What say the scriptures?

[e.r.m.]

Soul nature see sins as transgressions because they do not understand spirit fully, spiritual nature understands sin as ignorance of understanding that leads to transgressions.

Scripture does not understand sin that way.

 

[leov]

Scripture does not understand sin that way.

"We know that everyone who has been born of God does not keep on sinning,"

Why? Because they are not ignorant any longer.
You mean translated into English Scripture?

 

[e.r.m.]

Soul nature see sins as transgressions because they do not understand spirit fully, spiritual nature understands sin as ignorance of understanding that leads to transgressions.

Leov, NT scripture please, or kindly go elsewhere to discuss this different topic. This thread is about written in scripture purposes on baptism.

 

[leov]

Leov, NT scripture please, or kindly go elsewhere to discuss this different topic. This thread is about written in scripture purposes on baptism.

I Cor 2 from Paul the proto Valentinian Gnostic.

 

[e.r.m.]

I Cor 2 from Paul the proto Valentinian Gnostic.

I Cor 2 doesn't mention the word baptism.

 

[leov]

Leov, NT scripture please, or kindly go elsewhere to discuss this different topic. This thread is about written in scripture purposes on baptism.

John 14:5 Lexicon: Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way?"
John 14:7 Lexicon: "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him."
In v5 disciples say we do know because we did not learn that, in v.7 Jesus says if you used Gnosis you would have known. That is the last thing I want to say before I go elsewhere. The same , Scripture learning is not where you get knowledge and understanding but in spirit and truth, thanks for conversation.

 

[e.r.m.]

John 14:5 Lexicon: Thomas said to Him, "Lord, we do not know where You are going, how do we know the way?"
John 14:7 Lexicon: "If you had known Me, you would have known My Father also; from now on you know Him, and have seen Him."
In v5 disciples say we do know because we did not learn that, in v.7 Jesus says if you used Gnosis you would have known. That is the last thing I want to say before I go elsewhere. The same , Scripture learning is not where you get knowledge and understanding but in spirit and truth, thanks for conversation.

As with 1 Corinthians 2, it doesn't mention baptism.

Take care.

 

[whirlingmerc]

For the purpose of this discussion, what do the scriptures actually say?

In the whole book of Romans, there is no discussion of communion and one reference to baptism which is: you have been baptized into Christ's death.


Romans 6:3,4
Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?
We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.

A believer is united with Christ's death. Now there are a number of senses and uses of the word baptism and so ultimately I think it is describing a work of God where a believe goes from merely being 'in Adam' as part of the human race to being 'in Christ", part of the church, a child of God, baptized in the holy sprit, sealed with the holy spirit, blessed with every spiritual blessing in heaven and on earth.

But in Romans it focuses on dying to sin in Christ.

Doesn't mean it is a complete description but the purpose of Romans was giving clarity to the gospel and christian living in the light of the gospel so it's a significant point that believers are baptized into His death.

 

[e.r.m.]

In the whole book of Romans, there is no discussion of communion and one reference to baptism which is: you have been baptized into Christ.

Thank you and fully agreed.
Fortunately, we also have 23 more books to look in.

A believer is united with Christ;s death. Now there are a number of senses and uses of the word baptism and so ultimately I think it is describing a work of God where a believe goes from merely being 'in Adam' as part of the human race to being 'in Christ", part of the church, a child of God, baptized in the holy sprit, sealed with the holy spirit, blessed with every spiritual blessing in heaven and on earth.

Thank you and fully agreed.
This thread is addressing baptism in Jesus's name, which is in water. You can also go to my last post on page one for a fuller description.

But in Romans it focuses on dying to sin in a sins in Christ.

Agreed, that is a stated purpose.

Doesn't mean it is a complete description but the purpose of Romans was giving clarity to the gospel and christian living in the light of the gospel so it's a significant point that believers are baptized into His death.

Agreed.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Unless there are more, I think we got the one in Romans 6. Fortunately also, we have 23 more books to look in.

Thank you.
This thread is addressing baptism in Jesus's name, which is in water. You can also go to my last post on page one for a fuller description.

Agreed, that is a stated purpose.

For a believer's baptism view, the baptism is an outward sign of an inward reality, The individual's faith is emphasized.

