What takes place during Baptism?

[Luke Oakes]

I am struggling with the sacrament of Baptism. Is it just symbolism (on one extreme) or is it needed for salvation (the other extreme). Is baptism God’s preferred way to impart the Holy Spirit into our lives? Knowing we can’t but God in a box, I am not asking about the only way, but rather if it His preferred way. Please use scripture to back up your statements and beliefs.

[Luke Oakes]

No replies yet!! Does anyone have an opinion?

[Jerry Frank]

Patience. Sometimes it takes awhile to think through what we want to say, check the scriptures, etc. - especially on a weighty subject such as this.

[says the guy with a Lutheran background who may say something others in this forum may object to] :)


Jerry

[Brad Mercer]

Hey, Jerry!

Not to hijack what promises to be a good thread, but I see that you're from Alberta. Did you know that, although the feeling might not be mutual, Texas likes Alberta? We figure any place with oil and a big rodeo and that occasionally speaks poorly of those eastern elitists can't be all bad. :basic03

Brad

P.S. Good question, Luke. A good answer just takes more thought than my silly rabbit trail here did. Good, thought-provoking answers will come though.

Patience. Sometimes it takes awhile to think through what we want to say, check the scriptures, etc. - especially on a weighty subject such as this.

[says the guy with a Lutheran background who may say something others in this forum may object to] :)


Jerry

[Randy Wise]

I am struggling with the sacrament of Baptism. Is it just symbolism (on one extreme) or is it needed for salvation (the other extreme). Is baptism God’s preferred way to impart the Holy Spirit into our lives? Knowing we can’t but God in a box, I am not asking about the only way, but rather if it His preferred way. Please use scripture to back up your statements and beliefs.

Hi Luke, I was baptized as a baby. (Lutheran) So I don't see that act as a salvation act as I was much older, late teens when I asked for Gods Holy Spirit and made a commitment to live like a believer. So I don't think its the water, but a persons heart and commitment in truth to a loving God that God is seeking. Now both those conditions may come together at one time as in the Book of Acts. That being said the water part I see as optional. My earlier experiences I always believed and prayed to the Lord and felt God was around, but I never knew His presence inside my being as I do now. One other thing was I never felt the presence of demons either until after I was born again. That was something that scared me at first. I feel a little awkward writing about these things but I can't be alone in this.
Randy

[G R 'Scott' Cundiff]

Well, I'm pretty much plain vanilla Wesleyan when it comes to baptism. That is, I think it is a means of grace -- a way in which God imparts his grace into my life. It is a sacrament -- something common that produces uncommon results in my life.

[Mike Schutz]

What takes place during baptism?

We get wet!

I'm not trying to be a smart aleck, but I think of baptism in much the same manner as a wedding:

It is a public declaration of an internal reality. That being said, it is so rich in symbolism that it becomes a touchstone for who we say we are. We can look back on it and say, "I did that, and I said that, in front of all of those people. So I am going to keep my word!"

Baptism can also be one of those moments when God incarnates reality in such an amazing way that it truly changes us. That makes it similar to the Eucharist for me. Somedays, Communion is a memorial - just bread and juice. Sorry about that, but it just is for me. Other days - it is the Body and the Blood. Some days its ritual, other days its life-changing.

That may not be great theology, and I wouldn't answer that way to a Credentials Board. But then, no one pays attention to what anyone says on NazNet.. Or do they? :rolleyes:

[Scott Daniels]

The creation is formed out of the waters of chaos (Gen. 1).

Slaves become the people of God as they pass through the waters of the Red Sea (Exodus 14).

The wanderers become people of the promised land as they pass through the waters of the Jordan (Joshua 3).

John the Baptism calls Israel to come out and repent of their life lived caught up in the empire of Rome and once again become the people of covenant established in the Jordan (Matthew 3; Luke 3, etc.).

Jesus participates in that identification with God's renewed people (Matthew 3, Luke 3, etc. again).

Jesus calls us to continue that baptism (i.e. Matthew 28 and other texts).

Paul identifies baptism with the believers participation in the death and resurrection of Christ (see Romans 6).

I am convinced that the whole concept of baptism has to do with identification with the people of God. Most of our questions come because we have lost the corporate understanding of salvation that the scripture is immersed in. We are saved as we identify ourselves with the people who are being saved.

Baptism is a symbol in as much as we are publicly declaring our identification with Christ and with the people of Christ, but it is also sacramental in that it is a mysterious means of grace that bodily enacts our putting to death the dominion of sin and bringing to life the dominion of the resurrected one.

In my mind, asking the question, "Do we have to be baptized to be saved?" is sort of like asking, "Do we have to have a wedding ceremony in order to be married?" I suppose we don't have to keep having marriage ceremonies in order to be married. If it weren't for civil laws we could just decide in our hearts to be married and be done with it. However, we realize that there is something spiritually and communally significant to participating bodily and publically in the declaration of our intentions to belong permanently to another person in marriage.

In the same way that at the end of a marriage ceremony the bride and groom have a new identity: "Let me introduce, Mr. and Mrs..."; so too in baptism we go home with the inner assurance and the public declaration that our old life has been put to death and our new life (as a member of God's people) has been enacted. "Let me introduce, the new Luke Oakes, child of God, heir of the Kingdom."

I suppose we could do without baptism (we probably should be careful to impose anything legalistically in addition to Christ [i.e. circumcision]), but why would we want to?

[Laurie Florence]

Baptism is an outward public statement of something that has happened inside a person. In Acts people seem to have the Holy Spirit come upon them, and as a result of this they decide to seek baptism by water. The way I understand it, you can soak a person with water until they are dripping wet, but only the Holy Spirit can do the real work in a person's heart, and lead them to Jesus and salvation.

[Edith K. Thurmond]

I am convinced that the whole concept of baptism has to do with identification with the people of God. Most of our questions come because we have lost the corporate understanding of salvation that the scripture is immersed in. We are saved as we identify ourselves with the people who are being saved.



Thanks very much for your excellent post. This reader is thankful for the many wonderful contributions that you make.

Lenten (and Seder) blessings,

[Jeremy D. Scott]

I second what a whole lot of people have already said.

I also see it as having a corporate/communal element to it. To come before the whole of the community and make the statement implies the community's reception. You may know that Lent was originally a time of preparation for the whole community, but also specifically for those who would be baptized into the Christian community ("the Church"), perhaps on Easter Sunday.

So, I see one aspect of baptism as an entrance into the Christian community.

This is why my wife and I had our first child baptized as an infant and will have our 8 week old twin daughters baptized in a couple of weeks.

I'm not sure the question of necessity is relevant or of eternal importance.

[Dale Cozby]

Uh...What Scott Daniels said.

Man, your good. You should teach...:p

[Mike Schutz]

The creation is formed out of the waters of chaos (Gen. 1).

Slaves become the people of God as they pass through the waters of the Red Sea (Exodus 14).

