ECT Why Was Paul Baptized With Water?

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
I've been wanting to ask you about this but didn't want to bog down the discussion. Since the other point is at a stale mate, I'm curious what is your understanding about this.




When do you believe Paul got the details about the doctrine of grace especially concerning baptism?

Gradually over the course of the rest of his life and ministry.

As far as baptism goes, it was nearer the beginning of his ministry, around the time he baptized Crispus, Gaius, and the house of Stephanas.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
I don't understand this comment. It sounds like to me what you're saying is that everything Paul preached and wrote is not the gospel of grace. Is that correct?

No. I'm simply saying that Paul didn't receive everything at once that he taught in his letters.
 

turbosixx

New member
No. I'm simply saying that Paul didn't receive everything at once that he taught in his letters.

Ok, I can kinda understand that in that Paul would later write to them to expound upon what he taught/did . It sounds like to me you're saying that Paul would later write to the people he preached to and the people he baptized to tell them that what he preached/did wasn't the gospel of grace. Is that correct?
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Ok, I can kinda understand that in that Paul would later write to them to expound upon what he taught/did. It sounds like to me you're saying that Paul would later write to the people he preached to

You were fine up to this point.

and the people he baptized

The only people that we know he baptised were Crispus, Gaius, and the house of Stephanus.

to tell them that what he preached/did wasn't the gospel of grace. Is that correct?

No. You don't seem to be grasping the concept of progressive revelation.

Just because something in Paul's gospel was not yet revealed does not mean that when it is it overwrites something that was said previously, nor does it mean that what was said previously was wrong.
 

turbosixx

New member
The only people that we know he baptised were Crispus, Gaius, and the house of Stephanus.

I'm trying to understand from your viewpoint but it's confusing. Let's take Crispus.
8 Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in the Lord, together with his entire household. And many of the Corinthians hearing Paul believed and were baptized.

What did they hear to believe Paul, the gospel of grace? If so, why did it include baptism? Wouldn't that be a perversion of the truth?
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
I'm trying to understand from your viewpoint but it's confusing. Let's take Crispus.
8 Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed in the Lord, together with his entire household. And many of the Corinthians hearing Paul believed and were baptized.

What did they hear to believe Paul, the gospel of grace? If so, why did it include baptism? Wouldn't that be a perversion of the truth?

I see no water in that verse.

Because there is now only one baptism, and it doesn't use water.

I don't see Paul doing the baptising.

But when the kindness and the love of God our Savior toward man appeared,not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit,whom He poured out on us abundantly through Jesus Christ our Savior,that having been justified by His grace we should become heirs according to the hope of eternal life. - Titus 3:4-7 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Titus3:4-7&version=NKJV
 

turbosixx

New member
I don't see Paul doing the baptising.

Paul did do the baptizing in that verse. He tells us so in 1 Cor. 1:14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius Acts 18:8 is where he baptized Crispus.

So can you see my problem? I'm to accept that Paul, in the middle of his second journey, is preaching the gospel of grace and then baptizing the believers which is not part of the gospel of grace. That is perverting the gospel just as he says in Galatians when some wanted to circumcise the believers.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Paul did do the baptizing in that verse.

Sorry, you need to read the verse again:

Then Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his household. And many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed and were baptized. - Acts 18:8 http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Acts18:8&version=NKJV

He tells us so in 1 Cor. 1:14 I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius Acts 18:8 is where he baptized Crispus.

"Many of the Corinthians" is not Crispus.

So can you see my problem?

I see your problem quite clearly.

You're reading something into the text that isn't there.

I'm to accept that Paul, in the middle of his second journey, is preaching the gospel of grace and then baptizing the believers which is not part of the gospel of grace. That is perverting the gospel just as he says in Galatians when some wanted to circumcise the believers.

You can accept what you want. But 1 Corinthians says that Paul only baptized Crispus, Gaius, and the household of Stephanas.

There is no reference to any others, especially not "many of the Corinthians."

The only one perverting the gospel of grace here is you.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Here you say Paul baptized Crispus. How can you say Crispus hearing Paul preach, believed and wasn't baptized by Paul even though Paul said he did? Please clarify.
Read my post again, because now you're accusing me of saying something I didn't say.

Paul baptized Crispus, Gaius, and the household of Stephanas.

He did not baptize anyone else that he could recall.

Which means he DID NOT baptize the "many of the Corinthians" in Acts 18:8.
 

turbosixx

New member
Read my post again, because now you're accusing me of saying something I didn't say.

Paul baptized Crispus, Gaius, and the household of Stephanas.

He did not baptize anyone else that he could recall.

Which means he DID NOT baptize the "many of the Corinthians" in Acts 18:8.

Just wanted to get it straight. I still don't understand what type of baptism Crispus received from Paul if Paul did the baptizing.
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
Just wanted to get it straight. I still don't understand what type of baptism Crispus received from Paul if Paul did the baptizing.
As far as I was aware, the text does not specify how Crispus was baptized, just that he was.
 

