Baptism: How necessary is it?

e.r.m. said:

Do you mean when someone refers to the Bible, "According to God's word this is not something he approves of"? Or do you mean someone who gets in people's faces and says things like "God is not happy with you right now!" ?

Click to expand...

One of the first lessons I learned when starting my spiritual journey was "Never sit on God's throne", unless you are God. So I refrain to impose on others what God wants them to do or think. I keep it personal adding "IMHO" ... "I belief this" ... "my opinion". Others are free to act as if they are God and sit on God's throne if they desire so, but I don't allow them to impose "what God thinks" on me. That is my right and duty.
Proof seems to be given even in the Bible. God sometimes changes the rules. Genesis God tells to eat vegan, and vegan alone. Later God seems to be more lenient adding meat eating. So I decided never to act as if I know what God thinks or approves of, especially if I don't follow myself 100% all the rules given by God (parable with "who dares to throw the first stone")

How would you feel if I tell someone else "e.r.m wants you to eat only apples for 1 week and no coffee". Kind of stupid IMO, is it not? Even if you published a book in which you mentioned that this diet was good. Then you don't want others to instruct strangers saying "e.r.m says so"

No, they could say "e.r.m" wrote this in his book as a general rule, but of course there are exceptions ... some are allergic to apples or to coffee.

I just play it safe (implementing "do not judge" as instructed by Jesus). And make sure the other knows it's my opinion. Never telling them they "should" do it. And most of all NEVER EVER tell others "God will not love you, punish you and send you to hell/purgatory etc". Even if I would be 100% convinced, I would not tell such a thing (let God handle God's business, I will handle mine)

stvdv said:

One of the first lessons I learned when starting my spiritual journey was "Never sit on God's throne", unless you are God. So I refrain to impose on others what God wants them to do or think. I keep it personal adding "IMHO" ... "I belief this" ... "my opinion". Others are free to act as if they are God and sit on God's throne if they desire so, but I don't allow them to impose "what God thinks" on me. That is my right and duty.
Proof seems to be given even in the Bible. God sometimes changes the rules. Genesis God tells to eat vegan, and vegan alone. Later God seems to be more lenient adding meat eating. So I decided never to act as if I know what God thinks or approves of, especially if I don't follow myself 100% all the rules given by God (parable with "who dares to throw the first stone")

How would you feel if I tell someone else "e.r.m wants you to eat only apples for 1 week and no coffee". Kind of stupid IMO, is it not? Even if you published a book in which you mentioned that this diet was good. Then you don't want others to instruct strangers saying "e.r.m says so"

No, they could say "e.r.m" wrote this in his book as a general rule, but of course there are exceptions ... some are allergic to apples or to coffee.

I just play it safe (implementing "do not judge" as instructed by Jesus). And make sure the other knows it's my opinion. Never telling them they "should" do it. And most of all NEVER EVER tell others "God will not love you, punish you and send you to hell/purgatory etc". Even if I would be 100% convinced, I would not tell such a thing (let God handle God's business, I will handle mine)

Click to expand...

Neither of us want to play God. I'm pretty sure we agree on that much. Where we differ is where that line is crossed.
Revelation 1:1-3 The Revelation of Jesus Christ, which God gave Him to show to His bond-servants, the things which must soon take place; and He sent and communicated it by His angel to His bond-servant John, [2] who testified to the word of God and to the testimony of Jesus Christ, even to all that he saw. [3] Blessed is he who reads and those who hear the words of the prophecy, and heed the things which are written in it; for the time is near.

John proceeded to relay God's admonition for the churches and in Revelation 21 he relayed God's message about the lake of fire and who would go there.

The apostle Saul said stuff like
1 Corinthians 5:3,11-13 For I, on my part, though absent in body but present in spirit, have already judged him who has so committed this, as though I were present. [11] But actually, I wrote to you not to associate with any so-called brother if he is an immoral person, or covetous, or an idolater, or a reviler, or a drunkard, or a swindler-not even to eat with such a one. [12] For what have I to do with judging outsiders? Do you not judge those who are within the church? [13] But those who are outside, God judges. Remove THE WICKED MAN FROM AMONG YOURSELVES.

