What Is The Purpose Of Baptism?

[Cooky]

It's not even that much. There's no verbage in the Word of God itself that ever describes baptism as either a public declaration of faith, as a symbolic representation first of the cleansing of sin, as a symbolic representation of the baptized one entering death, the grave, as Christ did and coming out of the grave, resurrected, as Christ did. All such terminology of declaration and representation, is commentator driven nothing more. All those times when people say "It's not exactly written that way", or "It doesn't use those exact words, but..." is proof that the Bible doesn't say those things, and that it's actually the commentators themselves who are saying this "on behalf of" the Bible. THE BIBLE does not speak of a public declaration purpose for baptism. THE BIBLE does not speak of a "symbolizing" purpose for the Bible.

But the bible does ask us to go out and baptize... And baptize is a very specific word with a very specific meaning. It's not a euphemism or an alternate or generalized word that can mean something else.

And we know the procedure of baptism through the teaching of John the Baptist -who was a prophet of God Himself according to the bible.

 

[e.r.m.]

That copy and paste doesn't really explain "your understanding" of it though. I really don't want to take part in scriptural back and forths, as the cherry picking of verses out of context is something I can't take part in.

...Acts 2 is not even about baptism. I stopped there.

I did include
-We die, our old man is crucified, we are freed from sin.
-We are clothed with Christ.
-We are saved, making an appeal to God for a good conscious. These two are in unison, not opposing each other.

I'll also say, baptism in Jesus's name is for (not because of) the forgiveness of sins

 

[e.r.m.]

According to the Bible.

According to which Bible? I haven't seen that in either the KJV, NASB, NIV, Greek interlinear, NVI, or the RV60.

 

[e.r.m.]

But the bible does ask us to go out and baptize... And baptize is a very specific word with a very specific meaning. It's not a euphemism or an alternate or generalized word that can mean something else.

And we know the procedure of baptism through the teaching of John the Baptist -who was a prophet of God Himself according to the bible.

Agreed.

I like the hair. Very 70's. Wish my hair could grow out like that.

 

[e.r.m.]

The purpose of baptism is the conferral of grace upon the baptized and their entry into the kingdom of God. God's grace and kingdom are open to people of all ages, so there is no meaningful difference between an infant baptism and that of an adult.

Only upon the baptized believer who had committed sin.

 

[Cooky]

I like the hair. Very 70's. Wish my hair could grow out like that.

Indeed. It just so happens that's Jerry Garcia in the 1970's.

 

[e.r.m.]

Baptism is a carry-over of the mikveh in Judaism, both of which involve a symbolic cleansing and also an introductory rite into the faith. In many denominations, it is believed to also involve forgiveness of "original sin".

In some denominations, baptism may be done to an infant but then to be followed up much later if so desired in the rite of "confirmation" whereas some words of the baptismal rite are repeated and renewed.

The early Church mainly did baptism of young or older adults, but in Acts in mentions an entire family being baptized, although we don't know the ages of the kids. In the 2nd century, infant baptism was done but still not that common. But when the plagues hit that decimated Europe in later centuries, one of them killing an estimated 1/3 of all the children in Europe, the Church decided to split baptism into the two parts, "baptism' and "confirmation", and infant baptism became increasingly more common. The driving force in large part due to the words in Mark's gospel that one needed to believe and be baptized in order to be saved, and even though belief is not possible with an infant, baptism as a rite can be.

We don't have the authority to baptize someone before faith. The Bible gives us only that order, faith/repentance & then baptism. Infant baptism has no meaning in the scriptures.

 

[e.r.m.]

Indeed. It just so happens that's Jerry Garcia in the 1970's.

lol, I shoulda guessed. I only knew the gray-haired version.

 

[Cooky]

We don't have the authority to baptize someone before faith. The Bible gives us only that order, faith/repentance & then baptism. Infant baptism has no meaning in the scriptures.

This is the point where the Catholic Church and those of Sola scriptura split paths... But it's okay. It's only ecclesiastical, and God knows both of our intentions are good.

 

[e.r.m.]

So who does it hurt when we baptize babies? Does it anger God?

...Or is the rejection of infant baptism just an exaggerated talking point that gives Protestantism legitimacy.

It hurts the people who believe they were saved by this act. Those who buy into this have no motivation to seek getting saved, thinking they already are.

 

[e.r.m.]

This is the point where the Catholic Church and those of Sola scriptura split paths...

Agreed. You gotta admit though, Biblical Christianity looks a lot different than extra Biblical Christianity.

But it's okay. It's only ecclesiastical, and God knows both of our intentions are good.

For those who put their faith in God's word, it's not ecclesiastical. And even if "a church" had the authority to add onto God's word, they still could not contradict what's already in God's word.

 

[Thief]

Indeed you are not. By the same token, you cannot legitimately claim that you answered the question. You can't have it both ways.

Cutting out whole sections of scripture that don't fit with one's theology isn't good either.

I answered your question
I think the answer....you don't like

 

[Thief]

Denominations mean nothing to God.

right on

 

[tigrers2019]

The teaching of 'water baptism unto the remission of sins' falls apart starting with this passage o scripture:

John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance unto the remission of sins. (Mk.1:4)

 

[Thief]

Mark 1 verse 8

 

[shmogie]

According to which Bible? I haven't seen that in either the KJV, NASB, NIV, Greek interlinear, NVI, or the RV60.

Then you are not reading the right passages. I have 11 translation, from Phillips to the NKJV, they all say the same on this matter.

 

[shmogie]

Then you are not reading the right passages. I have 11 translation, from Phillips to the NKJV, they all say the same on this matter.

Sorry nine, I counted two paraphrases,

 

[e.r.m.]

I answered your question
I think the answer....you don't like

Ok Thief, how does Jesus baptizing by spirit and fire tie into the baptisms in water after Jesus's resurrection?

 

[e.r.m.]

Then you are not reading the right passages. I have 11 translation, from Phillips to the NKJV, they all say the same on this matter.

Please then sir, enlighten me on where within these 9 translations, it says saved by grace through faith alone, without paraphrasing or commentating, or adding words to the text, or helping the Bible out in any way. I want to see where the Bible actually states that. Thank you.

 

[e.r.m.]

The teaching of 'water baptism unto the remission of sins' falls apart starting with this passage o scripture:

John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance unto the remission of sins. (Mk.1:4)

You got my attention. How does baptism unto the remission of sins fall apart starting with this passage of scripture? Thank you.