a question: The baptism of John was it for the remission of sins??? Yes or No. Please provide scriptural evidence to support your claim.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), April 27, 2004.

No, it wasn't (Acts 19:4-6)

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), April 27, 2004.

Is this going to be another discussion on the word "FOR"?? Which we have already discussed has more than one meaning, but you seem to deny that and insist it only means 'in order to obtain' ALL the time. If that's what your going to insist, then I'd rather not waste me time discussing it.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), April 27, 2004.

David,

Acts 19:4-6 does NOT state that the baptism of John was not for the remission of sins.

How were the apostles saved??? It is obvious that they were baptized with the baptism of John because Jesus NEVER baptized anyone personally.

I guess that you are also going to say that those people who submitted to the baptism of John ALREADY had their sins washed away prior to their baptism right David??? Where is your scripture to back up this claim???

If the baptism of John was NOT for the remission of sins, then what was it for???

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), April 29, 2004.

Acts 19:1-10

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.
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.
7 And all the men were about twelve.
8 And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.
9 But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus.
10 And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), May 04, 2004.

I'm still waiting for my other passages, Kevin. That's if you can provide them.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), May 04, 2004.

David,

The link below refutes your false idea that Acts 19:1-10 shows that the baptism of John was not for the remission of sins.

New Testament Baptism: In Water or the Spirit?

I am not going to waste my time quoting all of the scriptures that deal with baptism FOR the simple reason that you will do your best to CHANGE the English words just as you did with the word FOR (which is the Greek word Eis) in the New Testament. The link below is for you David and those who try to pervert the simple New Testament plan of salvation.

A Rose Is a Rose; Or Is It?

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), May 04, 2004.

Yea, and here's a link for you. The Contract

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), May 04, 2004.

"I am not going to waste my time quoting all of the scriptures that deal with baptism" - Kevin.

There is no need to quote them, I know the usual 12 cited in defense of the water dogma. Can you give me 12 more?

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), May 04, 2004.

"FOR (which is the Greek word Eis" - kevin

We already had this discussion, and we have discussed that the word FOR has different meanings in English. Even in Greek (according to Scholars), it does not have the meaning you want it to have.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), May 04, 2004.

David,

In the link you provided, it states "through prayer, invite Jesus into your life". Please show everyone here where ANYONE in the New Testament ever said a prayer for salvation and were saved???

You wrote, "There is no need to quote them, I know the usual 12 cited in defense of the water dogma. Can you give me 12 more?"

The scriptures that have been provided that show that one MUST be baptized IN water in order to obtain remission of sins have already been provided and are sufficient to PROVE this to be true. You already do not believe that baptism has anything to do with salvation, what good would it be for me or anyone else for that matter to quote some more verses that talk about salvation through baptism in water???

You wrote, "We already had this discussion, and we have discussed that the word FOR has different meanings in English. Even in Greek (according to Scholars), it does not have the meaning you want it to have."

Yes, in Greek it DOES have the meaning (according to Scholars) that I want it to have. Why was the Greek word EIS not translated "because of" remission of sins???

The same EXACT phrase, same EXACT grammar, same EXACT syntax, and the EXACT same words appear in Matthew 26:28 and in Acts 2:38 "for the remission of sins" but different meanings? Many people INCLUDING David translate the word differently for absolutely no better reason than the simple FACT that in one place (Acts 2:38) it does not fit their favorite theology and in the other place it does.

It is obvious that your mind will not be changed no matter how much evidence is shown you to PROVE that baptism is indeed FOR the remission of one's sins. I could keep on going back and forth with you on this subject, but what would it prove.

You can continue to rail against the truth of God's word, but that does NOT change the FACT that one CANNOT be saved until they are baptized for the remission of their sins. This is one of the few Catholic doctrines (with the exception of infant baptism) that agree with the word of God.

In the Great Commission, Jesus told the apostles HOW disciples were made when He said in Matthew 28:19, "make disciples...baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit." Until one has been baptized IN water to have their sins washed away just as Ananias told Saul in Acts 22:16, they are NOT saved. You claim that one can be saved by faith BEFORE one is baptized however you still have NOT supplied the verse(s) that state that this is the New Testament plan of salvation NOR have you shown any examples of where someone was saved in this manner. You CLAIM that you believe in Christ, but you are NOT willing to DO what He says one MUST do in order to be saved. Until one's faith leads them to OBEY all of the conditions of salvation, they are NOT saved.