1 Timothy 5:20 Those who continue in sin, rebuke in the presence of all, so that the rest also will be fearful of sinning.

2 Timothy 4:2 preach the word; be ready in season and out of season; reprove, rebuke, exhort, with great patience and instruction.

and

Romans 15:14 And concerning you, my brethren, I myself also am convinced that you yourselves are full of goodness, filled with all knowledge and able also to admonish one another.

Jesus said things like
Luke 24:47 and that repentance for forgiveness of sins would be proclaimed in His name to all the nations, beginning from Jerusalem.

Matthew 28:19-20 Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, [20] teaching them to observe all that I commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age."

John 7:24 Do not judge according to appearance, but judge with righteous judgment."

Peter said things like
2 Peter 2:20-21 For if, after they have escaped the defilements of the world by the knowledge of the Lord and Savior Jesus Christ, they are again entangled in them and are overcome, the last state has become worse for them than the first. [21] For it would be better for them not to have known the way of righteousness, than having known it, to turn away from the holy commandment handed on to them.

The author of Hebrews said
Hebrews 3:12-13 Take care, brethren, that there not be in any one of you an evil, unbelieving heart that falls away from the living God. [13] But encourage one another day after day, as long as it is still called "Today," so that none of you will be hardened by the deceitfulness of sin.

God gave His followers a certain degree of authority with one another. Don't judge doesn't mean hands off.

The Bible doesn't reflect the leave everything to God stance. Again, it is up to you whether to subscribe to this or not, but the Bible's stance is fundamentally different than the one you feel comfortable with.

e.r.m. said:

Neither of us want to play God. I'm pretty sure we agree on that much

Click to expand...

That's a good thing we agree that it's better not to play God. We both need to practise this to be ready for "the final exam"

e.r.m. said:

Where we differ is where that line is crossed.

Click to expand...

True. I like what the Koran teaches us about this issue: The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Translation

e.r.m. said:

God gave His followers a certain degree of authority with one another. Don't judge doesn't mean hands off.

Click to expand...

I never said that. I just said "don't judge". You can advise respectful without belittling and you can do the opposite. What would Jesus advise?
example "tell a Jew or Muslim that Jesus is the only way for all" = arrogant and belittling and disrespectful
but "tell a Jew or Muslim that you believe (IMHO) that Jesus is the only way for all" = arrogant, but at least respectfully done giving your opinion

e.r.m. said:

The Bible doesn't reflect the leave everything to God stance.

Click to expand...

I did not say that, nor did I imply that. Most important for me is "How to say things". Done proper you can almost say anything.

e.r.m. said:

Again, it is up to you whether to subscribe to this or not, but the Bible's stance is fundamentally different than the one you feel comfortable with.

Click to expand...

Not respectful how you put it: "but the Bible's stance is fundamentally different than the one you feel comfortable with"
Nice and respectful would be: "but the Bible's stance is fundamentally different than the one you feel comfortable with IMHO"

This IMHO is very essential, because can you really claim you know me? We just had maybe 3 short social media writing exchanges
That is not enough to claim that you know everything about me, especially how I think about spiritual stuff; it's a very complex subject

IMHO: Another point is that the Bible is something between "a person and God". Very personal. It's about one's soul
Belittling and trampling someone's soul is not nice. Even if well meant it should not be done. Would Jesus do this?
So "hands off" might be even smarter ... you don't meddle in a marriage of others (unless they ask you to meddle)

stvdv said:

That's a good thing we agree that it's better not to play God. We both need to practise this to be ready for "the final exam"

Click to expand...

Agreed.

True. I like what the Koran teaches us about this issue: The Quranic Arabic Corpus - Translation

Click to expand...

I never said that. I just said "don't judge". You can advise respectful without belittling and you can do the opposite. What would Jesus advise?
example "tell a Jew or Muslim that Jesus is the only way for all" = arrogant and belittling and disrespectful
but "tell a Jew or Muslim that you believe (IMHO) that Jesus is the only way for all" = arrogant, but at least respectfully done giving your opinion

Click to expand...