The wanderers become people of the promised land as they pass through the waters of the Jordan (Joshua 3).

John the Baptism calls Israel to come out and repent of their life lived caught up in the empire of Rome and once again become the people of covenant established in the Jordan (Matthew 3; Luke 3, etc.).

Jesus participates in that identification with God's renewed people (Matthew 3, Luke 3, etc. again).

Jesus calls us to continue that baptism (i.e. Matthew 28 and other texts).

Paul identifies baptism with the believers participation in the death and resurrection of Christ (see Romans 6).

I am convinced that the whole concept of baptism has to do with identification with the people of God. Most of our questions come because we have lost the corporate understanding of salvation that the scripture is immersed in. We are saved as we identify ourselves with the people who are being saved.

Baptism is a symbol in as much as we are publicly declaring our identification with Christ and with the people of Christ, but it is also sacramental in that it is a mysterious means of grace that bodily enacts our putting to death the dominion of sin and bringing to life the dominion of the resurrected one.

In my mind, asking the question, "Do we have to be baptized to be saved?" is sort of like asking, "Do we have to have a wedding ceremony in order to be married?" I suppose we don't have to keep having marriage ceremonies in order to be married. If it weren't for civil laws we could just decide in our hearts to be married and be done with it. However, we realize that there is something spiritually and communally significant to participating bodily and publically in the declaration of our intentions to belong permanently to another person in marriage.

In the same way that at the end of a marriage ceremony the bride and groom have a new identity: "Let me introduce, Mr. and Mrs..."; so too in baptism we go home with the inner assurance and the public declaration that our old life has been put to death and our new life (as a member of God's people) has been enacted. "Let me introduce, the new Luke Oakes, child of God, heir of the Kingdom."

I suppose we could do without baptism (we probably should be careful to impose anything legalistically in addition to Christ [i.e. circumcision]), but why would we want to?

In another thread I commented that when I am on NazNet I know that I am "not the smartest person in the room."

Especially when Scott is here!

But he does it with such grace.

I am envious of those who sit under his preaching and teaching! :fav18

[John Kennedy]

As a part of a church tht practices infant baptism, I frequently hear the minister read the part of the ritual that talks about the children of believers being a part of the household of faith. And then the congregation responds by affirming their intent to help in the spiritual nurture of this child. It's kind of a way of saying 'we're giving you the best start we can.

I got amused one time when the minister baptized an especially wiggly and loud youngster. After pouring the water and baptizing in the name of the Trinity, he said, "you are now a part of Christ's church, whether you want to be or not."

It was funny, but incredibly profound. The vast majority of us were raised in a church, we were a part of it, whether we wanted to be or not. And a lot of our spiritual journey has revolved around coming to terms with that; being able to, ourselves, buy into the 'faith of our fathers..(or mothers) and become identified with the people of God.

[Randy Wise]

The creation is formed out of the waters of chaos (Gen. 1).

Slaves become the people of God as they pass through the waters of the Red Sea (Exodus 14).

The wanderers become people of the promised land as they pass through the waters of the Jordan (Joshua 3).

John the Baptism calls Israel to come out and repent of their life lived caught up in the empire of Rome and once again become the people of covenant established in the Jordan (Matthew 3; Luke 3, etc.).

Jesus participates in that identification with God's renewed people (Matthew 3, Luke 3, etc. again).

Jesus calls us to continue that baptism (i.e. Matthew 28 and other texts).

Paul identifies baptism with the believers participation in the death and resurrection of Christ (see Romans 6).

I am convinced that the whole concept of baptism has to do with identification with the people of God. Most of our questions come because we have lost the corporate understanding of salvation that the scripture is immersed in. We are saved as we identify ourselves with the people who are being saved.

Baptism is a symbol in as much as we are publicly declaring our identification with Christ and with the people of Christ, but it is also sacramental in that it is a mysterious means of grace that bodily enacts our putting to death the dominion of sin and bringing to life the dominion of the resurrected one.

In my mind, asking the question, "Do we have to be baptized to be saved?" is sort of like asking, "Do we have to have a wedding ceremony in order to be married?" I suppose we don't have to keep having marriage ceremonies in order to be married. If it weren't for civil laws we could just decide in our hearts to be married and be done with it. However, we realize that there is something spiritually and communally significant to participating bodily and publically in the declaration of our intentions to belong permanently to another person in marriage.

In the same way that at the end of a marriage ceremony the bride and groom have a new identity: "Let me introduce, Mr. and Mrs..."; so too in baptism we go home with the inner assurance and the public declaration that our old life has been put to death and our new life (as a member of God's people) has been enacted. "Let me introduce, the new Luke Oakes, child of God, heir of the Kingdom."

I suppose we could do without baptism (we probably should be careful to impose anything legalistically in addition to Christ [i.e. circumcision]), but why would we want to?

I would agree baptism is taught and practiced since the start of the church, but its the person that makes the choice to follow Christ Jesus, which would be the important part of "what takes place question". Sometimes baptism can be more for the church then for the believer as being baptized is expected. If someone came to the church to be saved and asked "what should I do" like was asked in acts of the apostles I see no reason why the same answer couldn't or wouldn't be given, which included baptism.
Randy

[Jerry Frank]

I can't really provide a viewpoint that is much better than Scott's.

I just wanted to add that my belief, coming from a Lutheran background, is that the water of baptism is just that, water. However, when it is combined with the word, it becomes sacramental in nature and carries with it not just symbolism but also an act of grace from God.

Some would argue that there are many Means of Grace. I have been told that nature can be a means of grace as one sits on the side of a mountain, absorbing Gods beautiful creation. In a sense I agree but it is not sacramental. It is the word, together with the water (and by extension, the bread and wine in communion) that makes these two acts sacramental Means of Grace.

I know, Luke, that you were looking for scripture to back up our statements and, except for Scott's posting, I haven't seen any. Perhaps that is because the issue has been debated for hundreds of years without common resolution. Both sides of the argument use what I call the theology of implication to buttress their positions. For example, Lutherans might state that the entire family of the jailer was baptized and this must therefore have included infants. I don't buy into that kind of theology from either side.


Jerry

[Luke Oakes]

I am saddened by the lack of scripture as well. So far, I am hearing a lot of church tradition. Tradition is very important, however, as I lay the firm foundations of my belief system. I need to argue both sides and compare it to scripture. Why would I just accept what I am told?

After reading the NT, I find that one of the main themes is the action that follows faith. Sure we believe, but will we act on those beliefs. Also, the majority of the time (one exception) the Holy Spirit enters a person after baptism. Remember, we can’t put God in a box, but it seems to me (just by using the Bible without tradition) that maybe baptism could be the preferred way God intended us to receive the Holy Spirit. Maybe I am dead wrong, but show me in the context of scripture.

Is there any scripture that would deny or contradict this? Also, we have a majority on the symbolism side of the fence. Are there any other views out there in Naznet land?