How many times does God have to say something to you David before you decide that it is true??? Thirteen times or more since it is obvious you do not believe the 12 that have been given to you???

Once is enough for me!

Baptism is found throughout the New Testament and in numerous places it shows that it is "for the remission of Sins" (Acts 2:38) and "salvation" (Mark 16:16; 1 Peter 3:21).

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), May 04, 2004.

Kevin,

Are you telling me you base your water dogma on just 12 verses? (Some that aren't even speaking of water baptism) I would like to remind you that there are over 7,900 verses in the Bible. I'm making a very simple request; Show me more verses that "Stress" your water dogma. I don't want to see the same 12 I already know, and NO, 12 out of 7,900 verses isn't "sufficient" when there are more than 70 passages in the New Testament that just don't mention baptism as a requirement for salvation. Passages like Acts 10 and Mark 2 don't just not mention baptism, they EXCLUDE it.

Can you cite some passages that show people not being justified until baptism? I can cite my passages that show one is justified by faith , so why should I believe my position is just "an exception to the rule". (And No, this is not a "faith only" thing again, people reject Sola Fide and still reject your water dogma, so just don't mention it because I will just ignore it.)

Also, Why do we NEVER find "be dipped or damned" in scripture? It seems God left out something very important then, and could have easly clear up arguments like these if he would have just put that in the bible.

-- David Ortiz (cyberpunk1986@hotmail.com), May 06, 2004.

David,

No, I am not telling you that I base my salvation on "just 12 verses".

Yes, there are many verses in the Bible and as I stated before there is no reason for me to show you "more" verses that speak of baptism in the New Testament for even if I did show them to you would you tell me that you would at this time be honest enough to really look at what has been written without your denominational bias??? Anyone who is looking for the truth can see that baptism in water is required for one to be saved. It takes a lot of stretching of the truth to be able to miss this fact in the word of God. In other words, one must be helped to misunderstand the Bible and it is obvious that you have had a lot of help.

Jesus plainly stated in the Great Commission that people are made disciples by being baptized. It is obvious that you do not believe what Jesus has plainly revealed in His word. In Mark 16:16 (here is a passage that you don't like right David?) Jesus said that belief + baptism = salvation. He did not say that belief = salvation + baptism.

How many times does baptism have to be mentioned in a salvation scripture for it to be necessary? Many passages do not mention belief, including the following: Acts 2:38; 3:19; 8:36-38 [most versions do not include verse 37]; 9:17-18 [& the parallel in 22:6-16]. Jesus does not mention belief in His discussion in Luke 13:1-5. We find verses in the New Testament where only "faith" is mentioned. We find verses in the New Testament where only "repentance" is mentioned (Luke 13:3; Acts 11:18; 17:30). We find verses in the New Testament where only "confession" is mentioned (Matt. 10:32; 1 John 4:15). We find verses in the New Testament where only baptism is mentioned (Acts 22:16; Rom. 6:3-4; Gal. 3:27; 1 Pet. 3:21). You latch onto the verses that mention faith and then dismiss the rest or redefine words or apply them subsequent to salvation. Why not just follow standard hermeneutical procedure and conclude the obvious?

To be saved and come in contact with the blood of Christ, one must believe in Christ, repent of sins, confess the deity of Christ with the mouth, and be immersed in water. This conclusion allows Scripture to harmonize with itself easily.

You asked the question, "Can you cite some passages that show people not being justified until baptism?"

Luke 7:30, "But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the will of God for themselves, not having been baptized by him."

Even with the baptism of John, those who did not submit rejected the will of God.

Is baptism a command??? Remember the Great Commission.

If it is optional, the writers of the New Testament surely were not aware this was the case.

1 Cor. 6:11, "But you were washed, but you were sanctified, but you were justified in the name of the Lord Jesus and by the Spirit of our God."

Washed = baptism.

Eph. 5:26, "that He might sanctify and cleanse her with the washing of water by the word,"

Washing of water = baptism.

Titus 3:5, "not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit,"

Washing of regeneration = baptism.

Heb. 10:22, "let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience and our bodies washed with pure water."

Our bodies washed with pure water = baptism.

1 Peter 3:21, "There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,"

The antitype which now saves us = baptism.

You asked another question, "Also, Why do we NEVER find "be dipped or damned" in scripture?"

