As I've said many times my friend,I'm all for baptism but it's just an expression of what has already happened.

I think we both know how we feel and where we stand. Have a great night my friend,and baptize as many as you can.

Thanks R.H. These discussions are good because it makes people examime the scriptures. And that is always good.

On the Old Testament and changing requirements issue.....I have been asked if God changed the requirements for salvation from Old to New testaments. My answer is no......and yes. I tend to look at things simply because I am a simple man. (Insert Lynard Skynard background music here). My answer to what the requirements were back then can be answered in 2 words....faith and obedience. What is required of us today? Faith and obedience. Y'all have already said yourselves that you view baptism as an act of obedience. What happens to those that don't obey the gospel?
1 Thess 1:7-8
And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels,

8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:

Bamarich2, It reads just as you say it does, I think in Acts 8 it is clearly speaking of the water baptism and baptism of the holy spirit. This is how you see it also, correct? You also agree with me that water baptism is a work and always follow the conversion of one belief. I am not a bible expert and fall far from most of you guys.I think the bible indicates that believers are indwelled with the Holy Spirit—that is, the Holy Spirit moves into their hearts—at the moment of conversion. "For in one Spirit we were all baptized into one body—Jews or Greeks, slaves or free—and all were made to drink of one Spirit" but many will disagree. And that is ok to. Here is what I was taught about Acts 4 and found some text to borrow to help explain it in my view.

The book of Acts tells about the changing from Judaism to the age of the Church. Jesus was a Jew. The disciples were Jews. But the Church is distinctly Christian. The disciples didn't become Christians until John 20:22 when Jesus breathed the Holy Spirit into them. In Acts 2:4, they were filled with the Holy Spirit. In Acts 8:14-17, I think God waited to give the Samaritans the Holy Spirit until Peter and John could see. I dont know why, although perhaps it was so these devout Jews could witness the coming of the Spirit upon a group of people so despised by them.(the gentiles) Acts 10:45-47 (Jews) "were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit was poured out even on the Gentiles." I could be all wrong on this whole topic and maybe Jesus will help me understand it better in the by and by. I may even ask Paul. I will never be to the point where I think I have the answers to Gods word and will have discerning ears and eyes on what I see and hear. Especially coming from a bunch of tree goat hunters. You guys have made me study the word more this week than I have in months. All I will say is I was saved by God's grace through my faith. And welcome more discussion on this and any other topics, however a sense the hammer coming down on these faith based topics.

There is also scripture in acts after Pentecost, I don't know the verse off the top of my head where Peter said these men have received the Holy Ghost what stops them from being baptized. Pretty sure you don't have the Holy Ghost without first being saved and yet they had not yet been baptized.

Bottom line Jesus said do it. It doesn't matter why.

On a slightly separate note does anybody know why the word baptismo "immerse" was left un-translated. At the time the bible was translated into English the king was already practicing sprinkling and nobody wanted to go tell the king he was doing it wrong so they left it as baptism.

Here is a good question for those that say one must be baptized by water to be saved. Were not the 12 apostles Jews. When did they become Christians? Right, when they were filled with the Holy Spirit correct? It was not a water baptism. Did they need to be baptized after becoming Christians? I think John baptized many and that is where Jesus met some of them. John was baptizing for the repentance of sin, and not for a Christian salvation. So once they received the holy spirit (the disciples)did they need to be rebaptized? I don't think it is ever mentioned in the Bible about this. I would love to here everyones thoughts on this.......

Will try to help on both questions. In Acts 10:44ff, Cornelius and his family members experienced "Holy Spirit baptism", which only occurs twice in the book of Acts (the other occasion is Acts 2:1ff). The measure of the Holy Spirit allowing believers the ability to have miraculous powers generally came through the apostle's hands (Acts 8:17/19:6) and the usual order was (1) hear the word, (2) believe/be baptized, and (3) receive the gift of the Holy Spirit via the apostle's hands. Acts 2:38-39 also describes it when we realize those "cut to the heart" already had believed and the apostles were present to lay their hands upon the new converts.

Thus, the case of Cornelius is the exception to the general order. Whereas others in the book of Acts received the Holy Spirit after being baptized, they received the Holy Spirit prior to their baptism (in water). Why the change in the usual order? The answer can be found in the very next chapter (11:1-18)... if you'll read it. The cliffs notes version... God felt it was necessary that Jewish believers (the circumcision party) be shown that the Gentiles were fully accepted into His family. In Judaism, a Gentile could become a proselyte (convert to the Jewish faith), but was still always considered a "second-class citizen". God likely chose "Holy Spirit baptism" because (1) Jesus Himself spoke of it and (2) the apostles themselves realized that was a sign God approved of them. I'm convinced God never intended the "Cornelius experience" to be viewed as the "usual" because of two reasons. First, other cases in Acts are clear that the order is reversed (Cornelius' case was the exception). Second, the purpose for the "exception" was clearly explained in chapter 11 (no explanations given following the other conversions).

