Cloven tongues like as of fire

[Hugh_Flower]

1 hour ago, Jim_Alaska said:

So then, by saying that "The Nation of Israel didn’t crucify Jesus Christ and reject him yet", are you then saying that after this happened people had to be baptized to be saved?

Saved as a nation, for the Kingdom of Heaven. I am not talking about being born again as Christians, as salvation to heaven.

[Jim_Alaska]

OK Hugh, show me scripture that says that Israel has to be baptized to be saved as a nation for the Kingdom of Heaven.

[Hugh_Flower]

And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Mat 3:3  For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

Mat 3:4  And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.

Mat 3:5  Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,

Mat 3:6  And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.

Mat 4:17  From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand

Edited November 11, 2021 by Hugh_Flower

[BrotherTony]

34 minutes ago, Hugh_Flower said:

And saying, Repent ye: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.

Mat 3:3  For this is he that was spoken of by the prophet Esaias, saying, The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

Mat 3:4  And the same John had his raiment of camel's hair, and a leathern girdle about his loins; and his meat was locusts and wild honey.

Mat 3:5  Then went out to him Jerusalem, and all Judaea, and all the region round about Jordan,

Mat 3:6  And were baptized of him in Jordan, confessing their sins.

Mat 4:17  From that time Jesus began to preach, and to say, Repent: for the kingdom of heaven is at hand

That is PRE-CRUCIFIXION! It has nothing to do with salvation after Christ was crucified, buried, and risen...and I think it's pretty clear when the Bible says there is no salvation through any other, and Christ says "no man cometh to the father but by me." Baptism doesn't have anything to do with it Johns baptism was a precursor, a forerunner to what the apostles preached.

[Jim_Alaska]

Hugh, they were not baptized to be saved, they were baptized because they were saved. Please notice that the preaching of John said, "repent and be baptized". The result of his preaching was all those that did repent, which incidentally were the same people that Jesus chose to form His church.

But the point you are missing is that no one in the Bible, in any age, had to be baptized to be saved, whether they were individuals or as a nation.

I don't know where you learned this stuff, but it is not Baptist at all and certainly not Scriptural. You can't just say "stuff" and make it up as you go. No Scripture teaches baptism for salvation. Salvation is completely by Grace, through Faith, with nothing added or subtracted.

[Hugh_Flower]

I’m not saying they need to be baptized to be saved, where have I said that. 
Where I said “saved as a nation” I’m talking about the literal nation of Israel becoming the Kingdom of Heaven. Not eternal life. As in, the repentance of the nation.

Edited November 11, 2021 by Hugh_Flower

[wretched]

Hold up friends, The passage quoted above from Matthew chapter 3 was pre-Crucifixion but not the command to baptize those whom repent and turn back to God through His Son.  That is absolutely what our Lord has commanded us to do after His Resurrection and He did not limit it to any group when He said "all nations" and "all the world". Nowhere does the Lord state it is optional or at any man's discretion. I am not agreeing with anyone in this thread (it is hard to tell what is really being said) but don't let the ideas that you were specifically taught make God's Word of none effect either. It is clear in the NT that water baptism "in itself" does not regenerate but it still remains that God commanded it for a reason and the only hint He gave was when He Himself was baptized of John; that it was to "fulfill all righteousness". A demonstration to others of repentance initially is what should be garnered from it. Water baptism was also practiced by those whom carried on Christ's Life and Message throughout the NT Epistles after this.

The idea that water baptism is unnecessary or meaningless for believers is just as much folly as those whom claim it "in itself" saves. 

https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Matthew-28-19/

https://www.kingjamesbibleonline.org/Mark-16-16/

[Hugh_Flower]

2 hours ago, BrotherTony said:

That is PRE-CRUCIFIXION! It has nothing to do with salvation after Christ was crucified, buried, and risen...and I think it's pretty clear when the Bible says there is no salvation through any other, and Christ says "no man cometh to the father but by me." Baptism doesn't have anything to do with it Johns baptism was a precursor, a forerunner to what the apostles preached.

Yes, and I’m saying in the early acts the only baptism they knew of was John’s, not until Paul was saved did the understanding of baptism change.

[Jerry]

27 minutes ago, Hugh_Flower said:

Yes, and I’m saying in the early acts the only baptism they knew of was John’s, not until Paul was saved did the understanding of baptism change.

Water baptism was never part of salvation - before or after the cross. It was the first step of obedience after salvation, a testimony of their salvation, or as John the Baptist stated, the fruits of repentance. In a culture where you were ostracized by the Pharisees and other religious leaders for standing for the truth (agreeing with the OT prophets, siding with John and Jesus), it was a public testimony of what they believed and where they stood.

To restate, baptism has never played a part in someone becoming saved in any way, shape or form. It was the first step of obedience after salvation, the testimony of their faith in the Messiah, and as Paul later stated it was an identification with Christ's death, burial, and resurrection; it pictured death to the old life and resurrection to new life.

[Hugh_Flower]

50 minutes ago, Jerry said:

Water baptism was never part of salvation - before or after the cross. It was the first step of obedience after salvation, a testimony of their salvation, or as John the Baptist stated, the fruits of repentance. In a culture where you were ostracized by the Pharisees and other religious leaders for standing for the truth (agreeing with the OT prophets, siding with John and Jesus), it was a public testimony of what they believed and where they stood.

To restate, baptism has never played a part in someone becoming saved in any way, shape or form. It was the first step of obedience after salvation, the testimony of their faith in the Messiah, and as Paul later stated it was an identification with Christ's death, burial, and resurrection; it pictured death to the old life and resurrection to new life.

Yeah man, we aren’t disagreeing with what you have stated here.

[BrotherTony]

2 hours ago, Hugh_Flower said:

Yes, and I’m saying in the early acts the only baptism they knew of was John’s, not until Paul was saved did the understanding of baptism change.

Can you provide proof tht that was when it changed? Jesus told the disciples to go into all the world and preach the gospel and to baptize in the name of the father, son and the Holy Ghost! Something's not right with your statement.

[Hugh_Flower]

1 hour ago, BrotherTony said:

Can you provide proof tht that was when it changed? Jesus told the disciples to go into all the world and preach the gospel and to baptize in the name of the father, son and the Holy Ghost! Something's not right with your statement.

Acts 10:45 shows they didn’t have the complete understanding of baptism at this time. 

[BrotherTony]

31 minutes ago, Hugh_Flower said:

Acts 10:45 shows they didn’t have the complete understanding of baptism at this time. 

Seems to me that they didn't have a full understanding of the outpouring of the Holy Spirit onto the Gentiles...I'm pretty sure that they understood baptism...

[Jim_Alaska]

4 hours ago, Hugh_Flower said:

Acts 10:45 shows they didn’t have the complete understanding of baptism at this time. 

This verse has nothing to do with baptism at all. I am afraid that you are so confused by what you believe or have been taught that neither you, or anyone replying to you, can reply without confusion.

Israel does not become The Kingdom of God, as you indicated above. You waffle hopefully between water baptism and what you call national baptism, of which there is no such thing.

This thread has become hopelessly mired down in confusion.How about we try this: Does a person have to be baptized to be saved? A simple yes or no will suffice, no more confusion.

[Jim_Alaska]

 

8 hours ago, wretched said:

The idea that water baptism is unnecessary or meaningless for believers is just as much folly as those whom claim it "in itself" saves. 

I don't think anyone has said or indicated that baptism was unnecessary or meaningless.