I believe there is a time and place for both. Peter didn't say
I believe there is salvation in no one else; I believe there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."

he said
Acts 4:12 And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."

I did not say that, nor did I imply that. Most important for me is "How to say things". Done proper you can almost say anything.

Click to expand...

Ok, but there are times what are the message itself will step on people's toes, and we are not to detract from the message itself. We are not looking to offend people 1 Peter 3:15, 2 Timothy 2:24-26, but there are times where we are not to shrink back even if it will.

Not respectful how you put it: "but the Bible's stance is fundamentally different than the one you feel comfortable with"
Nice and respectful would be: "but the Bible's stance is fundamentally different than the one you feel comfortable with IMHO"

This IMHO is very essential, because can you really claim you know me? We just had maybe 3 short social media writing exchanges
That is not enough to claim that you know everything about me, especially how I think about spiritual stuff; it's a very complex subject.

Click to expand...

Very true, fair enough. My apologies.

IMHO: Another point is that the Bible is something between "a person and God". Very personal. It's about one's soul
Belittling and trampling someone's soul is not nice. Even if well meant it should not be done. Would Jesus do this? So "hands off" might be even smarter ...

Click to expand...

There is no desire to belittling and trampling someone's soul. But that's not always in the hands of the presenter. That also plays into how one receives. You know that there are those with thicker skins who can take more and the presenter doesn't have to walk around eggshells. There are those with whom the presenter needs to be more careful. And there are times that what needs to be said just needs to be said. although the presenter will be as respectful as possible (hopefully), the message will still be hard.

you don't meddle in a marriage of others (unless they ask you to meddle)

Click to expand...

Of course not.

BilliardsBall said:

Again, the last thing immediately before the mikveh, an avowal, is the renunciation of all other gods and an affirmation of the God of Israel. The second cannot happen in the absence of the first, as witnessed by a rabbi. What is that besides identification? A Catholic convert, for example, might say, "I've studied and adhered to all the precepts of Judaism as best I can, with all my heart, today, I affirm that Jesus is not God and that God is not a trinity, God is the monotheist God of Israel," identification with the God of Israel as truth.

Click to expand...

Indeed, the identification makes sense, before and as a precursor to the mikveh.

And what is John asking people to do? Be baptized for repentance--baptism MUST have a witness, since one cannot baptize oneself, not even Jesus Christ. The witness hears "I do hereby repent", and Christian baptism is a witness hearing, "I do hereby proclaim the Father, Son and Spirit"--identification again.

Click to expand...

Romans 10:9-10 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; [10] for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

To be saved, internally one aligns him or herself to God/Jesus and verbally surrenders to him as Lord. Jesus commanded his followers to baptize them, necessitating someone being there, so all this I agree with. This falls short of the evangelical narrative that one is baptized as itself an announcement to the world that one has aligned him/herself with God/Jesus. Acts 9:20-21 the people learned of Saul's allegiance to Jesus through his preaching, not his baptism.

Your claim that identification with God is incidental to baptism doesn't align with the Great Commission of Matthew 28--"Make disciples, immersing them in my Name... teaching them all I've taught you..."

Click to expand...

Good point. There is something to that and I had not considered that connection before. There does seem to be that component, along with Romans 10:9-10, doesn't there? I will adjust my thinking on that. Still not an announcement though.

Perhaps we can clarify if you'll tell me what you think baptism is, if not identification with God. One MUST identify the true God to have a Jewish conversion mikveh, and most Christian baptisms REQUIRE one to proclaim the trinity or Jesus as God before baptism, both are done in presence of witnesses.

Click to expand...

Well, as you mentioned, there does seem to be an identification component to baptism. Although identifying with the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit is not the term used, it does seem to be a fitting synonym. However, along the lines that is mentioned in Matthew 28:19, Luke 24:47, Acts 2:38, Acts 4:12, Acts 22:16, 1 Peter 3:21, along with baptism one invokes the name of the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, calls on His name, for salvation/forgiveness of sins in His name, appeal to Him for a good conscience. There is no post saved coming out announcement mentioned in scripture though, aside from actually speaking to people and living the life.

