The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to be Saved! (HOF thread)

[HopeofGlory]

Ian,

You said:
I don't know where to start in proving your errors

Reply:
I understand you have a dilemma but of course you must realize I am not in error.

You said:
for you have not understood a word I have written up to now.

Reply:
I am not so sure about that.

You said:
I don't reject you as an antichrist, for I understand that you have repented & turned to God, and are trusting in Christ alone for your salvation.

I don't reject you for teaching against water baptism, for I believe baptism is for believers, already born again, from above, by the Holy Spirit.

I accept you as a brother in Christ, who is very confused, & needs to be taught the way of God more perfectly.

Reply:
Well I believe we can both agree the feelings you have are mutual
but the bond we have was made possible by the "new" testament in His blood.

You said:
I don't think anyone but you thinks that Peter was not converted for many years after the resurrection. THe dealings of the risen Lord with his disciples make it very clear that they were true believers, fully converted.

Reply:
If we understand what that conversion was from then I believe that it cannot be denied that is was years later. The law was the offence of which a simple reading of the Pauline epistles will enlighten the minds of the ignorant in such matters. The latter part of you statement is true, they were believers in the old testament and God honored that belief. The new testament has superceded the old and it is no longer effectual concerning salvation.

You said:
While "various baptisms" can be found in the Old Covenant Scriptures, the true water baptism is only in prophecy:

Reply:
Here in lies the root of your confusion.

Eze 36:25 Then will I sprinkle clean water upon you, and ye shall be clean: from all your filthiness, and from all your idols, will I cleanse you.
26 A new heart also will I give you, and a new spirit will I put within you: and I will take away the stony heart out of your flesh, and I will give you an heart of flesh.
27 And I will put my spirit within you, and cause you to walk in my statutes, and ye shall keep my judgments, and do [them].

Water baptism has no place in this prophecy. The clean water is the Holy Spirit.

You said:
The apostles were slow to believe the New COvenant teachings before the cross, but the risen Lord Jesus, & the Holy Spirit made sure that they did understand before they started preaching. There is no suggestion in Scripture that Peter's Pentecost sermon was mistaken.

Reply:
I am glad you agree. The sermon Peter preached was effectual in that they truly received remission of sins by obeying in water baptism but the message of the new testament is one of eternal life which is the better way. Peter's message was a true message but it was void of the new testament "for" remission of sins.

You said:
If Peter appears to have missed out some doctrines, like redemption through the blood of Jesus, note that "Act 2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. "

Reply:
You floored me with that reply!!!! You are not understanding that to be in Christ you MUST UNDERSTAND the redemptive power of His blood and it is eternal. The "new" testament in His blood is the eternal testament for all those who believe. Those that believe the old testimony "for" remission of sins were saved and have to endure to the end. Christ is our strength and He endures for us, Glory be to God!

You said:
Those "other words" are not recorded in Acts, but when he wrote down his teaching we read:

1 Peter 1:18 Forasmuch as ye know that ye were not redeemed with corruptible things, [as] silver and gold, from your vain conversation [received] by tradition from your fathers;
19 But with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot:

I charge you, read Acts as the inspired, infallible & authoritative Word of God. Not as a record of the misunderstandings of the apostles. THey were speaking under the direct inspiration of the Holy Spirit.

Reply:
All things have become new! The other words at that time were the truth so they were not other words at that time.

Peter (remember) first heard the new testament message of the blood of Christ "FOR" remission of sins from Paul and anything other than that message is corruptible (not eternal).

 

[Ian Day]

Hope,

I'll start here:

Ian said:
If Peter appears to have missed out some doctrines, like redemption through the blood of Jesus, note that "Act 2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation. "

Hope's reply:
You floored me with that reply!!!! You are not understanding that to be in Christ you MUST UNDERSTAND the redemptive power of His blood and it is eternal. The "new" testament in His blood is the eternal testament for all those who believe. Those that believe the old testimony "for" remission of sins were saved and have to endure to the end. Christ is our strength and He endures for us, Glory be to God!

I have been seeking to establish on the TOL board for over a year that there is ONE WAY OF SALVATION THROUGH THE BLOOD OF THE EVERLASTING COVENANT. Notice my signature.

Are you saying that any NOT IN CHRIST are saved by some other way???????

 

[Ian Day]

Enough is enough !

Enough is enough !

JustaChristian,

This takes us only through 2nd century for the most part. I could paste an equal portion of other statements, but I believe this is sufficent to establish presidence for consideration that baptism in water for the remission of sins was believed and practiced by the early church.

I don't think anyone is in doubt that baptism has been practised by Christians (& others) for nearly 2000 years.

[150-200 AD CLEMENT ]
"When he had given them these and such like precepts, he made proclamation to the people, saying: 'Since I have resolved to stay three months with you, if any one desires it, let him be baptized; that, stripped of his former evils, he may for the future, in consequence of his own conduct, become heir of heavenly blessings, as a reward for his good actions." (Clement, "Recognitions of Clement," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 8, pg. 132

Where is salvation in consequence of the merits of Christ ALONE? If we become heirs in consequence of our own conduct, we are utterly lost.

What your quotations show is the degree of confusion & error about the significance of baptism, and the Gospel itself, from the beginning.

Confusion & error which continue on the TOL forum
(I wanted the wagging finger smilie, but its not available.

 

[tralon]

What did the Apostles say?

What did the Apostles say?

It is quite true that the early Catholic church fathers held to "baptism regeneration" and that by baptism a candidate receves the remission of sins.But are they in AGREEMENT withe the Apostles themselves?Better yet, what would the spiritual ramifications of this be if this were true?