[Barb Bouldrey]

If a person has been taught that being baptized is connected to getting right with God, and goes into baptism repenting of their sins, then baptism is a part of their salvation experience. I know there are denominations that teach that you are saved at baptism. But the person must pray and repent on the way in, while under, or something.....to be born again.

I have always been taught it is a sacrament that is an outward sign of an inward work of grace that has already taken place. It is identifying with Christ. It is choosing to let the world know I am dead to sin and now alive in Christ.

Barb

[Scott Daniels]

I am saddened by the lack of scripture as well... Maybe I am dead wrong, but show me in the context of scripture.


Luke,

I am not a fan of proof-texting, but it is apparent that you want to have some sense of where the weight of scripture comes down on the relationship between baptism and the in-filling power of the Holy Spirit in the life of the beleiver.

I think the scripture speaks with many voices about the role of the Spirit and about the coming of the Spirit in the lives of believers. I think it is problematic to understand the HS as a substance placed in our lives rather than as the very presence of God continually at work in the transforming and empowering of our lives for his work. I'm not convinced that the scripture writers make clear distinctions between what we would call prevenient grace, transforming grace, common grace, and/or the basic work of God in our lives. It seems that whenever God clearly and visibly at work the writers credit that to the HS.

Anyways, below is a list of all the references to the Holy Spirit (I did not do a search for "the Spirit") in the NIV. I only find 5 out of 90 references to the Holy Spirit that includes baptism (other than John the Baptist's words about Jesus) and each of those separates the act of baptism from the infilling of the Holy Spirit. I have highlighted those 5 references in red below.

Sorry it is lengthy. But for what its worth:

NT Passages Citing the Holy Spirit [NIV] (90 REFERENCES)

Matthew (5 References):
Mary conceives by the HS (2) 1:18 & 1:20
John the Baptist says that Jesus will baptize by HS (and fire) 3:11
Blaspheming against the HS will not be forgiven 12:32
Great commission – in the name of the HS (as opposed to baptizing with the HS) 28:19

Mark (4 References):
John the Baptist says that Jesus will baptize by HS 1:8
Blaspheming against the HS will not be forgiven 3:29
David (the king) spoke by the Holy Spirit 12:36
When disciples face trial, the HS will give them the words to speak 13:11

Luke (13 References):
John the Baptist can’t drink wine because he is filled with the HS 1:15
Mary conceives by the HS 1:35
Elizabeth was filled with the HS 1:41
Zechariah is filled with the HS and prophesied 1:67
Simeon has the HS upon him and the HS told him he would not die before he saw the consolation of Israel 2:25-26
John the Baptist says that Jesus will baptize by HS (and fire) 3:16
HS descends upon Jesus like a dove 3:22
HS leads Jesus into the wilderness for temptation 4:1
Jesus is full of joy by the HS 10:21
The Father will give the HS to those who ask 11:13
Blaspheming against the HS will not be forgiven 12:10
When disciples face trial, the HS will give them the words to speak 12:12

John (3 References):
John the Baptist says that Jesus will baptize by HS 1:33
Jesus promises the coming of the HS 14:26
Jesus breathes on the disciples and gives them the HS 20:22

Acts (41 References):
Jesus gave instructions through the HS 1:2
Jesus tells them of the coming baptism of the HS 1:5
They will receive power when the HS comes on them 1:8
The HS spoke in the scriptures through David 1:16
The disciples were filled with the HS and began to speak in other languages 2:4
Jesus received and gave the HS as a gift from the Father 2:33
Peter preaches, “Be baptized for the forgiveness of sins, and then receive the HS 2:38
Peter preaches filled with the HS 4:8
The HS spoke through David 4:25
All were filled with the HS and spoke the word boldly 4:31
Ananias lies to the HS 5:3
HS is a witness to truth and is given to those who obey God 5:32
Stephen is chosen – he is full of the HS 6:5
The leaders of Israel always resist the HS 7:51
Stephen, full of the HS, sees the Kingdom of God in the heavens 7:55
Peter and John pray for the Samaritan Christians that they might receive the HS, because they had simply been baptized but the HS had not come upon them. After placing their hands on them, they received the HS 8:15-17
Simon wants the gift of being able to give the HS 8:19
Ananias gives Saul the gift of the HS 9:17
The church is encouraged by the HS 9:31
God anointed Jesus with power by the HS 10:38
The HS comes upon all of those who hear Peter speaking 10:44
The circumcised are amazed that the Gentiles have the HS 10:45
Peter argues that the Gentiles should be baptized because they have already received the HS 10:47
Peter tells about the HS coming upon the Gentiles 11:15-16
Barnabas was full of the HS and faith 11:24
The HS instructs the believers to set apart Barnabas and Saul 13:2
They are sent on their way by the HS 13:4
Paul speaks empowered by the HS 13:9
The disciples were filled with joy and the HS 13:52
God demonstrated his acceptance of the Gentiles by giving them the HS 15:8
The HS kept Paul from burdening the church 15:28
The HS keeps Paul from preaching in Asia 16:6
Paul asks the Ephesian Christians if they had the HS, they said “no.” They receive the HS after their baptism into Jesus and Paul lays his hands upon them. 19:2-6
The HS warns Paul that hardship awaits him. 20:23
The HS makes the leaders overseers of the church 20:28
The HS tells Paul what will happen in Jerusalem 21:11
The HS spoke through Isaiah 28:25

Romans (5 References):
God has poured his love in our hearts by the HS 5:5
Paul speaks the truth by the HS 9:1
The Kingdom of God is a matter of joy in the HS 14:17
May you overflow with hope by the power of the HS 15:13
The Gentiles might be sanctified as acceptable by the HS 15:16

1 &2 Corinthians (4 References):
Your body is the temple of the HS 1 Cor. 6:19
No one can say, “Jesus is Lord” except by the HS 1 Cor. 12:3
Purity, understanding, etc. by the HS 2 Cor. 6:6
May the fellowship of the HS be ours 2 Cor. 13:14

Ephesians (2 References)
Having believed, you were marked in him with a seal, the HS 1:13
Do not grieve the HS 4:30

1 Thessalonians (3 References)
The gospel came not with words, but by the power of the HS 1:5
In spite of suffering you have the joy of the HS 1:6
Whoever rejects Paul’s instructions rejects the HS 4:8

2 Timothy (1 Reference)
Guard the deposit of faith with the help of the HS 1:14

Titus (1 Reference)
He saved us through the washing of rebirth and renewal by the Holy Spirit 3:5

Hebrews (5 References)
God testifies by the gifts of the HS 2:4
The HS says, “Hear his voice today.” 3:7
It is impossible for those who have shared the HS to leave without hurting the Son of God 6:4
The HS was showing himself in the OT temple patterns 9:8
The HS testifies to us 10:15

1 & 2 Peter (2 References)
Those who have preached have done so by the HS 1 Pet 1:12
Those who prophesy do so by the HS 2 Pet. 1:21

Jude (1 Reference)
Pray in the HS 1:20

[Barb Bouldrey]

At Pentacost when the people asked, "What must we do to be saved?" Peter responded: "Repent and be baptized."