Right Divider

Body part
I wouldn't presume either, because scripture does not specify.
So many people, especially those that are totally obsessed with the water ceremony, cannot even read the word "baptism" (or it's derivatives) without seeing water. Even though there are SO many different types of baptisms in the Bible. The majority of which are NOT water.
 

Clete

Truth Smacker
Silver Subscriber
I've been wanting to ask you about this but didn't want to bog down the discussion. Since the other point is at a stale mate, I'm curious what is your understanding about this.




When do you believe Paul got the details about the doctrine of grace especially concerning baptism?

Any answer as to the timing beyond, "Shortly after his conversion.", would be speculation.

What we know is that Paul's gospel was not given to him by man, nor was he taught it but that it was given to him by direct divine revelation (Gal. 1:12). We know that it was different than that understood and taught by the Twelve and that Paul was sent, again by divine revelation (Gal. 2:2), to Jerusalem specifically for the purpose of explaining his gospel to them which they then accepted as being from God and agreed with him that they should minister to Israel while he would go to everyone else (i.e. the Gentiles) (Gal. 2:6-9).

Now, even that much is something of an over simplification of things because Paul went first to the Jew and did not go exclusively to the Gentiles until Acts 13 and so there was clearly a process that God was bringing Paul through during the first years of his ministry. By the end of which, things like circumcision, baptisms, tongues, miracles, prophesies, etc, all of which have to do with the flesh, had faded away, crossing from the Law to Love. (I Cor. 13)



What do you think this passgae means? What baptism is it refering to?

Ephesians 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.​
 

JudgeRightly

裁判官が正しく判断する
Staff member
Administrator
Super Moderator
Gold Subscriber
I can see Paul baptizing with water but not with the Holy Spirit. Wouldn't that make it water?

"I can see {A} but not {B}. Wouldn't that make it {A}?"

No, it wouldn't.

That's called an argument from incredulity, a type of informal logical fallacy.
 

turbosixx

New member
What do you think this passgae means? What baptism is it refering to?

Ephesians 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit, just as you were called in one hope of your calling; 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism; 6 one God and Father of all, who is above all, and through all, and in you all.​

Good question. I'm not being funny but I believe it means just what it says, one baptism. I believe that one baptism is water. Here is one reason why.

The disciples in Ephesus were converted by Apollos, Acts 18:24-28. He taught accurately Jesus with ONE exception, baptism. He hadn't learned of baptism in the name of Jesus but only knew John's baptism. All baptisms are not the same. Acts 19:1-6,When Paul comes into town he asks these disciples if they received the Holy Spirit (I understand HS gifts) when they believed, they said no. He asks them "into what then were you baptized?" If the Holy Spirit does the baptizing upon belief, Paul would not have asked believers this question.

He does not preach the gospel but simply explains the baptism of John and then baptizes them again, this time in the name of Jesus. Only after doing so does he give them the Holy Spirit. We see this exact same thing in Acts 8, baptized in the name of Jesus then laying of hands to receive the Holy Spirit.
8:4 Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, 15 who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit.

If the ONE baptism is by the HS, then Paul would not have needed to baptize these men again, this time in the name of Jesus.
 

Right Divider

Body part
Good question. I'm not being funny but I believe it means just what it says, one baptism. I believe that one baptism is water. Here is one reason why.

The disciples in Ephesus were converted by Apollos, Acts 18:24-28. He taught accurately Jesus with ONE exception, baptism. He hadn't learned of baptism in the name of Jesus but only knew John's baptism. All baptisms are not the same. Acts 19:1-6,When Paul comes into town he asks these disciples if they received the Holy Spirit (I understand HS gifts) when they believed, they said no. He asks them "into what then were you baptized?" If the Holy Spirit does the baptizing upon belief, Paul would not have asked believers this question.

He does not preach the gospel but simply explains the baptism of John and then baptizes them again, this time in the name of Jesus. Only after doing so does he give them the Holy Spirit. We see this exact same thing in Acts 8, baptized in the name of Jesus then laying of hands to receive the Holy Spirit.
8:4 Now when the apostles at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent to them Peter and John, 15 who came down and prayed for them that they might receive the Holy Spirit, 16 for he had not yet fallen on any of them, but they had only been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 17 Then they laid their hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit.

If the ONE baptism is by the HS, then Paul would not have needed to baptize these men again, this time in the name of Jesus.
Just so sadly wrong.... since you mash all of God's plans together, you come out with a complete mess.

The ONE baptism for the body of Christ is baptism INTO the body of Christ.... NO WATER.

1Co 12:12-13 KJV For as the body is one, and hath many members, and all the members of that one body, being many, are one body: so also is Christ. (13) For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

THAT is the ONE baptism that Paul is talking about.
 
Top