"Men and brethren, what shall we do?"

[CrochetOverCoffee]

After Peter delivered his first sermon to those gathered for the celebration of Pentecost in Jerusalem, convicting them of the murder of Jesus and convincing them that He was the Messiah, they asked him this question (Acts 2:37). He then tells them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2:38) Why then do so many deny that either repentance or baptism are requirements of salvation? (Scripture quoted from NKJV.)

 

[Fool]

After Peter delivered his first sermon to those gathered for the celebration of Pentecost in Jerusalem, convicting them of the murder of Jesus and convincing them that He was the Messiah, they asked him this question (Acts 2:37). He then tells them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2:38) Why then do so many deny that either repentance or baptism are requirements of salvation? (Scripture quoted from NKJV.)

Welcome to RF

baptism is not in the name jesus. the name is a whole other name. it is the name, notice not plural, of the Father, the son, and the holy spirit into which the of self is immersed. the holy spirit isn't called jehovah, nor is it called jesus. the father is not called jesus either.

 

[CrochetOverCoffee]

baptism is not in the name jesus. the name is a whole other name. it is the name, notice not plural, of the Father, the son, and the holy spirit into which the of self is immersed. the holy spirit isn't called jehovah, nor is it called jesus. the father is not called jesus either.

The Scripture is a direct quote. So how is baptism not in the name of Jesus? Because Peter, the inspired apostle, said it is. How are you getting a different answer?

 

[Fool]

The Scripture is a direct quote. So how is baptism not in the name of Jesus? Because Peter, the inspired apostle, said it is. How are you getting a different answer?

thou shall not take the lord thy god's name in vain isn't a reference to the name jesus. it's a reference to the ineffable name. jesus was the name given to him by his parents. the ineffable name is the name sealled in the forehead of the 144,000. the Father's name. it is the seal of ezekiel at ezekiel 9:4.

it isn't jesus.

most do not know what they are being baptized into. they are focused on salvation, saving their rumps. they don't have a clue what they are being baptized into.


so most baptism are like that of leviticus 14:8

or

mark 7: 4


matthew 23:27


but immersion into the name is that which cleanses the inside. that is why it is also written


luke 11:35 talks about a light that doesn't come from outside. this light can be found in everyone; if everyone looks

so it isn't what is on the outside of self but what is within self that defiles

 

[exchemist]

After Peter delivered his first sermon to those gathered for the celebration of Pentecost in Jerusalem, convicting them of the murder of Jesus and convincing them that He was the Messiah, they asked him this question (Acts 2:37). He then tells them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2:38) Why then do so many deny that either repentance or baptism are requirements of salvation? (Scripture quoted from NKJV.)

To be fair, Peter does not actually say that repentance and baptism are the only way to salvation. He just tells this particular audience to do these things.

 

[CrochetOverCoffee]

When we say, "Stop in the name of the law!" it is understood that "in the name of" means "by the authority of". That is also what it means in Acts 2:38. Be baptized by the authority of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.

But that doesn't mean that a person isn't put into something when they are baptized. So what is it? "For" here is the Greek word eis, which means toward, unto, or into. So, be baptized by the authority of Jesus Christ into the remission of sins.

Baptism is the place where the soul meets the blood of Christ. It's not magic water, and it's not a washing away of the filth of the flesh. It's a washing of the soul, a burial in water to reflect Jesus's burial, and a rising out of the water to reflect His resurrection. The one being baptized is then saved from their sins by the blood of Jesus, resurrected to walk a new life as a reflection of Jesus Himself.

Does that make sense to you?

 

[exchemist]

When we say, "Stop in the name of the law!" it is understood that "in the name of" means "by the authority of". That is also what it means in Acts 2:38. Be baptized by the authority of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.

But that doesn't mean that a person isn't put into something when they are baptized. So what is it? "For" here is the Greek word eis, which means toward, unto, or into. So, be baptized by the authority of Jesus Christ into the remission of sins.

Baptism is the place where the soul meets the blood of Christ. It's not magic water, and it's not a washing away of the filth of the flesh. It's a washing of the soul, a burial in water to reflect Jesus's burial, and a rising out of the water to reflect His resurrection. The one being baptized is then saved from their sins by the blood of Jesus, resurrected to walk a new life as a reflection of Jesus Himself.

Does that make sense to you?

Do you have scriptural references that clearly show all this? Or is it just your inference, or what you have been taught?

 

[CrochetOverCoffee]

To be fair, Peter does not actually say that repentance and baptism are the only way to salvation. He just tells this particular audience to do these things.

The book of Acts is often called the book of conversions, and there are many instances of people being required to be baptized for the remission of their sins. But perhaps more telling is the fact that Jesus Himself stated that baptism would be a requirement of salvation when speaking to Nicodemus (John 3:1-7). He states, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

A very good example is the instance of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:36-38). Philip baptized this man in water after preaching Jesus to him. Other good examples are Cornelius and his household, the Philippian jailer, and Lydia.

As a final point, I Peter 3:21 explicitly states, "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), the resurrection of Jesus Christ,".

 

[amorphous_constellation]

well besides the other arguments brought up, particularly that it might just be incidental, there somewhat of a clash with Mark 1:8, and there were people that Jesus encounters that do not require baptism.

 

[CrochetOverCoffee]

Do you have scriptural references that clearly show all this? Or is it just your inference, or what you have been taught?