I'm a Messianic Jew, thanks for asking.

Click to expand...

Thank you. I've run into another Messianic Jew and if you two's example is representative of your group, then you guys know a lot about the Jewish side of things. Kudos on that. I have read though, that on the Christian side of things, Messianic beliefs are most similar to the Evangelical school of thought, is it not?

stvdv said:

So "hands off" might be even smarter ... you don't meddle in a marriage of others (unless they ask you to meddle)

Click to expand...

e.r.m. said:

Of course not.

Click to expand...

Here I meant it figuratively "Marriage between (wo)man and God", hence we should be very careful to meddle with another person's belief

stvdv said:

I never said that. I just said "don't judge". You can advise respectful without belittling and you can do the opposite. What would Jesus advise?
example "tell a Jew or Muslim that Jesus is the only way for all" = arrogant and belittling and disrespectful
but "tell a Jew or Muslim that you believe (IMHO) that Jesus is the only way for all" = arrogant, but at least respectfully done giving your opinion

Click to expand...

e.r.m. said:

I believe there is a time and place for both. Peter didn't say
I believe there is salvation in no one else; I believe there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."

he said
Acts 4:12 And there is salvation in no one else; for there is no other name under heaven that has been given among men by which we must be saved."

Click to expand...

Your interpetations implies that you agree, that it is okay that a Bible verse belittles all other religions.

We hugely disagree here.

And by the way, you totally misinterpret this verse IMO. I read this verse totally different than you do.
Peter writes it in a specific respectful way (totally senang with RF rules even).
And when I say it is written respectful, then it mostly is, because I am quite allergic to disrespect
It's only you, that messes up again, making such a beautiful verse, ugly. Why do this all the time?

You seem to like it, to read this verse in an arrogant and belittling way. I don't like to "read" this way
You keep giving me this kind of "belittling" verses; or rather how you interpret it as being belittling.
Even while you know, that I am not such a person who likes to arrogantly belittle other people's faith

Why do you do that? Fine for me if you want to live a life belittling the faith of others.
But please don't involve me in such an act of blasphemy.

Try for once (praying to Jesus) to show you "How to read this verse in such a way, that it is not belittling to other religions"
It is very easy. But you should be willing to let go your arrogant belief "my religion is the only right one, others are no good at all"

IF you are not willing to try this at least once (with this verse), then I decide to "not talk again to you". I have explained it too often already.
Acts 4:12 Salvation exists in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."

adrian009 said:

To what extent is baptism a necessary part of the Christian Faith? What purpose does baptism serve and is its purpose unique to the Christian Faith?

Click to expand...

Baptism figuratively represents resurrection, with or without the awareness of John the Baptist. John the Baptist acts as a starter of the NT era. That's why the Bible says that Law and Prophets are proclaimed until John the Baptist.

Hades behaves more like a sea, the "deeper" it goes the darker it becomes. Baptism represents how we follow the path of Jesus in terms of how He was buried into and resurrected from this sea of water. Jesus Himself set an example by submitting Himself to the baptism by John the Baptist. At the same time, God's Trinity was shown at that exact moment. At the point of our death, that is, when we are buried in Hades our trinity will show which is the separation of our body, soul and spirit.

Baptism is thus an open declaration that we are going to follow Jesus Christ. It serves as an open testimony that we firmly made such a decision. To put it another way, without this testimony Jesus Himself may be challenged in the Final Judgment, as the one He's going to save is in lack of such a testimony. Baptism is thus a must unless it's under special circumstance, such as the thief on the cross beside Jesus didn't have a chance to be baptized.

e.r.m. said:

Indeed, the identification makes sense, before and as a precursor to the mikveh.

Romans 10:9-10 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; [10] for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.

To be saved, internally one aligns him or herself to God/Jesus and verbally surrenders to him as Lord. Jesus commanded his followers to baptize them, necessitating someone being there, so all this I agree with. This falls short of the evangelical narrative that one is baptized as itself an announcement to the world that one has aligned him/herself with God/Jesus. Acts 9:20-21 the people learned of Saul's allegiance to Jesus through his preaching, not his baptism.