1.The blood of Christ would cleanse no sin whatsoever, but only the waters of baptism.
2.A person to receive forgiveness for their sins would not have to believe in God at all, let aalone repent.All they have to do is go down into the baptism waters.
3.A sinner who was sincere about believing and repenting of his sins could NEVER find any forgiveness of sins UNTIL he went down in the waters of baptism.
4.The power to administer the forgiveness of sins would now be in the hands of the minister doing the baptising.No longer would a sinner be saved by grace through faith, but by the performance and words of the one doing the baptising.

This then would be the spiritual frankenstien monster that would be created, if one held to such a teaching.

But the BIBLE teaches that a sinner receives the forgiveness of sins WHEN ONE REPENTS OF THEIR SINS.The moment that they turn from their sins and become converted.Read Acts 3:19 carefully. Also the bible clearly states that it is the BLOOD of Jesus Christ that cleanses us from ALL SIN and not the waters of baptism.I John 1:7.If the blood cleanses us from sin.Then this was ALREADY accomplished 2,000 years ago.We gain acess to this forgiveness through faith and repentance alone.

I am a Baptist by religous persuasion.But I am also a student of the word.The bible does NOT teach that water baptism remits sins at all.But only the precious blood of Christ HAS and we receive that cleansing through faith and repentance.Acts 2:38,3:19 and I John 1:7-9.

It is VERY true that many religous and pious men wrote tons of stuff after the Apostles.From Justin to Augustine.But are we just to accept willy nilly everything they wrote because they said so? Or should we COMPARE what they said and taught to the writings of the Apostles? That is the issue, and the choice every sincere Christian MUST make.Otherwise he's throwing darts at a target in the dark.For the word of God is our true light and not the writings of the catholic church fathers.

 

[agape]

Mark 1:8:
I indeed have baptized you with water: but he [Jesus Christ] shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.

Who does the baptizing? "Jesus Christ shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost. How does he baptize?

Romans 10:9-10:
That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

For with the heart believing is made unto righteousness and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

These verses tell us how we are saved. When we do this, we are automatically born again of God's spirit. No man or woman does the baptizing. This is something only God can do through Christ.

The only baptism that can be administered to another person is water baptism. John's water baptism was performed by Jesus Christ's disciples before Christ ascended unto His Father and therefore could not have been a baptism in the spirit. They performed a temporary and preparatory baptism.

John 4:1-3:
When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,

(Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)

He left Judaea, and departed again into Galilee.

Now look at Mark 16.

Mark 16:15-16:
And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned [katakrino - condemned].

Mark 16:16 states that he that believes and is baptized shall (absolutely) be saved. Believing and baptism go hand in hand. (Romans 10:9-13). Baptism in the spirit follows this believing. Mark 16:16 declares “he that believeth not shall be damned. It does not say “he that believeth not and is not baptized shall be damned, because believing and baptism simultaneously occur. When a person believes in Jesus Christ and he or she changes lord, (Romans 10:9 and 10, they are baptized with holy spirit. If they do not believe, they are not baptized. It is impossible for one to be saved, yet not baptized. Baptism in the holy spirit is the end result of calling on the name of Jesus Christ, the one who died for the remission of sins.

Luke 24:49
And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

Acts 1:4:
And, being assembled together with [them], commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, [saith he], ye have heard of me.

Acts 1:5
For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.

Acts 2:1-2:
And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.

And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.

And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them.

And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

Speaking in tongues was the manifestation or evidence that they were filled with the Holy Ghost.

This was the promise of the Father they had been instructed to wait for....to be baptized with the Holy Ghost. Who did the baptizing? God did the baptizing in the name of Jesus Christ. If it had not been for what Jesus Christ accomplished for us on the cross, which was the remission of sins, we could not be born again in the spirit.

Acts 4:31:
And when they had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word of God with boldness.

So far we don't see any individual or individuals literally doing the baptism.

Acts 2:38
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Repentance is doing Romans 10:9 and 10. ...and be baptized...." How were they baptized. There is nothing in this verse that states Paul did the baptizing. He said "be ye baptized." They were baptized "in the name of Jesus Christ." It is in his name because Jesus Christ died for the remission of our sins. "...Whosoever believeth in him shall not perish but have eternal life." It is believing in Jesus Christ, our Redeemer that one gets born again and saved.

Titus 3:4-6:
But after that the kindness and love of God our Saviour toward man appeared,

Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration [paliggenesia = new birth, inward washing], and renewing [renewal, change for the better] of the Holy Ghost;

Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

The new birth, inward washing of the baptism by holy spirit replaces the outward symbolic washing of baptism with water.

Note verse 4 "God our Saviour and verse 6 Jesus Christ our Savior. God is our Savior as the author, originator of the plan of salvation. Jesus Christ made the new birth available as the "agent" of the plan of salvation, the finisher of faith.

God shed the "washing of regeneration (new birth)" and the "renewing of the Holy Ghost upon us abundantly through His Son, Jesus Christ.

A reiteration of what I previously posted...

NOTE: All these verse are quite the contrary to what is recorded in Matthew 28:19.

Matthew 28:19 -20:
Go ye therefore, and teach [make disciples of] all nations baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you, and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world [age], Amen.

This is the first record since the resurrection of Jesus Christ where he tells his followers to go out and make disciples of others, even the Gentiles. The phrase "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" has been the source of much confusion. The authenticity of this phrase has been questioned by many mainly because there is no scriptural support or findings that this kind of baptism was ever carried out, nor is it ever mentioned anywhere else in the entire Word of God. Throughout the Book of Acts, people were baptized in the spirit in the name of Jesus Christ. They were not baptized with the trinitarium formula given above.