I think that makes it scripturally important and required.

They sure baptized a lot of people in just one day. Even if all 120 from the upper room experience helped to baptize, can you imagine how long it took?????

barb

[Kevin Rector]

I am struggling with the sacrament of Baptism. Is it just symbolism (on one extreme) or is it needed for salvation (the other extreme). Is baptism God’s preferred way to impart the Holy Spirit into our lives?

Luke, I haven't read all of the posts in the thread (a dangerous thing) so I may be repeating what others say, but here's what I'm thinking about your question.

From a Wesleyan perspective the Holy Spirit is always imparted into our lives. It's not like we don't have the Holy Spirit one minute and then do something (pray, get baptized, whatever) and then we do have the Holy Spirit. In fact the Holy Spirit is not something that we can have.

Rather the Holy Spirit is a someone that we can know.

Hope this wasn't too much of a rabbit trail.

[Jerry Frank]

Don't always agree with you , Kevin but I'm 100% behind you on this one. :)

And this is one of the areas where we have something in common with Lutherans. From Luther's Small Catechism, meaning of the third article in the Apostle's Creed:

"I believe that I cannot by my own reason or strength believe in Jesus Christ, my Lord, or come to Him; but the Holy Ghost has called me by the Gospel, enlightened me with His gifts, sanctified and kept me in the true faith; even as He calls, gathers, enlightens, and sanctifies the whole Christian Church on earth, and keeps it with Jesus Christ in the one true faith; in which Christian Church He forgives daily and richly all sins to me and all believers, and at the last day will raise up me and all the dead, and will give to me and to all believers in Christ everlasting life. This is most certainly true."

Note the implication that the Holy Spirit is already influencing our lives prior to salvation. Now of course this same statement which Nazarenes can probably agree to leads to things that cause us to disagree on such issues as entire sanctification but that issue belongs on a different thread.


Jerry

[Doug Wise]

Luke,

I have taught adult Christian education for many years and the question of baptism comes up quite frequently. This is my explanation that I hand out to explain and give support for my understanding of this precious gift.


What is Baptism?

Baptism is the monolith that marks the Christian covenant of relationship/love between God and the person being baptized; much like a wedding marks the covenant of love/relationship between a man and women. Circumcision in the Old Testament was a sign of the covenant between God and those people that are His. Today baptism does the same thing in that it marks the covenant between God and His people. *1

Baptism is an appeal and pledge of a good conscience towards God. *2

Baptism is an act of faith and an expression of love. *3

Baptism is an outward sign of an inward Grace, declaring one a member in Christ’s universal (catholic) Church

Baptism is uniting in the death of Christ and therefore His life, love and resurrection *4

Baptism is a celebration of the Grace of God

Baptism is putting on of Christ to become a child of God *5


Is Baptism salvific? (Will it save me?)

No, it is not salvific in the physical sense. It is not fire insurance. It of its own accord can no more save you than a dip in the pool or hot shower.

Yes, it can be salvific in a relational sense in that it can be an act of loving God expressed by faith through Christ Jesus. It is only through a relationship with God by His Grace through Christ that all people are saved.


Should babies be Baptized?

No, if the parents are not Christians and are not going to raise them in a Christ centered home.

Yes, if the parents through faith in Christ will lovingly raise their child in God’s Grace.


I have omitted 3 sections of this paper from the post as they are quite long (one very supportive of baby baptism another on baby dedication and a third explaining Immersion, Pouring or Sprinkling)
I would gladly post them if you are interested.

Love in Christ,
Doug.


Footnotes
*1
(Colossians 2
9For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, 10and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority. 11In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, 12having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

Look closely at how this scripture relates NT baptism with OT circumcision. It sets a precedent that the two are linked in that they both mark God’s people.

Genesis 17:9-13
And God said unto Abraham, Thou shalt keep my covenant therefore, thou, and thy seed after thee in their generations. This is my covenant, which ye shall keep, between me and you and thy seed after thee; Every man child among you shall be circumcised. And ye shall circumcise the flesh of your foreskin; and it shall be a token of the covenant betwixt me and you.
And he that is eight days old shall be circumcised among you, every man child in your generations, he that is born in the house, or bought with money of any stranger, which is not of thy seed. He that is born in thy house, and he that is bought with thy money, must needs be circumcised: and my covenant shall be in your flesh for an everlasting covenant.

*2 Baptism, which corresponds to this, now saves you, not as a removal of dirt from the body but as an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,
1 Peter 3:21

*3 The only thing that counts is faith expressing itself through love. Gal: 5:6

*4 Do you not know that all of us who have been baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death?
We were buried therefore with him by baptism into death, so that as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, we too might walk in newness of life. For if we have been united with him in a death like his, we shall certainly be united with him in a resurrection like his. Romans 6:3-5

*5 for in Christ Jesus you are all sons of God, through faith. For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ.
Gal 3:26-27

[Anne and Dwayne Hood]

An outward sign of an inward grace is what i have been taught. My husband will sprinkle, pour or immerse, according to the desires of the individual.
The Holy Spirit is present in our Justification, but He comes in what we call His fullness when we completely surrender our life to Him. He is the person that helps us to not live a life of intentional sin. As a minister's wife since 1962, I have learned to, and purposely endeavor to, explain things to people in a way that even a child would be able to understand it. I still get Dwayne to explain things to me...not in terms that many people are not able to understand. If the way is so plain that "a wayfaring man, though a fool" will not err therein, we have to bring it down to their level, and not in big terms like Theologians use.

[Len Empie]

So is it considered appropriate for me as the father of my children and spiritual leader of my household to baptize my own children? It is one of two sacraments that we protestants recognize (communion being the other). I believe that it all comes down to how we are to interpret the great commission. Were the words of Jesus directed to his Apostles, or to all of the readers? I know what the manual says, something like "Thou must be a liscenced, not local minister to bapitze. My question is, Why?

Len

[Barbara Moulton]

As I often say here, I was raised in a non sacramental church and wasn't baptized until we joined the Church of the Nazarene. In fact, I was recognized as an elder in the CofN before that baptism took place. As I look back on that, I wonder if that was even kosher? :)

Because of my background (saved at 5 and baptized at 35) I could never see baptism as something that is necessary to salvation. I know too many wonderful Christian people who are still in The Salvation Army (and still unbaptized) to believe that.

I was baptized because I felt it was the right thing to do, now that I was in a denomination that practiced baptism. But I certainly never felt that I hadn't adequately testifed to salvation up until that point.