For a paedobaptist view, the child being baptized is a covenant dedication and blessing but the child may or may not become a believer. The covenant faith of the parents are emphasized for children but for adults it isn't very different than a believers baptism

I can see how someone in good conscience might believe either of these

There are other views I do have to point out people received the Holy Spitir before during and after being baptized in the book of Acts. Other views include baptismal regeneration

 

[whirlingmerc]

Thank you and fully agreed.
Fortunately, we also have 23 more books to look in.

Thank you and fully agreed.
This thread is addressing baptism in Jesus's name, which is in water. You can also go to my last post on page one for a fuller description.

Agreed, that is a stated purpose.

Agreed.

Yes... but Romans seems to be 'gospel primary' so issues of highest importance to the gospel I would expect to be there

And yes... there are other books such as Galations where even circumsision was not to be trusted as a prerequisite for salvation because you start with grace and you continue with grace

But we should not over simplify or be reductionistic

 

[e.r.m.]

For a believer's baptism view, the baptism is an outward sign of an inward reality, The individual's faith is emphasized.

For a paedobaptist view, the child being baptized is a covenant dedication and blessing but the child may or may not become a believer. The covenant faith of the parents are emphasized for children but for adults it isn't very different than a believers baptism

I can see how someone in good conscience might believe either of these

Agreed. These views exist. There is also the view of believer's baptism that it is not purposed as a sign, but as part of the entry into being saved. Believer's baptism is attached to both these views. Now, what is found in the text about its purpose? Which is a question that is difficult to answer, because people jump so quickly to interpretation and commentary.

There are other views I do have to point out people received the Holy Spitir before during and after being baptized in the book of Acts.

The only ones who are said to have received received the Holy Spirit before baptism in Jesus's name in the book of Acts says they had the Holy Spirit come "on" or "upon" them as opposed to having it indwelt as in Romans 8:9, 1 Corinthians 3:16, 6:19.

 

[e.r.m.]

Yes... but Romans seems to be 'gospel primary' so issues of highest importance to the gospel I would expect to be there

Never heard that before. Don't know who made up that principle.

And yes... there are other books such as Galations where even circumsision was not to be trusted as a prerequisite for salvation because you start with grace and you continue with grace

Ok, will have to revisit that. Not fresh in my memory.

But we should not over simplify or be reductionistic

Agreed with not oversimplifying. What is reductionistic?

 

[whirlingmerc]

Agreed. These views exist. There is also the view of believer's baptism that it is not purposed as a sign, but as part of the entry into being saved. Believer's baptism is attached to both these views. Now, what is found in the text about its purpose? Which is a question that is difficult to answer, because people jump so quickly to interpretation and commentary.

The only ones who are said to have received received the Holy Spirit before baptism in Jesus's name in the book of Acts says they had the Holy Spirit come "on" or "upon" them as opposed to having it indwelt as in Romans 8:8, 1 Corinthians 3:16, 6:19.

Actually there are cases in Acts where people reviewed the Holy Spirit before Baptism, Cornelius for example.

Why is there no mention of Baptism is for examples 1 Corinthians 15:1-4,

but it does say
1 Corinthians 15:2
By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

I would be back to the question of why the silence of the Jerusalem council in Acts on related matters which was to address the necessity or lack of it regarding circumsism. I also would wonder why the absence of discussion of a connection between circumsision and baptism in the Jerusalem council in Acts.

 

[whirlingmerc]

Never heard that before. Don't know who made up that principle.

It seems to be the emphasis in the book

1:1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God--
1:15 That is why I am so eager to preach the gospel also to you who are in Rome. just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”

I see 7 references to the gospel in the introductory 2 chapters
I see 1 in the middle
I see 4 in the concluding 2 chapters

It seems to be a major theme

Paul really seems to emphasize this
Romans 15:16
to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles. He gave me the priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

And in final thoughts

Romans 16:25
Now to him who is able to establish you in accordance with my gospel, the message I proclaim about Jesus Christ, in keeping with the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past,

 

[e.r.m.]

Actually there are cases in Acts where people reviewed the Holy Spirit before Baptism, Cornelius for example.

Those would be the ones who received the Holy Spirit "on" or "upon" as opposed to the Holy Spirit indwelt as in Romans 8:9, 1 Corinthians 3:16, 6:19.

Why is there no mention of Baptism is for examples 1 Corinthians 15:1-4,

but it does say
1 Corinthians 15:2
By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.