There is evidence from the early writings of the Church fathers who quoted this verse that the phrase "baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost" was not in the original text. Instead, it simply read, "...make disciples of all nations in my name, teach them...." Aphraates of Nisibis (around 340 A.D.) quoted the verse without the words "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." Eusebius (who died around 340 A.D.) quoted this verse eighteen times without ever using those words. There is evidence that Justin Martyr, who lived in the mid-second century, did not have these words in his manuscripts. These men were quoting from manuscripts older than any that we now have. This clearly indicates that the original of Matthew 28:29 read, "Go ye therefore and make disciples of all nations in my name. The rest was added later.

As I mentioned previously, the writings of the Church fathers does not prove the Word of God but rather the Word of God proves and confirms the writings. I do not totally rely on all the writings of the Church fathers, particularly when it does not agree or fit with the whole Word of God. However, in this case I lean toward the writings of the above mentioned Church Fathers because they substantiate the many clear verses regarding baptism in the name of Jesus Christ in comparison to the "ONE" verse containing "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost.

Galatians 3:27
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Ephesians 4:24
And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness.

God bless you,
Agape

 

[HopeofGlory]

I have been seeking to establish on the TOL board for over a year that there is ONE WAY OF SALVATION THROUGH THE BLOOD OF THE EVERLASTING COVENANT. Notice my signature.

Are you saying that any NOT IN CHRIST are saved by some other way??????

Yes Ian, I have noticed and if you remember I thanked you on a previous page for you defense of our Saviours blood.

In response to your question:

In the four gospels eternal is always referenced as looking forward to the “new” and “eternal” testament in His shed blood “for” remission of sins.

Who will render to every man according to his deeds: Rom. 2:6 (KJV)
o them who by patient continuance in well doing seek for glory and honour and immortality, eternal life: Rom. 2:7 (KJV)


Paul was the first man to preach to man that the “eternal” testimony had come and it was to be received by faith in the “new” testament “for” remission of sins.

And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance. Heb. 9:15 (KJV)
For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator. Heb. 9:16 (KJV)
For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth. Heb. 9:17 (KJV)


Paul taught that “all things” had become “new” and all things were “now” of God (2 Cor. 5:17). The “old” testimony of water baptism “for” remission (Acts 2:38) was effectual in man’s obedience and was deliver by man to man. The “new” testimony “for” remission is effectual in Christ’s obedience and is delivered by God to man and can only be received by faith (Roms. 3:25). The “old” testament was honored by God because He is long suffering (2 Pet. 3:9)to those who have not obeyed the truth of the “new” testament. The tragedy is when one does not understand the old has been superceded by the new (John 5:36) in that the old is no longer effectual. The new testament was progressively understood but clearly revealed.

The Gentiles freely accepted the new testament (Acts 13:48) because they were without the offence (law) of the cross (Roms. 5:20). It is a matter of simple logic to realize one trained from birth that the law of obedience gives righteousness will not easily understand a “new’ testimony completely opposite of the old testimony in that the law is an offence to the new. This was the monumental task given to Paul and is evident in all his epistles. Paul’s knowledge of the “new” testament came by revelation of mysteries that were progressively revealed.

Unto me, who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given, that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of Christ; Eph. 3:8 (KJV)
And to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ: Eph. 3:9 (KJV)
To the intent that now unto the principalities and powers in heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold wisdom of God, Eph. 3:10 (KJV)
According to the eternal purpose which he purposed in Christ Jesus our Lord: Eph. 3:11 (KJV)

The problem with dispensational theology is that a dispensation is not clearly defined when God fully accepts the old until the new is clearly revealed . Acts is that historic account of progressive revelation in the “new” testament of remission of sins that Christ first delivered. God’s purpose was to deliver the “eternal” message of the “new” testament. If the apostles at Pentecost had clearly delivered that “incorruptible eternal” message of the blood of Christ for remission of sins then there would have been no need for Christ to have called Paul into the ministry. The eternal message would have to be received through the Gentiles.

Whereas thou hast been forsaken and hated, so that no man went through thee, I will make thee an eternal excellency, a joy of many generations. Isa. 60:15 (KJV)
Thou shalt also suck the milk of the Gentiles, and shalt suck the breast of kings: and thou shalt know that I the LORD am thy Saviour and thy Redeemer, the mighty One of Jacob. Isa. 60:16 (KJV)

As newborn babes, desire the sincere milk of the word, that ye may grow thereby: 1 Pet. 2:2 (KJV)


Those of us who believe are chosen by God to deliver the eternal message whereby we can have all men see what is the manifold wisdom of God.

Fight the good fight of faith, lay hold on eternal life, whereunto thou art also called, and hast professed a good profession before many witnesses. 1 Tim. 6:12 (KJV)

 

[JustAChristian]

More Ante-Nicene Conclusions on Water Baptism

More Ante-Nicene Conclusions on Water Baptism

I have posted earlier some of the 1st and 2nd century "Fathers" of the church to their belief of baptism. This present post is more of these understandings and beliefs from the 2nd and 3rd century "Fathers". Since they are not so removed as we, perhaps we should consider their beliefs in light of what we are presented from the scriptures.


181 AD Theophilus of Antioch "Moreover, those things which were created from the waters were blessed by God, so that this might also be a sign that men would at a future time receive repentance and remission of sins through water and the bath of regeneration all who proceed to the truth and are born again and receive a blessing from God" (To Autolycus 12:16).