[Luke Oakes]

Wow, it has been 7 months since I received a reply from this post. That is a long time. I am still not sure about the full implications of baptism. However, it always seems essential in the Bible.

Luke

[Hans Deventer]

Wow, it has been 7 months since I received a reply from this post. That is a long time. I am still not sure about the full implications of baptism. However, it always seems essential in the Bible.

As you would expect in the beginning years of a new movement of the Spirit. In the NT, no one was born into the church yet. All who entered needed some symbol by which they made a public declaration of their new alliance to Christ.

[Ian Gentles]

So is it considered appropriate for me as the father of my children and spiritual leader of my household to baptize my own children? It is one of two sacraments that we protestants recognize (communion being the other). I believe that it all comes down to how we are to interpret the great commission. Were the words of Jesus directed to his Apostles, or to all of the readers? I know what the manual says, something like "Thou must be a liscenced, not local minister to bapitze. My question is, Why?

Len

The whole idea of it must be a local or liscenced minister is rubbish. I am a minister, not a Nazarene one, and for long years performed communion in all sorts of denominations, they recognised my ministry. But hey, even though i was well know by all, one Nazarene church said i couldent, Hey water off a ducks back, but church can get stupid sometimes lol

[Ian Gentles]

Baptism seems clearly commanded to me, not as necessary for salvation, but as an act of obedience, and a sign of dieing to world to live in Christ, and yep i much prefer Emerson.

[Bob Evans]

When I pastored I always tried to encourage the new converts to invite those who don't know Christ in order to testify to their newness of life. Sometimes this worked and sometimes it didn't. But I always thought it was a great vehicle to announce the change that Christ brings to your world.

[Luke Oakes]

Why are there so many changes in Christian beliefs in the 20th century? Is it because of new exegetical techniques, or is it because our culture has begun to infiltrate our faith? For 1,500 years after Christ. The first organized church made baptism essential for salvation. Is it possible, in our attempt to save as many as we can, we have made it too easy to become a Christian. What if the many Christians we work so hard to make aren't really Christians at all? Can you go to heaven by just believing in Christ? The bible says no. Even John 3:16 in the original Greek implies the action of following Christ as a qualifier to receiving eternal life.

I am Nazarene through and through. However, it is still important as I develop my personal theology that I take the time to find the answers for myself and compare those findings with the doctrine I claim membership to. Without this step in my life, I risk being uneducated in what I believe. I still have not made my decision about baptism. I am looking for something that will convince me that Paul is only using baptism as a symbol of the faith. At this point, in my gut, and in my exegesis, I can not find any reason to support the theory of baptism as a symbol. Looking only at the biblical text, I find baptism is the method of dying to sin, and the chosen method for receiving the Spirit. I concede that God may use other means to impart the Spirit; however, baptism is His chosen method.

[Hans Deventer]

Why are there so many changes in Christian beliefs in the 20th century? Is it because of new exegetical techniques, or is it because our culture has begun to infiltrate our faith?

The latter, but it always has. It hasn't "begun" to do so. There is no faith that isn't influenced by culture. So cultural changes affect our faith. Not necessarily the core of it, but certainly the expression of it, and also the accents, the things we consider important.
And since we are in a cultural paradigm shift right now (as we have been before), the changes are more rapid than in previous centuries. The Reformation was similar in impact, but that of course was 500 years ago.

Secondly, you need to work on hermeneutics rather than reading texts. I mean, questions like what was the context in which the NT authors wrote their letters, what was their purpose, how did their audience understand what they wrote?

But if you want a text without context: 1 Cor 1:17a "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel."

Seems brother Paul was terribly mistaken if baptism was essential for salvation.

[Luke Oakes]

Thank you for using scripture. I know that there are people in this site that are more advanced in faith and theology then I am. As I said before, I am still trying to grasp why Baptism is seen as a symbol. When I read 1 Corinthians 1:10-17, I find that the main idea of the passage is about divisions in the church. Paul is thankful that he didn’t baptize many because they could have assumed that they were baptized into Paul instead of Christ. Therefore, when I read verse 17, I feel that Paul is talking about his personal call and not making a theological statement. As a religious celebrity, it was probably a good move to leave baptism to the local church. But I do not think that this text will help me influence my decision. Again, I say thank you for using scripture. Your replies will one day lead me to a decision on the subject.

[Hans Deventer]

When I read 1 Corinthians 1:10-17, I find that the main idea of the passage is about divisions in the church. Paul is thankful that he didn’t baptize many because they could have assumed that they were baptized into Paul instead of Christ. Therefore, when I read verse 17, I feel that Paul is talking about his personal call and not making a theological statement. As a religious celebrity, it was probably a good move to leave baptism to the local church.

Agreed, Luke! I don't think that Paul meant this as a theological statement on baptism either. He wrote against the divisions in the church in Corinth, that was his main goal.

Still, I do wonder if he would have written the same on preaching the gospel. I don't think so.

Anyway, for the people in Corinth (and the first believers in general), baptism followed faith, right? One first comes to faith in the Lord Jesus, and then, generally, baptism follows. The NT knows of no unbaptized Christians, apart from the man who died on the cross next to Jesus, but that was because there was no opportunity. And of course it is commanded by the Lord.

Yet I cannot find a trace of the teaching that people who were not baptized, would be lost (as has been taught in the church). In fact, Peter says that "the pledge of a good conscience toward God" is what saves us "by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3 :21 ff). Elsewhere Paul makes clear that we are saved by grace through faith. Which is a similar statement. But I'm starting to ramble :basic01

[Luke Oakes]

I will look at your reply later, I have to study for a test.

Luke

[Bob Carabbio]

In my case, nothing perceptable happened, except afterwards I was wet.

I was saved on a Wednesday night in the spring of '61 when my roommate led me to the Lord. AFTER that experience, IMMEDIATELY I was personally changed, and made alive, and as frosting on the cake my 3-pack a day Cigarette habit disappeared instantly and totally - no withdrawal, no craving - nothing. Like I'd never smoked in my life.

But I understood from the Bible that baptism was the next thing to do in obedience - i.e. WHEN you got saved, you should be baptized.

And so I was - by a Baptist Minister at Greenwood Baptist Church in Pasadena Texas that Sunday night, along with my roommate, and about half a dozen other folks that had been saved that week. Experientially, there was a sense that I had been obedient to the Word, which was a good feeling, but the REAL CHANGE had come 4 nights before.

In the last 46 years, I've not changed my personal opinion about Baptism in any way. I don't believe there IS such a thing as a "Sacrament" and adding "works" - like Baptism - to the sacrifice of Jesus for salvation would appear to me to be outright blasphemy - i.e. "Jesus, YOU didn't do enough, so I have to add MY WORKS to what you did - to "get 'er done".

The first 8 chapters of Romans lays out the "nuts and bolts" of salvation nicely, and make it abundantly clear it's through FAITH - period - end of story.