Romans 6:3-5, "Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection,"

 

[CrochetOverCoffee]

well besides the other arguments brought up, particularly that it might just be incidental, there somewhat of a clash with Mark 1:8, and there were people that Jesus encounters that do not require baptism.

This passage indicates people who John was baptizing, which was a baptism of repentance, not of salvation. Also, this is before Jesus even begins his official ministry. The next event shown to us is His fasting in the desert for forty days, then His direct temptation by Satan, finally followed by the beginning of His Galilean ministry. So none of this pertains to the kingdom of God or to salvation because it is long before the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus.

 

[amorphous_constellation]

This passage indicates people who John was baptizing, which was a baptism of repentance, not of salvation. Also, this is before Jesus even begins his official ministry. The next event shown to us is His fasting in the desert for forty days, then His direct temptation by Satan, finally followed by the beginning of His Galilean ministry. So none of this pertains to the kingdom of God or to salvation because it is long before the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus.

I see, what about people Jesus met during the duration of the ministry?

 

[exchemist]

The book of Acts is often called the book of conversions, and there are many instances of people being required to be baptized for the remission of their sins. But perhaps more telling is the fact that Jesus Himself stated that baptism would be a requirement of salvation when speaking to Nicodemus (John 3:1-7). He states, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

A very good example is the instance of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 8:36-38). Philip baptized this man in water after preaching Jesus to him. Other good examples are Cornelius and his household, the Philippian jailer, and Lydia.

As a final point, I Peter 3:21 explicitly states, "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), the resurrection of Jesus Christ,".

Yes I think the passage from St. John is lot more definite, though the reference to water here is not explicitly a reference to baptism, so far as I can see. He just says one needs to be born "from above" through water and the Holy Spirit and then draws a distinction between human nature and spirit.

But I dislike your bible rendering of the passage from St. Peter. My bible renders verse 21 as "It is the baptism corresponding to this water that saves you now - not the washing off of physical dirt but the pledge of a good conscience given to God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Nothing here about "filth of the flesh", please note.

 

[exchemist]

Romans 6:3-5, "Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death? Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been united together in the likeness of His death, certainly we also shall be in the likeness of His resurrection,"

OK but nothing here about "the soul meeting the blood of Christ", or of a "burial in water", or that "rising out of water reflects his resurrection".

These images are very nice, I grant, but they seem to be constructions you have developed from the text, rather than being explicitly stated anywhere.

The general sense of the text is that being received into the church through baptism means a metaphorical death of the old and a rebirth, at the start of what should be a new life.

 

[Left Coast]

But I dislike your bible rendering of the passage from St. Peter. My bible renders verse 21 as "It is the baptism corresponding to this water that saves you now - not the washing off of physical dirt but the pledge of a good conscience given to God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Nothing here about "filth of the flesh", please note.

In fairness, the "this water" that the author is saying baptism is an antitype for is the Flood...ie as Noah was saved through water (the flood), we are also saved through water (baptism). It would be bizarre if the author meant some non-water baptism, given his analogy.

 

[CrochetOverCoffee]

In fairness, the "this water" that the author is saying baptism is an antitype for is the Flood...ie as Noah was saved through water (the flood), we are also saved through water (baptism). It would be bizarre if the author meant some non-water baptism, given his analogy.

Actually, the flood is the type, not the antitype. This comes from the way printing used to be done. The antitype is the original, full item. The type is the thing that is printed from it. So if the printed thing, the copy, is the flood, and the full, correct item is baptism, which one, now having both as examples, should we be following?

 

[CrochetOverCoffee]

OK but nothing here about "the soul meeting the blood of Christ", or of a "burial in water", or that "rising out of water reflects his resurrection".

These images are very nice, I grant, but they seem to be constructions you have developed from the text, rather than being explicitly stated anywhere.

The general sense of the text is that being received into the church through baptism means a metaphorical death of the old and a rebirth, at the start of what should be a new life.

I apologize. Being a writer, I will sometimes use my own images to clarify Biblical concepts. But yes, being put into the church, is being put into Christ, and it is achieved through baptism. Many people state that a person is saved and then baptized, but this clearly states otherwise.

 

[exchemist]

In fairness, the "this water" that the author is saying baptism is an antitype for is the Flood...ie as Noah was saved through water (the flood), we are also saved through water (baptism). It would be bizarre if the author meant some non-water baptism, given his analogy.

Yes good point. It's a comparison with Noah's Flood.

It was the gratuitous bit about "filth of the flesh" that I disliked in whatever translation the OP has been using.

 

[CrochetOverCoffee]

Yes I think the passage from St. John is lot more definite, though the reference to water here is not explicitly a reference to baptism, so far as I can see. He just says one needs to be born "from above" through water and the Holy Spirit and then draws a distinction between human nature and spirit.

But I dislike your bible rendering of the passage from St. Peter. My bible renders verse 21 as "It is the baptism corresponding to this water that saves you now - not the washing off of physical dirt but the pledge of a good conscience given to God through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Nothing here about "filth of the flesh", please note.

Which version are using, if I may ask? I use the NKJV.

 

[exchemist]

I apologize. Being a writer, I will sometimes use my own images to clarify Biblical concepts. But yes, being put into the church, is being put into Christ, and it is achieved through baptism. Many people state that a person is saved and then baptized, but this clearly states otherwise.

No that's fine, I'm just trying to work to suss out what concepts you think are mandated by scripture and which bits are your own imagery.