Christians: Where do you draw the line? (Jesus, Creator, Moses)

[uss_bigd]

Originally Posted by sojourner

wherein we find the method of Jesus' baptism???

Matthew 3:16
And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:


simple english will tell us ( no need for genius tehological jargons) went up out of the water would mean Jesus was "in" the water.

That wouldn't sould like sprinkle huh?

Ok fine its just my fanciful interpretation. and i have to refer to your genius that taught your theology and all that stuff.

The bible is enough for sir. in the water means in the water. and went out means went out

Matthew 13:14
And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:

[sojourner]

Originally Posted by uss_bigd

Matthew 3:16
And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:


simple english will tell us ( no need for genius tehological jargons) went up out of the water would mean Jesus was "in" the water.

That wouldn't sould like sprinkle huh?

Ok fine its just my fanciful interpretation. and i have to refer to your genius that taught your theology and all that stuff.

The bible is enough for sir. in the water means in the water. and went out means went out

Matthew 13:14
And in them is fulfilled the prophecy of Esaias, which saith, By hearing ye shall hear, and shall not understand; and seeing ye shall see, and shall not perceive:

Let me reiterate the question:

How can that refer to the gospels, too, wherein we find the method of Jesus' baptism???

Which was asked in response to your assertion that we must "keep to what is written." since we have determined that the gospels could not have been included in Paul's statement of "what is written," and since you state that you only follow "what the Bible says" with regard to the Pauline passage in question, why do you adhere to the formula for baptism, as laid out in the gospels, if you only stick to "what is written?" (Assuming, as we are, that the gospels are not included in the set of "what is written.) It doesn't make sense, unless you're switching horses in the middle of the stream.

[Scuba Pete]

It seems that people are intent on making the thing that would free us from law into yet another law. Somehow we think (and I once thought) that it's the IMMERSION that's important. Peter seems to disagree with you:

I Peter 3:21 and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 22 who has gone into heaven and is at God's right hand—with angels, authorities and powers in submission to him. NIV

God is not looking at the type of water, the clarity or how deeply we were immersed: he is looking at our HEARTS. Which is precisely why children DON'T need to be baptized. Their hearts are perfect already.

[Charity]

Originally Posted by ChristineES

About baptism-- I personally prefer total body immersion, but I won't judge if some Churches sprinkle or whatever. It is symbolic, anyway.

I agree with you Christine. We have accepted Jesus as our Lord, so actually the water holds no power. Whether we are totally immersed or sprinkled it is just symbolic that we are following Christ.

[sojourner]

Originally Posted by Charity

I agree with you Christine. We have accepted Jesus as our Lord, so actually the water holds no power. Whether we are totally immersed or sprinkled it is just symbolic that we are following Christ.

It is that, but it's also more than that. The act of baptism, the presence of water, the gathering of the Ekklesia to witness and share in the act -- this constitutes not only a symbol that we are following Christ, but a sacrament, as well: an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace. Symbols serve to remind. That's good, but sacraments go further than that. Sacraments serve to immerse us fully in the moment and make us, not only cognitively aware (as symbols do), but emotionally aware and spiritually aware.

[Dunemeister]

Originally Posted by sojourner

It is that, but it's also more than that. The act of baptism, the presence of water, the gathering of the Ekklesia to witness and share in the act -- this constitutes not only a symbol that we are following Christ, but a sacrament, as well: an outward and visible sign of an inward and spiritual grace. Symbols serve to remind. That's good, but sacraments go further than that. Sacraments serve to immerse us fully in the moment and make us, not only cognitively aware (as symbols do), but emotionally aware and spiritually aware.

Yes. And besides, our salvation is completed, consummated if you will, by baptism. "Believe and be baptized" proclaimed Peter in his inaugural address to the public. Being "saved" isn't merely a matter between you and God. God saves you out of the world and into that holy community of saints that has been called to live out a life of holiness. And the first step is baptism. The Christian spends the rest of her life living out her baptism. It's a necessary first step, not an optional one (which it would be if it were merely symbolic).

[Scuba Pete]

Originally Posted by Dunemeister

And the first step is baptism. The Christian spends the rest of her life living out her baptism.

This reminds me of one of my favorite verses:

Romans 12:1 Therefore, I urge you, brothers, in view of God's mercy, to offer your bodies as living sacrifices, holy and pleasing to God—this is your spiritual act of worship.2 Do not conform any longer to the pattern of this world, but be transformed by the renewing of your mind. Then you will be able to test and approve what God's will is—his good, pleasing and perfect will. NIV


Of course, the problem with living sacrifices is that they keep crawling off of the alter.

Originally Posted by Dunemeister

It's a necessary first step, not an optional one (which it would be if it were merely symbolic).

I Peter 3 characterizes this as being symbolic. I am not sure why we feel a need to codify the appeal of our heart.

[sojourner]

I Peter 3 characterizes this as being symbolic. I am not sure why we feel a need to codify the appeal of our heart.

Because, Biblically, believers belong to Christ (As evidenced by John 17). It's not that we need to codify the appeal of our heart, so much as it is that the Church needs to formally recognize that appeal and identify with it.