190 AD Irenaeus of Lyons "`And [Naaman] dipped himself . . . seven times in the Jordan' [2 Kgs. 5:14]. It was not for nothing that Naaman of old, when suffering from leprosy, was purified upon his being baptized, but [this served] as an indication to us. For as we are lepers in sin, we are made clean, by means of the sacred water and the invocation of the Lord, from our old transgressions, being spiritually regenerated as new-born babes, even as the Lord has declared: `Except a man be born again through water and the Spirit, he shall not enter into the kingdom of heaven'" (Fragment 34).

200 AD CYPRIAN "But what a thing it is, to assert and contend that they who are not born in the Church can be the sons of God! For the blessed apostle sets forth and proves that baptism is that wherein the old man dies and the new man is born, saying, 'He saved us by the washing of regeneration.' But if regeneration is in the washing, that is, in baptism, how can heresy, which is not the spouse of Christ, generate sons to God by Christ?" (Cyprian, "The Epistles of Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 388)

200 AD Cyprian of Carthage "While I was lying in darkness . . . I thought it indeed difficult and hard to believe . . . that divine mercy was promised for my salvation, so that anyone might be born again and quickened unto a new life by the laver of the saving water, he might put off what he had been before, and, although the structure of the body remained, he might change himself in soul and mind. . . . But afterwards, when the stain of my past life had been washed away by means of the water of rebirth, a light from above poured itself upon my chastened and now pure heart; afterwards, through the Spirit which is breathed from heaven, a second birth made of me a new man" (To Donatus 3)

200 AD HERMAS "And I said, 'I heard, sir, some teachers maintain that there is no other repentance than that which takes place, when we descended into the water and received remission of our former sin.' He said to me, 'That was sound doctrine which you heard; for that is really the case.'" (Hermas, "The Shepherd," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 2, pg. 22)

200-258 AD CARTHAGE "Aurelius of Utica said: Since the apostle says that we are not to communicate with other people's sins, what else does he do but communicate with other people's sins, who holds communion with heretics without the Church's baptism? And therefore I judge that heretics must be baptized, that they may receive forgiveness of their sins; and thus communion may be had with them." ("The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 569.)

200-258 AD CARTHAGE "Caecilius of Bilta said: I know only one baptism in the Church, and none out of the Church. This one will be here, where there is the true hope and the certain faith. For thus it is written: 'One faith, one hope, one baptism;' not among heretics, where there is no hope, and the faith is false, where all things are carried on by lying." (The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian, September, 258 AD, Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 565)

200-258 AD CARTHAGE "Marcellus of Zama said: Since sins are not remitted saved in the baptism of the Church, he who does not baptize a heretic holds communion with a sinner." ("The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian,", Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 570)

200-258 AD CARTHAGE "Nicomedes of Segermae said: My opinion is this, that heretics coming to the Church should be baptized, for the reason that among sinners without they can obtain no remission of sins. ("The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 567)

200-258 AD CARTHAGE "Novatus of Thamugada said: Although we know that all the Scriptures give witness concerning the saving baptism, still we ought to declare our faith, that heretics and schismatics who come to the Church, and appear to have been falsely baptized, ought to be baptized in the everlasting fountain; and therefore, according to the testimony of the Scriptures, and according to the decree of our colleagues, men of most holy memory, that all schismatics and heretics who are converted to the Church must be baptized; and moreover, that those who appeared to have been ordained must be received among lay people. (The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian, September, 258 AD, Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 565)

200-258 AD CARTHAGE "Victor of Gor said: Since sins are not remitted save in the baptism of the Church, he who admits a heretic to communion without baptism does two things against reason: he does not cleanse the heretics, and he befouls the Christians." ("The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 568)

200-258 AD CARTHAGE "Victoricus of Thabraca said: If heretics are allowed to baptize and to give remission of sins, wherefore do we brand them with infamy and call them heretics?" ("The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 568)

200-258 AD CARTHAGE Dativus of Badis said: We, as far as in us lies, do not hold communion with heretics, unless they have been baptized in the Church, and have received remission of their sins." ("The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 567)

200-258 AD CARTHAGE Felix of Bagai said: As, when the blind leads the blind, they fall together into the ditch; so, when the heretic baptizes a heretic, they fall together into death. And therefore a heretic must be baptized and made alive, lest we who are alive should hold communion with the dead. ("The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 567)

200-258 AD CARTHAGE Nemesianus of Thubunae said: That the baptism which heretics and schismatics bestow is not the true one, is everywhere declared in the Holy Scriptures, since their very leading men are false Christs and false prophets, as the Lord says by Solomon: 'He who trusteth in that which is false. he feedeth the winds...' And in the Gospel our Lord Jesus Christ spoke with His divine voice, saying, 'Except a man be born again of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.' This is the Spirit which from the beginning was borne over the waters; for neither can the Spirit operate without the water, nor the water without the Spirit." ("The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 566.)