On your second question, from what I've gathered in studying the topic, every translation prior to the KJV of 1611 rendered "baptizo" as "immerse" (or dip). However, one of the purposes of King James in creating that translation seemed to be to create unity between the religious groups in his country. For the past half-century, the Geneva Bible won the hearts of non-Anglicans... but it contained spurious commentary that took shots at the Anglican faith. To counter the Geneva Bible, the Anglicans published "The Bishop's Bible".. but it never gained traction versus the much more popular Geneva Bible.

When James (an Anglican) assumed power he seemed to realize the pathway to unity in these two polar-opposite groups was to create a new translation... one which would not include the "anti-Anglican" comments of the Geneva Bible while attracting the group that embraced it. One way to be successful... create a translation that embraced the beliefs of both groups. King James would be a hero to both parties. One group practiced sprinkling as a means to baptize... so instead of the translators rendering "baptizo" as "immerse" (which would be offensive to those who sprinkled), they transliterated the word and created a new English term "baptize". In essence, they "redefined" the word because of politics and power... but nearly every English translation since then has followed suit. I may have some specific detail about the matter wrong, but I'm confident the gist of it is correct.

That one is tough because of the lack of information in the gospels. John's baptism was a water baptism that involved repentance and forgiveness of sin (Luke 3:3). After being baptized Himself, Jesus began baptizing people (John3:26/4:1ff)... though it was actually the apostles who did the baptizing. Because John's account doesn't specify another mode of baptism and it was compared to John's baptism, I assume it was water baptism. Also, I assume whenever Jesus "made disciples", it included baptism - though we don't find any more evidence of them baptizing people except in these two accounts.

On the day of Pentecost, the church (and Christianity) was officially established. What about those who had followed Christ and had been baptized by the apostles - did they have to be baptized again? Because the book of Acts is silent on the matter, I assume they all (including the apostles) were "grandfathered in". The only time we read of people being baptized a second time in Acts is in 19:1ff - they were men who had been baptized with John's baptism (fundamentally different than John's baptism).

To answer "when did they become Christians"... I'd probably answer it was when they initially chose to follow Christ when He called them - when they themselves were first baptized. For the record, it has been suggested that Pentecost wasn't the first time the apostles had received a measure of the Holy Spirit - to accomplish the "Limited Commission", Jesus gave them authority over unclean spirits and the power to heal disease/affliction (Matthew 10:1). No one else in the book of Acts could do that without being empowered by the Holy Spirit.

Not for me….I was baptized b/c the bible tells me to be baptized to be cleansed of my sins. If we are to do nothing, then why does the Bible say otherwise? I will also try to do everything I can to resist temptation and live a Godly life, although I fall short daily. That being said I understand that without Jesus I wouldn't have a chance of spending eternity in Heaven, but it doesn't mean that God doesn't expect for us to follow his word. Throwing hands up in the air and saying there is nothing I can to do to be saved is a dangerous road to go down. This can be taken the wrong way which leads to people doing nothing, which is not God's plan for his people.

After reading more, the common denominator among those that don't believe that baptism is required, is picking a choosing verses that support their belief. Speaking for myself, I also believe that you must accept Jesus, that you must believe, that you must have faith, that without Jesus's death and resurrection we have nothing, that we could never live a life that would allow us to spend eternity with God, without grace and forgiveness….BUT I don't forget that the NT also commands us to be Baptized and shows many examples. If someone is giving you directions to go from Point A to Point B, you don't follow most of the directions, you follow all of the directions. Same things with the New Testament.

Hey truedouble, not singling you out or picking on you, I'm actually gonna borrow something from your response above that I hear lots of people say, and point out the impossibility of a salvation you can lose (which is what I perceive some of the people in this thread believe).

First, I am fond of saying (constantly), "If you could lose your salvation, YOU WOULD!" Y'all please tell me if I'm wrong, but most of the posters who say baptism is required for salvation, seem to also say (or imply)that I have to "work out my salvation" or in some way continously strive to maintain my righteous standing. Is that right? But, many of those same folks will say "I strive to always be obedient, but I fail daily." If that's what you believe, how do you deal with the second-by-second fear that you could die during that time you "failed"?

Sorry if I'm misconstruing what you mean, that's just how I take it, so I wanted to touch on that.

I know what you are saying but not wanting to do good isn't an issue for saved people. The very act of salvation is receiving a new heart and a born again Spirit. If there is no change in a person,then there is no salvation. I'm not saying that a saved person will always do good. I'm saying that they want to do good.