The James 2 passages aren't in conflict, and only reveal the criteria BY WHICH we can know that he do actually HAVE saving faith.

[John Kennedy]

To characterize a sacrament as 'adding works' to the sacriice of Jesus is indicative of a tremendous lack of knowledge about the meaning of a sacrament. A sacrament has been defined as 'an outward sign of an inward work of grace'. It is a means by which God's grace is conveyed to us. The Lord's Supper and baptism are not about what we're doing, but what God is doing in us.

[Luke Oakes]

Romans 1-8 is for the argument of baptism. Not against it. Yes we are saved by grace through faith, but what is faith. Timothy says faith without works is death. Therefore, Paul can teach grace through faith and still show the necessity of baptism; which he does in Romans 6. How can we die with Christ without being baptized? I just don't see how chapter 6 could be a metaphor about dying to Christ.

[Eric Frey]

What takes place during baptism?

We get wet!

I'm not trying to be a smart aleck, but I think of baptism in much the same manner as a wedding:



Hope I don't restate something, but I haven't read the entire post yet. You are 100% correct. Baptism is like a wedding. It is meaningless without the love between the parties...There is no marriage without it...it will never grow to its fullness without consumation.

Love...marriage...consumation are all necessary for a healthy wedding.
Love...baptism...eucharist are all necessary for a healthy faith.

OK argue away:basic05

[Eric Frey]

OK, now that I've read all the posts, I am curious that there is no mention of our creedal affirmation:

"I acknowledge one baptism for the remission/forgiveness of sins."

How does that square with our usual knee-jerk against anything that hints of baptismal regeneration?

[Anne and Dwayne Hood]

Just think in terms of what baptism over the years, beginning with the early church meant to people. The early Christians were risking their lives to serve Jesus. It would have been a thrilling time for them to be baptized, as an outward sign, signifying their believe in this new person, that they are accepting as the prophesied Messiah. In many countries, now, some are risking one's life to accept Christianity, or be baptized. Most people we know are not risking their life today, but are we willing to follow, what we are told in the Bible to do, and signify to a non Christin world, and sometimes, a non Christian family, non Christian workforce, or whatever, that we have believed, and accepted Jesus into our life, and not be ashamed of it?
And, if some feel that the symbolic phrase holds "no water," just do it to be obedient.
Also, I undersstand how some think of it as regeneration. Maybe, they have settled in their heart, that they wnt to be a Christian, But, when they are actually baptized, they feel so jubilant (possibly), becasue to them, tht is the time that they have been accepted into the family of God. I can see that. I don't have any problem with that, if that is their way of thinking, due to the church they were raised and taught in.

[Meghan Schoonover]

OK, now that I've read all the posts, I am curious that there is no mention of our creedal affirmation:

"I acknowledge one baptism for the remission/forgiveness of sins."

How does that square with our usual knee-jerk against anything that hints of baptismal regeneration?

I do wonder how many Nazarenes know where that "creedal affirmation" comes from, or what "remission of sins" means. Having spent 6 yrs. in the Nazarene church I have yet to say *any* creed corporately, and I think I would get a bunch of blank stares if I started talking about baptismal regeneration. I'm a borderline regenerist myself, having been brought up in that mindset, and am not quick to share it, b/c of the "knee-jerk" response you mention. I guess my question is, what creedal affirmation are you talking about...simply the one that says, hey, we're creedal Christians by default, or is it actually somewhere in the Manual? Heh.

[Brad Mercer]

Okay, I know this is a serious, important question that deserves answers of the same quality. Fortunately it's now received enough thoughtful answers that I now feel free to post the first thought that comes to my silly mind every single time I see the subject line.

Q: What takes place during baptism?
A: Giggling, usually.

Brad

[Eric Frey]

Meghan,

Check out the historical statement in the "Manual."

"One Holy Faith. The Church of the Nazarene, from its beginnings, has confessed itself to be a branch of the “one, holy, universal, and apostolic” church and has sought to be faithful to it. It confesses as its own the history of the people of God recorded in the Old and New Testaments, and that same history as it has extended from the days of the apostles to our own. As its own people, it embraces the people of God through the ages, those redeemed through Jesus Christ in whatever expression of the one church they may be found. It receives the ecumenical creeds of the first five Christian centuries as expressions of its own faith. While the Church of the Nazarene has responded to its special calling to proclaim the doctrine and experience of entire sanctification, it has taken care to retain and nurture identification with the historic church in its preaching of the Word, its administration of the sacraments, its concern to raise up and maintain a ministry that is truly apostolic in faith and practice, and its inculcating of disciplines for Christlike living and service to others."

We accept the creeds of the first 5 christian centuries as our own. That would include both Apostles' and Nicene. As you well know, the Nicene creed affirms, "We acknowledge one baptism for the forgiveness of sins." Both creeds are also included in the Nazarene Hymnals.

[Meghan Schoonover]

Thanks for the clarification, Eric. :) I have read that and seen the creeds in the hymnal (I look at the hymnal a lot, being the music co-ordinator, heh heh). I was simply meaning would most people have any idea what that "stuff" (reference to the creeds, regenerism) meant? I only know b/c of my Lutheran heritage. Also want to clarify that I *don't* mean that condescendingly, and I realize my OP could have been taken that way, yikes. So, if they're not aware of it or understand it, it's pretty natural that there wouldn't be objection. And I do find there's objection.

I think that happens in every church (not fully understanding church's stance on things)...I remember being shocked when, as Nazarene, I was accused of believing people could "lose" their salvation. Oh the horror! Now, this is a belief of both the Nazarene AND Lutheran churches, but somewhere along the line I'd picked up eternal security and so was actually upset someone accused me of that. That was me simply not understanding the teachings of my chuches, not a personal conviction or something. Once I got over my initial shock and did some studying for myself, I did agree with it, but before that person confronted me, I literally didn't know about that belief!

[Doug Wise]

. As I said before, I am still trying to grasp why Baptism is seen as a symbol. .


Luke,
I hear you asking, "Is Baptism just symbolic or somehow salvific?

I believe the answer is “yes” to both.

Yes, Baptism is symbolic, but do not sell symbolism short or trivialize its importance. Symbolic gestures have great meaning to both mankind and God.
How much of mankind has struggled and even died holding onto the symbolism of a flag?
A wedding ring is a symbol, which proclaims one’s promise to a spouse and the world, of the wearer’s life long commitments. Today mascots are a common symbol such as a donkey for a democrat or a Buckeye for a great Ohio college. These symbols are real in that they not only represent an institution or event but they serve as a reminder to others and ourselves and about who or what we are. Baptism in its symbolic sense tells other people and ourselves much about whose and who we are or at least who we should be.
The entire Jewish sacrificial system from which Jesus emerged was heavily steeped in symbolism. Circumcision was an Old Testament act that symbolized one as a Jew. Did God see this act of symbolism as important? Yes, in fact it was important enough to kill even His chosen deliver of Israel Moses for refusing to participate in it! (Exodus 4, also see Colossians 2:9-12 that relationally links circumcision with baptism) Let’s also not forget the symbol of the snake on the pole, which brought healing to all who looked upon it. (Numbers 21:1-9) So Baptism is symbolic in a way that holds great meaning and importance to both God and the Church.