200-258 AD CYPRIAN "But as often as water is named alone in the Holy Scriptures, baptism is referred to, as we see intimated in Isaiah: 'Remember not,' says he, 'the former things, and consider not the things of old. Behold, I will do a new thing, which shall now spring forth; and ye shall know it. I will even make a way in the wilderness, and rivers in the dry place, to give drink to my elected people, my people whom I have purchased, that they might show forth my praise.' There God foretold by the prophet, that among the nations, in places which previously had been dry, rivers should afterwards flow plenteously, and should provide water for the elected people of God, that is, for those who were made sons of God by the generation of baptism.... Christ... cries and says, 'If any man thirst, let him come and drink. He that believeth on me, as the Scripture saith, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water.' And that it might be more evident that the Lord is speaking there, not of the cup, but of baptism, the Scripture adds, saying, 'But this spake He of the Spirit, which they that believe on Him should receive.' For by baptism the Holy Spirit is received... As also, in another place, the Lord speaks to the Samaritan woman, saying, 'Whosoever drinketh of this water shall thirst again; but whosoever drinketh of the water that I shall give him, shall not thirst for ever.' By which is also signified the very baptism of saving water, which indeed is once received, and is not again repeated.." (Cyprian, "The Epistles of Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 360)

200-258 AD CYPRIAN "But if the baptism of heretics can have the regeneration of the second birth, those who are baptized among them must be counted not heretics, but children of God. For the second birth, which occurs in baptism, begets sons of God." (Cyprian, "The Epistles of Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 393)

200-258 AD CYPRIAN "But what a thing it is, to assert and contend that they who are not born in the Church can be the sons of God! For the blessed apostle sets forth and proves that baptism is that wherein the old man dies and the new man is born, saying, 'He saved us by the washing of regeneration.' But if regeneration is in the washing, that is, in baptism, how can heresy, which is not the spouse of Christ, generate sons to God by Christ? For it is the Church alone which, conjoined and united with Christ, spiritually bears sons; as the same apostle again says, 'Christ loved the Church, and gave Himself for it, that He might sanctify it, cleansing it with the washing of water.' If, then, she is the beloved and spouse who alone is sanctified by Christ, and alone is cleansed by His washing, it is manifest that heresy, which is not the spouse of Christ, nor can be cleansed nor sanctified by His washing, cannot bear sons to God." (Cyprian, "The Epistles of Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 388)

200-258 AD CYPRIAN "For he who has been sanctified, his sins being put away in baptism, and has been spiritually re-formed into a new man, has become fitted for receiving the Holy Spirit; since the apostle says, 'As many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.' (Cyprian, "The Epistles of Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 387-388)

200-258 AD CYPRIAN "Moreover, Peter himself... has commanded and warned us that we cannot be saved, except by the one only baptism of one Church. 'In the ark,' says he, 'of Noah, few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water, as also baptism shall in like manner save you.' In how short and spiritual a summary has he set forth the sacrament of unity! For as, in that baptism of the world in which its ancient iniquity was purged away, he who was not in the ark of Noah could not be saved by water, so neither can he appear to be saved by baptism who has not been baptized in the Church which is established in the unity of the Lord according to the sacrament of the one ark. (Cyprian, "The Epistles of Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 389)

200-258 AD CYPRIAN "Peter... said, 'In the ark of Noah, few, that is, eight souls, were saved by water; the like figure whereunto even baptism shall save you;' proving and attesting that the one ark of Noah was a type of the one Church. If, then, in that baptism of the world thus expiated and purified, he who was not in the ark of Noah could be saved by water, he who is not in the Church to which alone baptism is granted, can also now be quickened [made alive] by baptism. Moreover, too, the Apostle Paul, more openly and clearly still manifesting this same thing, writes to the Ephesians, and says, 'Christ loved the Church, and gave Himself for it, that He might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water.'" (Cyprian, "The Epistles of Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 398)

200-258 AD CYPRIAN "Since, therefore, from the preaching and testimony of Christ Himself, the Father who sent must be first known, then afterwards Christ, who was sent, and there cannot be a hope of salvation except by knowing the two together; how, when God the Father is not known, nay, is even blasphemed, can they who among the heretics are said to be baptized in the name of Christ, be judged to have obtained the remission of sins?" (Cyprian, "The Epistles of Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 383.)

200-258 AD CYPRIAN "What then, say they, will become of those who, coming from the heretics, have been received without the baptism of the Church?... But they... should be baptized with the baptism of the Church, that they may obtain remission of sins, lest by the presumption of others they remain in their old error, and die without the completion of grace." (Cyprian, "The Epistles of Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 395)

200-258 AD CYPRIAN "Wherefore baptism cannot be common to us and to heretics, to whom neither God the Father, nor Christ the Son, nor the Holy Ghost, nor the faith, nor the Church itself, is common. And therefore it behooves those to be baptized who come from heresy to the Church, that so they who are prepared, in the lawful, and true, and only baptism of the holy Church, by divine regeneration, for the kingdom of God, may be born of both sacraments, because it is written, 'Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.'" (Cyprian, "The Epistles of Cyprian," Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 384)


JustAChristian

 

[Ian Day]

Please, no more !

Please, no more !

JustaChristian,

All you are showing is that water baptism was practised in the post-apostolic church, for reasons which reveal utter confusion.

200-258 AD CARTHAGE "Marcellus of Zama said: Since sins are not remitted saved in the baptism of the Church, he who does not baptize a heretic holds communion with a sinner." ("The Seventh Council of Carthage Under Cyprian,", Ante-Nicene Fathers, vol. 5, pg. 570)

So, if we baptize heretics we remit their sins.
And if we don't baptize heretics we hold communion with sinners. Most of us try not to baptize heretics.

It seems very clear that the title of this thread "The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to be Saved!" is completely vindicated. And has been a heresy for almost as long as there has been a church.

I believe water baptism is commanded by our Lord in the Great Commission. BUT I would rather identify with those who insist on baptism into Christ by the Holy Spirit as the true baptism, and do not practise water baptism, than with those who insist that water baptism is necessary for salvation.