Well Paul did say
1 Corinthians 2:2 For I resolved to know nothing while I was with you except Jesus Christ and him crucified.

So although they did baptize a bunch of Corinthians Acts 18:8, and referred to what should have been baptism in Jesus's name 1 Corinthians 1:13 which means they had to have been exposed to the teaching about baptism in Jesus's name at some point, Paul may have still kept his emphasis with that group. He did go more into baptism with other groups such as with the Romans and Galatians.

I would be back to the question of why the silence of the Jerusalem council in Acts on related matters which was to address the necessity or lack of it regarding circumsism. I also would wonder why the absence of discussion of a connection between circumsision and baptism in the Jerusalem council in Acts.

My understanding is that there was in fact no connection between physical circumcision and baptism in water in Jesus's name. If baptism was to take the place of physical circumcision, they could resolve that whole mess by saying these Gentiles have been baptized, so that covers it. The council is glaring that they did not see baptism and physical circumcision in the same light.

It brings us back to the question in the Op, What is the "written" purpose for baptism in Jesus's name?

 

[whirlingmerc]

Never heard that before. Don't know who made up that principle.

Ok, will have to revisit that. Not fresh in my memory.

Agreed with not oversimplifying. What is reductionistic?

There is yet another issue.
What is the root and what is the fruit

1) endurance . Jesus said "He who endures to the end shall be saved" but is that part of the fruit of God working in one's life

2) repentance. Paul speaks of God granting the repentance that leads to life

3) good works. Without them one might have dead faith but Col 1 speaks of their fruit of faith working in love went back to them understanding the grace of God in truth

4) lordship. Jesus said not everyone who merely says Lord Lord (professing familiarity with Jesus) but those who it is really true. and one would expect an aspect of lordship would be normatively being baptized and with it public identification with Christ

I would say the root if grace by faith and these can all be the fruit

 

[e.r.m.]

It seems to be the emphasis in the book

1:1 Paul, a servant of Christ Jesus, called to be an apostle and set apart for the gospel of God--
1:15 That is why I am so eager to preach the gospel also to you who are in Rome. just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.”

I see 7 references to the gospel in the introductory 2 chapters
I see 1 in the middle
I see 4 in the concluding 2 chapters

It seems to be a major theme

Paul really seems to emphasize this
Romans 15:16
to be a minister of Christ Jesus to the Gentiles. He gave me the priestly duty of proclaiming the gospel of God, so that the Gentiles might become an offering acceptable to God, sanctified by the Holy Spirit.

And in final thoughts

Romans 16:25
Now to him who is able to establish you in accordance with my gospel, the message I proclaim about Jesus Christ, in keeping with the revelation of the mystery hidden for long ages past,

He mentions the gospel a bunch of times from 1 Corinthians through Philippians, and in other books too.

 

[e.r.m.]

There is yet another issue.
What is the root and what is the fruit

1) endurance . Jesus said "He who endures to the end shall be saved" but is that part of the fruit of God working in one's life

2) repentance. Paul speaks of God granting the repentance that leads to life

3) good works. Without them one might have dead faith but Col 1 speaks of their fruit of faith working in love went back to them understanding the grace of God in truth

4) lordship. Jesus said not everyone who merely says Lord Lord (professing familiarity with Jesus) but those who it is really true. and one would expect an aspect of lordship would be normatively being baptized and with it public identification with Christ

I would say the root if grace by faith and these can all be the fruit

If by root you mean that God's gracious nature is the fountain from from which all else flows, I agree. If by root you mean saved and fruit you mean after saved then that's another matter. How do you answer the Op?

 

[Riders]

This might be a difficult question to answer:

What do the written scriptures say is the (or a) purpose of baptism in Jesus's name? Specifically, what do the texts say?

Apostolics and the United Pentecostal churches, and some unaffiliated Pentecostal churches Baptize in Jesus name only because the bible says there is power in the name of Jesus.

But if you argue with them that there are scriptures that say to be baptized in the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost they say well that scripture is pointing to Jesus. What is the name of the Father Son and Holy Ghost its Jesus so there.

Nope! the issue with that definition is that if the Father Son and Holy Ghost points to Jesus what freaking difference does it make? Do you really think God is watching every move we make including the exact right name to be Baptized in and the right scripture to use? I wonder of he checks spelling too? WHOA get back you misspelled baptism your kicked out of heaven!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!