Yes, Baptism is salvific when the essence of that symbol is reflected into one’s very being and through faith becomes a living projection of the symbolic. Baptism in this sense goes beyond the symbolic. For when one participates in the symbolic, that participation is an act of faith. The sacrament of Baptism is the act of faith chosen by God that unites the symbolic with the salvific though a participatory acceptance of God’s grace through Christ Jesus.
This participation of faith can even be seen in the OT examples above. The people participated in sacrifice by bringing animals or crops to the priests, the Jews had to gaze at the snake to be healed and like baptism participation through faith in the symbolic becomes acceptance of God’s covenant of grace. That covenant joins us with Christ and if we are joined with Christ we will also be raised with Him. This can be seen in:

Colossians 2: 9-12 For in Christ all the fullness of the Deity lives in bodily form, and you have been given fullness in Christ, who is the head over every power and authority. In him you were also circumcised, in the putting off of the sinful nature, not with a circumcision done by the hands of men but with the circumcision done by Christ, having been buried with him in baptism and raised with him through your faith in the power of God, who raised him from the dead.

Hebrews 9: Explains the need for death to establish a new covenant and the subsequent inheritance of eternal life.

1 Peter 3:18-22 Joins the whole process of the symbolic with the salvific, the water baptism is the symbol, participation in the symbolic results in a good conscience towards God and units us with Christ in Resurrection.

Now some might ask, “Does one have to be baptized to receive God’s Saving Grace.?”
My answer would be “yes”, but not because baptism accomplishes or earns Grace, but because baptism symbolizes that grace. If one refuses to be associated with the symbolic they walk very close to the line of refusing the grace of God that is being symbolized.
Would someone be considered a patriot if they refused to respect their country’s flag?
Would a person willingly accept a spouse’s unreasoned refusal to wear a ring?
Would a person be considered a Buckeye if they refused to answer the call of “OH”?
Would God in the OT accept refusal to bring a sacrifice as an acceptable sacrifice?
Would God have healed the Hebrews that refused to gaze upon the snake?
Would God have used Moses if he continued to reject His symbolism of circumcision?
Surely, by those same standards refusal to be baptized (symbol set forth by God) should quickly bring ones Christian nature or lack of it into serious question.

To sum this all up, I believe baptism is God's symbolic sacrament in that it is representative of God's grace and therefore should be revered with holy wonder. I believe baptism is salvific as an active faith participation in joining us to Christ Jesus and the Resurrection.

Hope that helps in your journey,
Love in Christ,
Doug

[Eric Frey]

...IO!!!!

[Hans Deventer]

Now some might ask, “Does one have to be baptized to receive God’s Saving Grace.?”
My answer would be “yes”, but not because baptism accomplishes or earns Grace, but because baptism symbolizes that grace. If one refuses to be associated with the symbolic they walk very close to the line of refusing the grace of God that is being symbolized.
Would someone be considered a patriot if they refused to respect their country’s flag?
Would a person willingly accept a spouse’s unreasoned refusal to wear a ring?
Would a person be considered a Buckeye if they refused to answer the call of “OH”?
Would God in the OT accept refusal to bring a sacrifice as an acceptable sacrifice?
Would God have healed the Hebrews that refused to gaze upon the snake?
Would God have used Moses if he continued to reject His symbolism of circumcision?
Surely, by those same standards refusal to be baptized (symbol set forth by God) should quickly bring ones Christian nature or lack of it into serious question.

So I understand you consider Salvation Army people as people who's Christian nature or lack thereof should be seriously questioned? Do I understand you correctly?

[Roland Hearn]

So I understand you consider Salvation Army people as people who's Christian nature or lack thereof should be seriously questioned? Do I understand you correctly?

Yeh those pesky Salvation Army people they really mess the rest of us Wesleyans up. We either accept a near Baptist position on Baptism and call them inferior Christians at best, or we acknowledge they are Christians in a complete sense and make their point for them. Dang I wish this faith thing could be a simple mater of finding ways of accepting some people and rejecting others, oh wait, we're already pretty good at that. So which way will we go on this one? How about we just ignore them and their perspective? That seems the easiest way through.

[Hans Deventer]

Yeh those pesky Salvation Army people they really mess the rest of us Wesleyans up. We either accept a near Baptist position on Baptism and call them inferior Christians at best, or we acknowledge they are Christians in a complete sense and make their point for them. Dang I wish this faith thing could be a simple mater of finding ways of accepting some people and rejecting others, oh wait, we're already pretty good at that. So which way will we go on this one? How about we just ignore them and their perspective? That seems the easiest way through.

Or simply acknowledge one can be a perfectly good Christian without being baptised or attending the Lord's supper, since neither are essential to salvation.

Sometimes it's good to get out of the theoretical discussions and simply look at reality.

[Barbara Moulton]

Now some might ask, Does one have to be baptized to receive Gods Saving Grace.?
My answer would be yes, but not because baptism accomplishes or earns Grace, but because baptism symbolizes that grace. If one refuses to be associated with the symbolic they walk very close to the line of refusing the grace of God that is being symbolized.

I simply can't let that pass without challenge. Here's a picture of two people on their wedding day. People who spent their life serving God. People who taught me about Jesus. People who led my family in devotions. People who testified to the saving grace of Jesus Christ. People who preached the gospel.

I am not trying to be difficult...just trying to put a face to those you would claim have come close to refusing the grace of God.

[John Kennedy]

Barbara -
As commited as I am to a sacramental approach to the Christian life, I couldn't agree with you more emphatically!

[Doug Wise]

I simply can't let that pass without challenge. Here's a picture of two people on their wedding day. People who spent their life serving God. People who taught me about Jesus. People who led my family in devotions. People who testified to the saving grace of Jesus Christ. People who preached the gospel.

I am not trying to be difficult...just trying to put a face to those you would claim have come close to refusing the grace of God.


Barbara and Hans,
Thank you and Hans for the “challenge” as questioning my arguments is entirely appropriate considering my statements. It is additionally important for me to remember that we are often talking about real people with real lives and real faces and not just concepts, which your picture clearly brings to mind (Thanks again)
While my statements are admittedly a bit broad-stroked, let me attempt to place them in proper perspective.

I previous wrote, “Surely, by those same standards refusal to be baptized (symbol set forth by God) should quickly bring ones Christian nature or lack of it into question.”

If while walking along a country road we come across a turtle sitting on a fence post it should immediately bring the question to mind, how did it get there? It is not in the nature of a turtle to climb fence posts; therefore we know that it isn’t really a turtle or something put it there.