 

[Ian Day]

Hope, Agape, & anyone else who thinks that the apostles who in error in their preaching at Pentecost,

A straightforward reading of Holy Scripture shows that the teaching of Scripture is Holy Spirit inspired & authoritative. We are NOT free to reject verses we don't like, or dismiss the preaching of the New Covenant preachers as "Old Covenant."

To suggest that Peter in his letters was acknowledging errors in teaching (as opposed to errors of behaviour recorded in Galatians) is to deny that Scripture is wholly true.

In particular:

[Hope]
But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 2 Pet. 3:8 (KJV)
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 2 Pet. 3:9 (KJV)

Peter includes himself in this statement and how realizes the promise was not received at Pentecost and warns the listeners to not be ignorant of it. This clearly was hard for them to understand for the Pentecostal experience was a Jewish nation expecting to receive the promise of the kingdom and the things pertaining to it.

Why did you not quote the Scripture IN CONTEXT ?

2Pe 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in [both] which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as [they were] from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.
10 But the day of the Lord will come as a thief in the night; in the which the heavens shall pass away with a great noise, and the elements shall melt with fervent heat, the earth also and the works that are therein shall be burned up.

The promise in question is the promise of Christ's coming. Peter is replying to the scoffers, questioning the promise of Christ's return in judgement. Even if his return is a millennium away, Christ will keep his promise. The reason for his timing is to save us his people, and bring us to repentance.

The scoffers will suffer judgement & perdition on the day of the Lord, when he comes again.

If you read the first chapter, you will see:

2 Pe 1:16 For we have not followed cunningly devised fables, when we made known unto you the power and coming of our Lord Jesus Christ, but were eyewitnesses of his majesty.
17 For he received from God the Father honour and glory, when there came such a voice to him from the excellent glory, This is my beloved Son, in whom I am well pleased.
18 And this voice which came from heaven we heard, when we were with him in the holy mount.
19 We have also a more sure word of prophecy; whereunto ye do well that ye take heed, as unto a light that shineth in a dark place, until the day dawn, and the day star arise in your hearts:
20 Knowing this first, that no prophecy of the scripture is of any private interpretation.
21 For the prophecy came not in old time by the will of man: but holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost.

If ever " holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost" it was on the Day of Pentecost.

 

[agape]

Hi Ian Day,

I would prefer you not addressing me if it is not a direct response to something I specifically stated. I have said nothing concerning the contents of your reply.

Thank you.

God bless you,
Agape

 

[HopeofGlory]

Ian,

You said:
A straightforward reading of Holy Scripture shows that the teaching of Scripture is Holy Spirit inspired & authoritative. We are NOT free to reject verses we don't like, or dismiss the preaching of the New Covenant preachers as "Old Covenant."

Reply:
You have not understood what I have said. The apostles spoke truth at Pentecost in the sense that God backed up the words completely and I don't reject any of the teachings. I believe sins were remitted when they obeyed in water baptism! That message is not effectual in this dispensation and is not true today. You on the other hand choose to retain this message as a sign of what we believe and that I reject as not scriptural and it was not taught as such at Pentecost.

You said:
To suggest that Peter in his letters was acknowledging errors in teaching (as opposed to errors of behaviour recorded in Galatians) is to deny that Scripture is wholly true.

Reply:
The errors as I said before were not errors at that time but Peter realizes they are errors now because of the NEW testament for remission of sins.

You said:
Why did you not quote the Scripture IN CONTEXT ?

Reply:
2Pe 3:1 This second epistle, beloved, I now write unto you; in [both] which I stir up your pure minds by way of remembrance:
2 That ye may be mindful of the words which were spoken before by the holy prophets, and of the commandment of us the apostles of the Lord and Saviour:
3 Knowing this first, that there shall come in the last days scoffers, walking after their own lusts,
4 And saying, Where is the promise of his coming? for since the fathers fell asleep, all things continue as [they were] from the beginning of the creation.
5 For this they willingly are ignorant of, that by the word of God the heavens were of old, and the earth standing out of the water and in the water:
6 Whereby the world that then was, being overflowed with water, perished:
7 But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.

Peter in the above is speaking to believers referring to scoffers who did not believe that Jesus was the promised Messiah that had already come. The context is clearly not the second coming.

Below Peter is introducing a new thought to those who believed the Messiah had already come but were ignorant of why the messiah did not set up the promised kingdom.

8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

These above verses refer to the promise Jesus made in Acts.....To whom also he showed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: Acts 1:3 (KJV)
And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. Acts 1:4 (KJV)
For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. Acts 1:5 (KJV)

You said:
The promise in question is the promise of Christ's coming. Peter is replying to the scoffers, questioning the promise of Christ's return in judgement. Even if his return is a millennium away, Christ will keep his promise. The reason for his timing is to save us his people, and bring us to repentance.

Reply:
You need to provide proof text where Jesus promised His scecond coming to Peter.

You said:
If ever " holy men of God spake [as they were] moved by the Holy Ghost" it was on the Day of Pentecost.

Reply:
Amen

 

[Ian Day]

Try understanding the New Testament literally !

Try understanding the New Testament literally !

Hope,

You do impose your own doctrine on Scripture, to distort its clear meaning.

My replies in bold.

[Hope]
Peter in the above [2 Peter 3:1-7] is speaking to believers referring to scoffers who did not believe that Jesus was the promised Messiah that had already come. The context is clearly not the second coming.

Verse 7 reads: But the heavens and the earth, which are now, by the same word are kept in store, reserved unto fire against the day of judgment and perdition of ungodly men.
The context is clearly the second coming.