Peter thought that one must "be dipped or damned". You are directly contradicting scripture by saying that Baptism does not save. Jesus said: "He who believes and is baptized will be saved." Does Peter mean to say that baptism is all that is essential to salvation (apart from faith and repentance) or that baptism alone is sufficient to save people from their sins (whether or not they are old enough to even understand)? No. Peter does not say "baptism only" any more than any New Testament writer says "faith only" or "repentance only." Baptism has no power apart from faith (on the part of the one being baptized) and repentance. Without faith, one will not be baptized, it is that simple. Accepting the salvation which God offers through the atoning work of Christ involves a series of responses on the part of man: faith, repentance, confession and baptism. Without faith, repentance would not occur, and baptism would be meaningless. Without repentance, the individual has not died to himself and therefore is not suitable for burial (Rom. 6:3-7). Without confession, one has not made the good confession (nor will Jesus confess their name) and this makes me wonder does one really believe that Jesus is the Son of God? Without baptism, the blood of Christ cannot wash away the sins of the penitent (Acts 22:16; Rev. 1:5). Baptism saves us because it is part of the salvation process. Without baptism the conversion process is not complete. Ask yourself the question David, why were all of those who were converted in the book of Acts baptized??? There is no mention that they were baptized to show they were saved for this is nothing but an invention of men.

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), May 06, 2004.

Are OT verses legal on this challenge thread? I mean, they prove that the essential washing of water is not a new concept.

-- Luke Juarez (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), May 10, 2004.

Baptised means to be born-again by the washing of the Word..,it is a spiritual rebirth. The ritual itself is purely symbolic of this deeper spiritual truth..

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), May 10, 2004.

Faith would you go as far as saying that the actual use of water is not necessary or the act of baptizing is not needed, but the conversion or cognitive "re-birth" is what is really needed. Think of it as a birthday party without the cake. Is the cake really necessary?

The only reason I ask is because of the context of symbolism being presented.

....................

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 10, 2004.

I think that when the Bible says something like this:

Colossians 2:11-13 "In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead. When you were dead in your sins and in the uncircumcision of your sinful nature, God made you alive with Christ...

....That it isn't refering to the water ritual--but to the saving baptism of faith--rebirth of the spirit---- by faith in Jesus Christ.

When the Bible says we must believe and be baptised.., notice that believe is listed first.

I think we are baptised by our believing...it is a faith issue. The Holy Spirit washes us in rebirth.....

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), May 10, 2004.

John the Baptist was preparing the way. He was converting the Jews. He was making it possible for one doctrine to be discarded and the new doctrine to be accepted. The symbolism was easy to understand of what the believer was actually doing--washing away the old and preparing for the new. It that circumstance I can understand the symbolism. But, I also see Jesus--the Divine Christ--being baptized. This opens up more to the mere symbolism and makes it an act of faith. The washing away of sin may be the washing away of false beliefs or old beliefs that have been superceded by the new doctrine. I still think that baptism has more than meets the eye.

.......................

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 10, 2004.

Was Jesus baptised for salvation?

No.

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), May 10, 2004.

No, of course not, Jesus didn't need "saving", nor did He need baptizing.

.......................

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 10, 2004.

So then.,

How does that fact that Jesus was baptisedin a water ceremony, support the notion that Baptism--the water ceremony-- is necessary for salvation??

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), May 10, 2004.

Jesus could have just walked away and taken the dry path into the desert, but He didn't. Why? He taught us to do certain things in certain ways, I suppose. It could be symbolic and it could be something else.

...................

-- rod (elreyrod@yahoo.com), May 10, 2004.

Faith, read the "non-reg" baptism verses I posted. Hebrews specifies that with pure water did God cleanse our hearts from guilty conscience. Water physically does not come into contact with the heart even in full immersion, so "true saving baptism" must be both water and spirit. You said, "Baptised means to be born-again by the washing of the Word." However Ephesians reads "washing with water through the word." Where is your definition found? Do you know what "the Word" is in reference to?

-- Luke Juarez (hubertdorm@yahoo.com), May 10, 2004.

Yes Luke--the Word would be Jesus..we are washed clean through faith in Jesus.

-- ("faith01@myway.com"), May 11, 2004.

Yes Faith, the word as stated in John 1:1 is Jesus however that is NOT the same word that Luke was talking about in his last post.

Jesus had a sharp sword that came out of His mouth in Revelation 19:15 that allowed Him to strike the nations. What is this sword???

-- Kevin Walker (kevinlwalker572@cs.com), May 13, 2004.