I see trying to work for salvation or acceptance is much more dangerous to the believer. For one thing Satan will continually convince you that God will bless you but only when you achieve a higher level of perfection.

Another thing is that you will constantly be concentrating on yourself,what needs fixing about you,how to stop certain sins and how to be more holy. The path to these things doesn't come through focus on self. Holiness and spiritual growth come through crucifying yourself. In other words consider your flesh dead,don't think about or focus on fixing flesh. Concentrate on the things of God,his word,prayer, whatsoever things are good,pure,just,lovely. Fix your mind on these things and you will not fulfill the lusts of the flesh.

As I've said many times in this thread,all believers should be baptized but not because God won't accept you if you aren't. All believers should do good works,tithe,attend church,but none of these save. We are saved by becoming one in the spirit with Jesus.When that happens everything we should do is simply fruit that naturally grows because we are connected to the vine.

I'm not sure what you mean by "work out salvation", but I don't live in fear b/c I was baptized for the remission of my sins and Jesus died so that my sins can be forgiven. I never will be in righteous standing by what I do or don't do.

I was going to wait a few days and start another thread on can a person lose their salvation.

Maybe I can help. You will always see those who think they have to work for salvation quote Philippians 2:12 saying that we need to work out our salvation.

It does not mean for us to work for our salvation.Paul was talking to believers who were already saved and salvation is not a work of man.The words "work out" are a translation of the greek word which means,"to carry out to the goal,to carry to it's ultimate conclusion." The Philippians are exhorted to carry their salvation to it's ultimate goal,Christlikness. The salvation spoken of here is not justification but sanctification.

They are to achieve victory over sin.They are to do this with fear and trembling.The fear here speaks of a wholesome caution.The fear here is vigilance against temptation.It's just like the verse"be not high minded but fear." It is taking heed lest we fall.

Oops, didn't mean to jump string!

Boom, that's exactly what I say too. I had a guy in my office maybe a month ago, said he was new to the area, had moved here to take the pastorate of a local Free Will Baptist church. I avoided discussion like the plague, but I could tell he was trying to engage me (just doing his job to evangelize). I finally opened some dialogue about "What is a Free Will Baptist?" and off he went. I just nodded as if I was tracking with him, didn't think it was prudent to disagree with a fella buying insurance! LOL

I think the word Baptize can be used as conversion, as well as immersion.
(Full Definition of BAPTIZE
transitive verb
1
: to administer baptism to
2
a : to purify or cleanse spiritually especially by a purging experience or ordeal
b : initiate
3
: to give a name to (as at baptism) : christen)

Verse 4-6 appears to have these men go immediately from Paul asking the question in vs4 the admitting in vs5 to the laying of hands in vs6.

Acts 19 1599 Geneva Bible (GNV)

1 And it came to pass, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul when he passed through the upper coasts, came to Ephesus, and found certain disciples,
2 And said unto them, Have ye received the holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be an holy Ghost.
3 And he said unto them, Unto what were ye then baptized? And they said, Unto John’s baptism.
4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe in him, which should come after him, that is, in Christ Jesus.
5 And when they heard it, they were baptized in the Name of the Lord Jesus.
6 So Paul laid his hands upon them, and the holy Ghost came on them, and they spake the tongues, and prophesied.

Can we agree on the bible being Gods word. And can we further agree the words in red were spoken by Christ. If we can agree then how can one disagree with his statement "He that believeth AND is baptized shall be saved but he that believeth not shall be damned"
Yes in his second part he mentions those who dont believe. Believe what? All of the above including baptism and the Gospel. Key word is AND which indicates those who wish to be saved MUST believe the gospel AND be baptized. Its not complicated to understand.

John 1:33
I myself did not know him, but he who sent me to baptize with water said to me, ‘He on whom you see the Spirit descend and remain, this is he who baptizes with the Holy Spirit.’

Not singling you out as there are others on here who have stated something similar; scripture, the very words of Christ prove that it is a commandment, no an option and that it is indeed necessary to our salvation. I have posted only a few of the scriptures that support this.

Now as far as baptism being a "work" getting baptized was easy, I knew I needed it, all I did was go down in the water in Jesus name according to scripture. Prayer must be a work then because prayer is more taxing on the body both physically, and mentally than baptism.

James 2:18-20
Yea, a man may say, Thou hast faith, and I have works: shew me thy faith without thy works, and I will shew thee my faith by my works.

19 Thou believest that there is one God; thou doest well: the devils also believe, and tremble.

20 But wilt thou know, O vain man, that faith without works is dead?
KJV

So is James wrong, or is he simply stating that his faith in Christ causes him to live a life which produces work?
Because of my faith in God and His Word I know that by being baptized my sins are washed away, because of my faith in God I fast and pray, because of my faith in God I live my life according to His Word... this type of works.