Below Peter is introducing a new thought to those who believed the Messiah had already come but were ignorant of why the messiah did not set up the promised kingdom.

8 But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day [is] with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day.
9 The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance.

These above verses refer to the promise Jesus made in Acts.....To whom also he showed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: Acts 1:3 (KJV)
And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. Acts 1:4 (KJV)
For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. Acts 1:5 (KJV)

Those verses come in the middle of a passage speaking of the second coming, 7. ... the day of judgement .... 10 ... the day of the Lord,

You said:
The promise in question is the promise of Christ's coming. Peter is replying to the scoffers, questioning the promise of Christ's return in judgement. Even if his return is a millennium away, Christ will keep his promise. The reason for his timing is to save us his people, and bring us to repentance.

Reply:
You need to provide proof text where Jesus promised His scecond coming to Peter.

John 14:1 Let not your heart be troubled: ye believe in God, believe also in me.
2 In my Father's house are many mansions: if [it were] not [so], I would have told you. I go to prepare a place for you.
3 And if I go and prepare a place for you, I will come again, and receive you unto myself; that where I am, [there] ye may be also.

Acts 1:11 Which also said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? this same Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like manner as ye have seen him go into heaven.

2 Peter 3:13 Nevertheless we, according to his promise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth righteousness.

 

[rapt]

AMEN, Ian!

Abraham didn't seek any continuing country in this world; he called himself a pilgrim and a stranger, for he looked for a HEAVENLY city whose builder was God.

Jesus said "My Kingdom is NOT OF THIS WORLD".

Our hope is in heaven, not on this present earth, which is destined to melt with fervent heat at the second coming of Christ, when he comes in flaming fire to take vengeance on them that know not God, as well as upon those that obey not the gospel, (2Thes 1:7-10) but to be admired of all who have believed and obeyed it.

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; he that believeth not shall be damned". Mk 16:16

Peter was not mistaken at Pentacost, for he had JUST RECEIVED THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY GHOST. He may not have understood that that same gospel was to be taken to the gentiles yet, but his gospel was not wrong! He did not preach circumcision to anyone at Pentacost! (And when he got swayed into not eating with the Galatians because of FALSE BRETHREN, Paul rebuked him for his heresy, and he REPENTED OF IT.)

 

[HopeofGlory]

Ian,

The "promise" has always been the "kingdom" and that it would be set up at His "coming" not "second coming". The two clearly were understood as a single occurrence. The scriptures we are currently discussing are in reference to Peter explaining why the lord had not set up His Kingdom at His coming. Abraham, Peter and all those at Pentecost clearly looked for the kingdom to be set up on the earth of which they did not receive and this kingdom is New Jerusalem which is made without hands. If I understand your theology you believe the kingdom they looked for was set up and that it was Spiritual and they understood it so you reject any interpretation of scriptures as to the kingdom being taken from them and given to the Gentiles.

Forgive me if I am wrong and if so will you briefly explain your kingdom theology.

Also I would like you to explain to me how those at Pentecost entered into the Spiritual kingdom as related to what you must believe and what operation of God brought them in.
Please bear in mind that if you use any scripture after Pentecost I may reject because of dispensations unless it relates to Pentecost.

Thanks from your brother in Christ.

Craig

 

[rapt]

"Please bear in mind that if you use any scripture after Pentecost I may reject (them) because of dispensations..."

He need say nothing more. I rest the case of my signature:

 

[rapt]

If ye were Abraham's seed, ye would do the works of Abraham, but now ye seek to kill me, a man that has told you the truth: this did not Abraham.

Ye do the works of your father.



2 Timothy 3
16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness


Revelation 22
18
For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, If any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:
19
And if any man shall take away from the words of the book of this prophecy, God shall take away his part out of the book of life, and out of the holy city, and from the things which are written in this book.

So much for rejecting the word of Scripture!

 

[JustAChristian]

Re: Please, no more !

Re: Please, no more !

JustaChristian,

All you are showing is that water baptism was practised in the post-apostolic church, for reasons which reveal utter confusion.

So, if we baptize heretics we remit their sins.
And if we don't baptize heretics we hold communion with sinners. Most of us try not to baptize heretics.

It seems very clear that the title of this thread "The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to be Saved!" is completely vindicated. And has been a heresy for almost as long as there has been a church.

I believe water baptism is commanded by our Lord in the Great Commission. BUT I would rather identify with those who insist on baptism into Christ by the Holy Spirit as the true baptism, and do not practise water baptism, than with those who insist that water baptism is necessary for salvation.

I admit, there was some confusion and misuse of the baptismal system. It even came to sprinkling and pouring as well as immersion in the modern century. Does this discount the truth of baptism though? I hardly think it does. Baptism by its Greek definition tells us that it is a "dipping" down under and NOT sprinkling onto or pouring over. The correct method affirms the correctness of the believer. Any other method is done with speculation or subjection. Peter said in his general epistle that being water baptized is a saving action. (1 Peter 3:20-21). If you ask me to explained it, I could only say that Jesus Christ commanded it, the apostles preached and faithful candidates received it. The Holy Spirit can on all flesh (Joel 2:28) when the Jewish generation (Apostles) and the Gentile generation (Cornelius) constituting "all flesh" were baptized. Were they saved by Holy Spirit baptism? No, for Peter was to preach to the household of Cornelius words whereby him and his household were to be saved (Acts 11:14). So, Holy Spirit baptism was only for a sign. He never was for the cleansing one of sins. We are cleansed of sins when we obey the truth (1 Peter 1:22).