Good point. There is something to that and I had not considered that connection before. There does seem to be that component, along with Romans 10:9-10, doesn't there? I will adjust my thinking on that. Still not an announcement though.

Well, as you mentioned, there does seem to be an identification component to baptism. Although identifying with the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit is not the term used, it does seem to be a fitting synonym. However, along the lines that is mentioned in Matthew 28:19, Luke 24:47, Acts 2:38, Acts 4:12, Acts 22:16, 1 Peter 3:21, along with baptism one invokes the name of the Father, Jesus, and the Holy Spirit, calls on His name, for salvation/forgiveness of sins in His name, appeal to Him for a good conscience. There is no post saved coming out announcement mentioned in scripture though, aside from actually speaking to people and living the life.

Thank you. I've run into another Messianic Jew and if you two's example is representative of your group, then you guys know a lot about the Jewish side of things. Kudos on that. I have read though, that on the Christian side of things, Messianic beliefs are most similar to the Evangelical school of thought, is it not?

Click to expand...

Identification/baptism has to do with sanctification/growth and is not salvific.

Why would you ask that? There are multiple Messianic sects and most of us are in Gentile fellowships. A label might not be wise here, but we do tend to align with fundamentalism/evangelicalism because Rome and the cults are VERY obvious to OT experts.

Augustus said:

Baptism is a kind of initiation ceremony, whereas ablutions are ritual purification.

Click to expand...

Baptism is both an initiation and a purification

BilliardsBall said:

Identification/baptism has to do with sanctification/growth and is not salvific.

Click to expand...

Do you know of any verses that describe baptism in Jesus's name in the way you just described?

Why would you ask that? There are multiple Messianic sects and most of us are in Gentile fellowships. A label might not be wise here, but we do tend to align with fundamentalism/evangelicalism because Rome and the cults are VERY obvious to OT experts.

Click to expand...

I saw it on Wikipedia. And I figured it'd be likely that Messianics would align themselves with one school of thought or another. I did not know that there were various sects.

Hawkins said:

Baptism figuratively represents resurrection, with or without the awareness of John the Baptist. John the Baptist acts as a starter of the NT era. That's why the Bible says that Law and Prophets are proclaimed until John the Baptist.

Hades behaves more like a sea, the "deeper" it goes the darker it becomes. Baptism represents how we follow the path of Jesus in terms of how He was buried into and resurrected from this sea of water. Jesus Himself set an example by submitting Himself to the baptism by John the Baptist. At the same time, God's Trinity was shown at that exact moment. At the point of our death, that is, when we are buried in Hades our trinity will show which is the separation of our body, soul and spirit.

Baptism is thus an open declaration that we are going to follow Jesus Christ. It serves as an open testimony that we firmly made such a decision. To put it another way, without this testimony Jesus Himself may be challenged in the Final Judgment, as the one He's going to save is in lack of such a testimony. Baptism is thus a must unless it's under special circumstance, such as the thief on the cross beside Jesus didn't have a chance to be baptized.

Click to expand...

Baptism represents how we follow the path of Jesus in terms of how He was buried into and resurrected from this sea of water. Jesus Himself set an example by submitting Himself to the baptism by John the Baptist.

~Hawkins, are these tenets scripture or simply a church narrative? I haven't seen any scripture describing baptism's purpose as a representation. That is always only in the commentators description. I've never seen baptism described in scripture as a declaration or open testimony, and I've never read that anyone was baptized or instructed to be baptized in order to follow Jesus's example. Isn't all this pulpit teaching just a companion to the Biblical teaching?

the thief on the cross beside Jesus didn't have a chance to be baptized.

Click to expand...

The thief wouldn't have been expected to get baptized in Jesus's name, as it wasn't commanded until after Jesus's resurrection, after the thief was dead.

stvdv said:

Your interpetations implies that you agree, that it is okay that a Bible verse belittles all other religions.

We hugely disagree here.