I want relate any more of the ante-Nicene fathers statements on baptism. I believe you really see the futility of your conclusion. As it was in the first century, so is it today "...he that believes and is immersed (baptized KJV) shall be saved" (Mark 16:16).

JustAChristian

 

[rapt]

Ian, if you said this:

It seems very clear that the title of this thread "The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to be Saved!" is completely vindicated. And has been a heresy for almost as long as there has been a church.

I believe water baptism is commanded by our Lord in the Great Commission. BUT I would rather identify with those who insist on baptism into Christ by the Holy Spirit as the true baptism, and do not practise water baptism, than with those who insist that water baptism is necessary for salvation.

...then you show a dangerously flagrant willingness to side with those who reject the commandment of Jesus Christ.

1 John 2
4
He that saith, I know him, and keepeth not his commandments, is a liar, and the truth is not in him.
5
But whoso keepeth his word, in him verily is the love of God perfected: hereby know we that we are in him.
6
He that saith he abideth in him ought himself also so to walk, even as he walked.

...Jesus walked in obedience to His Father, being baptized of John. If we abide in Christ, we must also do as He did. If we say we know him, but refuse to keep His commandments, or side with those who reject them, opposing them, we are liars in whom the truth does not abide. Liars, the scripture warns, have no part in the Kingdom of God, but rather will go to the lake.

The only "heretics" that insist on baptism as a necessary act for salvation would be those who redefine baptism by their rejection of immersion, or that neglect the words of Christ, who said "he that BELEIVETH AND is baptized shall be saved; he that believeth not shall be damned". Baptism minus faith can't save anyone, and neither will disobedience disguised as submission, such as is the case in sprinkling or pouring.

Remember how King Saul said to Samuel, "I have kept the commandment of the Lord" when he had not done what God said to do? Even so those that suppose they have obeyed the command of Christ when they get sprinkled or poured, when scripture says they are commanded to be baptized deceive themselves, because baptism is nothing short of immersion. Also all who deny that anyone even NEEDS to obey the commandment to be baptized to be saved are rank heretics.

 

[Ian Day]

JustaChristian,

My replies in BOLD.

[Just]
I admit, there was some confusion and misuse of the baptismal system. It even came to sprinkling and pouring as well as immersion in the modern century. Does this discount the truth of baptism though? I hardly think it does.

Baptism by its Greek definition tells us that it is a "dipping" down under and sprinkling onto or pouring over. sic

VINE: "to baptize," primarily a frequentative form of bapto, "to dip," was used among the Greeks to signify the dyeing of a garment, or the drawing of water by dipping a vessel into another, etc. Plutarchus uses it of the drawing of wine by dipping the cup into the bowl (Alexis, 67) and Plato, metaphorically, of being overwhelmed with questions (Euthydemus, 277 D).

Nicander says that in order to make a pickle, the vegetable should first be 'dipped' (bapto) into boiling water and then 'baptised' (baptizo) in the vinegar solution. Both verbs concern the immersing of vegetables in a solution. But the first is temporary. The second, the act of baptising the vegetable, produces a permanent change.
When used in the New Testament, this word more often refers to our union and identification with Christ than to our water baptism. e.g.

Mark 16:16. 'He that believes and is baptised shall be saved'.
Christ is saying that mere intellectual assent is not enough. There must be a union with him, a real change, like the vegetable to the pickle!
Bible Study Magazine, James Montgomery Boice, May 1989.

Why do you insist on the Greek understanding of Baptism? What we need is the Hebrew understanding, and we read that in Hebrews 9. Various BAPTISMS. Various sprinklings!


The correct method affirms the correctness of the believer.

RUBBISH. Does God care whether those who have repented and turned to God with faith in the Christ are then dipped, sprinkled or submerged ?

It is the righteousness of Christ that secures our salvation, not the technicality of the mode of baptism.

Any other method is done with speculation or subjection. Peter said in his general epistle that being water baptized is a saving action. (1 Peter 3:20-21). If you ask me to explained it, I could only say that Jesus Christ commanded it, the apostles preached and faithful candidates received it. The Holy Spirit can on all flesh (Joel 2:28) when the Jewish generation (Apostles) and the Gentile generation (Cornelius) constituting "all flesh" were baptized. Were they saved by Holy Spirit baptism? No, for Peter was to preach to the household of Cornelius words whereby him and his household were to be saved (Acts 11:14). So, Holy Spirit baptism was only for a sign.

Water baptism is a sign of true Holy Spirit baptism into CHRIST.
You've got it all backwards.
You'll be telling me next that the cross was only a sign of the passover lamb sacrifice.

He never was for the cleansing one of sins. We are cleansed of sins when we obey the truth (1 Peter 1:22).

Cleansing is the work of the Holy Spirit:
Titus 3:5 Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
6 Which he shed on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Saviour;

& Peter says:
1Pe 1:2 Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ: Grace unto you, and peace, be multiplied.

Note there also that sprinkling of blood is the significance of baptism.

 

[Freak]

Again allow me to remind you that the focus should be on Jesus not on an act involving water. Jesus Saves! Period! Anything more is heresy pure and simple.

After salvation one needs to be water baptized as a testimony of ones new life in Christ! But this water however is just that water. It's foolish to think water is somehow greater than the Blood of Jesus which cleanses us from all sin. The focus needs to be on Jesus not on baptism!

I have noticed those who believe water baptism is necessary for salvation focus more on the water then our living Lord Jesus. This is shameful.