And by the way, you totally misinterpret this verse IMO. I read this verse totally different than you do.
Peter writes it in a specific respectful way (totally senang with RF rules even).
And when I say it is written respectful, then it mostly is, because I am quite allergic to disrespect
It's only you, that messes up again, making such a beautiful verse, ugly. Why do this all the time?

You seem to like it, to read this verse in an arrogant and belittling way. I don't like to "read" this way
You keep giving me this kind of "belittling" verses; or rather how you interpret it as being belittling.
Even while you know, that I am not such a person who likes to arrogantly belittle other people's faith

Why do you do that? Fine for me if you want to live a life belittling the faith of others.
But please don't involve me in such an act of blasphemy.

Try for once (praying to Jesus) to show you "How to read this verse in such a way, that it is not belittling to other religions"
It is very easy. But you should be willing to let go your arrogant belief "my religion is the only right one, others are no good at all"

IF you are not willing to try this at least once (with this verse), then I decide to "not talk again to you". I have explained it too often already.
Acts 4:12 Salvation exists in no one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved."

Click to expand...

Ok. I'm sorry you feel that way about me.

e.r.m. said:

I believe there is a time and place for both. Peter didn't say

Click to expand...

Peter is kind of a jerk, though. He's an arrogant coward involved in the deaths of at least three people I can think of off-hand.

Kelly of the Phoenix said:

Peter is kind of a jerk, though. He's an arrogant coward involved in the deaths of at least three people I can think of off-hand.

Click to expand...

Ananias and Sapphira, and who else? He was also involved in raising Tabitha from the dead.

e.r.m. said:

Do you know of any verses that describe baptism in Jesus's name in the way you just described?

I saw it on Wikipedia. And I figured it'd be likely that Messianics would align themselves with one school of thought or another. I did not know that there were various sects.

Click to expand...

You want verses that Christ saved, not immersion in water?

I'm asking you to not paint my entire race with a broad brush by saying, "all you Jews do the same thing when you become Christians". There are many flavors and sects in Judaism, so why would we all move robotically in one direction after trusting Jesus?

BilliardsBall said:

You want verses that Christ saved, not immersion in water?

Click to expand...

No I want verses for
Identification/baptism has to do with sanctification/growth and is not salvific.

I'm asking you to not paint my entire race with a broad brush by saying, "all you Jews do the same thing when you become Christians". There are many flavors and sects in Judaism, so why would we all move robotically in one direction after trusting Jesus?

Click to expand...

I ask for a little forbearance. I am learning from you about Messianics. I acknowledge my ignorance on the matter. I think I was thinking of Messianics as its own group (like Hassidic, Orthodox, etc.) and not an overall description of Jews who believe in Jesus, which could certainly lend itself to diversification. Plus Wikipedia described Messianics this way. Thank you for helping me understand better.

e.r.m. said:

No I want verses for
Identification/baptism has to do with sanctification/growth and is not salvific.

I ask for a little forbearance. I am learning from you about Messianics. I acknowledge my ignorance on the matter. I think I was thinking of Messianics as its own group (like Hassidic, Orthodox, etc.) and not an overall description of Jews who believe in Jesus, which could certainly lend itself to diversification. Plus Wikipedia described Messianics this way. Thank you for helping me understand better.

Click to expand...

If verses said "baptism is identification" we would both believe it without further explanation. Do you believe baptism is salvific or that Jesus saves?

You have much forbearance from me. I'm not upset, and again, many fellow Jewish believers run fundamentalist/evangelical because Rome and her children (idols, paganism) seem obvious to us based on our iconoclastic Jewish background.

BilliardsBall said:

I'm not upset, and again, many fellow Jewish believers run fundamentalist/evangelical because Rome and her children (idols, paganism) seem obvious to us based on our iconoclastic Jewish background.

Click to expand...

Apparently telling the Truth isn't important to your church, but it certainly is in my Church. We don't make or worship idols, nor do we celebrate any "pagan" festivals or honor any "pagans".

Here's the "Catechism of the Catholic Church", so maybe actually spend some time looking things up instead of spewing falsehoods: Catechism of the Catholic Church

To the OP question, my response is
"Some aspects are unique to Christianity, others more universal" as water is used in numerous religions.