In the same way in our Christian walk I believe there are times when we will come across ideas that are contrary to the nature of Christ. Baptism was natural for Jesus as He was both baptized and instructed His followers to do the same. Refusal to baptize or be baptized is unnatural behavior and like the turtle on the fence post should raise serious questions about its nature and how it got there. Is it really a turtle or does it just look like a turtle?

I also previous wrote:
“Now some might ask, “Does one have to be baptized to receive God’s Saving Grace.?”
My answer would be “yes”, but not because baptism accomplishes or earns Grace, but because baptism symbolizes that grace. If one refuses to be associated with the symbolic they walk very close to the line of refusing the grace of God that is being symbolized. “

Now back to our turtle on a fence post. I tell Hans that my first impression is it kinda looks like a turtle but since it is not the nature of a turtle to climb a post it is unlikely to be a turtle. Barbara replies, “I know it’s a turtle. I’ve known that turtle all my life and it is a turtle.
Now that leaves only one option. Something placed that turtle in an unnatural position.

In this case that something appears to be the Salvation Army. Now it is my understanding (please correct me if I’m wrong as Salvation Army doctrine is not my strong suite) that the Salvation Army does not refuse membership to those who have been baptized in fact it permits its members to be baptized in other churches if they so desire. In addition, the Salvation Army has a ceremony that in some ways mimics baptism. To be a member one must participate in a ceremony where they show an understanding of doctrine and publicly acknowledge their salvation from sin and sign a copy of the articles of war along with a prayer for God’s assistance in keeping their pledge. While I disagree with the Salvation Army’s position on baptism I do not think it crosses the line of refusal of baptism, though it does come nervously close to the edge.

Now back to the turtle. We have determined that the creature on the fence post is a turtle and even know how it got there. I would prefer to place the turtle on its natural solid ground habitat. It is dangerous for a turtle to be up on a post as it puts them close to the edge of a fall. However, as you have testified, the turtle has been on that post for a long time and has done well, just where it is.

I know turtles don’t belong on fence posts, as it is not their nature. I too have family turtles on fence posts that I deem even more dangerous and likely from which to fall. Fence posts with names like Christian Science and Jehovah Witness. I would like to carefully pick all the turtles up off the fence posts and place them on natural ground and both continue our journeys. I know however that some turtles are happy, productive and living by the grace of God atop their fence posts. They even look over at me and can’t understand why I don’t join them. I walk on, as they are free to live as they please on the fence post edge. Should they ever fall, I pray God will catch them as He so often has caught me.

I hope that helped in understanding of my perspective.
Love in Christ,
Doug

[Doug Wise]

So I understand you consider Salvation Army people as people who's Christian nature or lack thereof should be seriously questioned? Do I understand you correctly?

Hans,
Yes, but please see my reply Post# 54 to Barbara for a more complete understanding of my statement’s perspective.

Thanks,
Doug

[Barbara Moulton]

Thanks for your response Doug. .

I would mention one thing as it appears that you might have gone to The Salvation Army website and read some of their material when you talk about the "ceremony that mimics" baptism. I know the section you reference and I want to state that when I was in The Salvation Army, I was very uncomfortable with equating the "swearing in as a soldier" with baptism, simply because it was a public declaration of faith and identification with Christ.

The primary purpose of the ceremony is to receive someone into membership. Since other churches have similiar ceremonies, and don't claim that they are at all equivalent to baptism, I thought it was a faulty argument. Either you are confident enough in your non sacramental position to speak to it alone or you aren't. Don't try to say that something else you do sort of "counts" as baptism. And yes...I said this while I was in The Salvation Army.


Now...I understand your "turtle on a fencepost" analogy. And here is my comment. I would say that if you reject the premise "it really isn't a turtle" then you accept that a "non turtle" force had to intervene and put it there. Maybe only to demonstrate that a turtle can be on a fence and still be a turtle. :-)

The one choice that isn't open to you is that it simply got up on the fence itself by accident.

Do you see where I am going with this? There could be a very valid reason why a "non human hand" might indeed have led The Salvation Army to its position (which I agree is out of sync with the rest of the Christian church).

Maybe that reason is simply to be a testimony to the fact that yes...one can be a Christian without being baptized. That when it comes right down to it...it isn't about ceremony but about belief.

Like the turtle, it might feel like an uncomfortable place to be, but it carries along until that same hand leads them off the fence.

So, while I was in The Salvation Army, I felt part of a collective witness to the fact that God does save and even sanctify the individual and this happens apart from any ceremony.

When we left The Salvation Army (for reasons unrelated to the sacraments) I chose to be baptized as a testimony to my faith in God.

Standing in front of a group of Christian friends and family who came to my baptism, it was a great experience. I appreciated the sense of coming into unity with the rest of the Christian faith. It was a way of publically identifying my life with Christ's.

But, as I said that night, I do not believe that I had been disobedient to God up until that point in my life.

[Ian Gentles]

Paul mentions baptism, but Jesus doesnt! If it is so important wouldn't Jesus have said something on the subject? OK i am a stirrer ;)

[Roland Hearn]

Barbara, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the SA position that baptism is primarily a spiritual experience that the physical act may reflect but is not the experience itself. SA believes its people are in fact baptized because it is a spiritual experience. The rejection of the physical act is less of an attack on the physical act of baptism as a reinforcement of the spiritual nature of relationship with Christ.
I think the evidence to support such a claim, if I have it right, is in the reality of the experience of SA people. I for one believe in baptism as a wonderful church experience but I affirm the SA expression.

[Eric Frey]

Go into the world, making disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit and teaching the to obey all my commands.

[Barbara Moulton]

Barbara, correct me if I'm wrong but isn't the SA position that baptism is primarily a spiritual experience that the physical act may reflect but is not the experience itself. SA believes its people are in fact baptized because it is a spiritual experience. The rejection of the physical act is less of an attack on the physical act of baptism as a reinforcement of the spiritual nature of relationship with Christ.
I think the evidence to support such a claim, if I have it right, is in the reality of the experience of SA people. I for one believe in baptism as a wonderful church experience but I affirm the SA expression.

Yes, this is part of the teaching. And they would say something similiar about communion.

My life must be Christ's broken bread
My love His outpoured wine
A cup o'erfilled
A table spread
Beneath His name and sign
That other souls refreshed and fed
May share His life through mine.
~ Albert Orsborn ~

[Barbara Moulton]

Go into the world, making disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit and teaching the to obey all my commands.

John 13:14
Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet.

[Laurie Florence]

One reveals their affiliation to Christ through their love for God and others, and through the fruits they produce. Many meet this criteria without being baptised or participating in the Lord's supper.

[Roland Hearn]

Go into the world, making disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit and teaching the to obey all my commands.-

Eric, I think you quoted this scripture as some kind of response rather than simply a random act. It is always hard to tell when someone doesn't actually make a comment. If it is supposed to contradict the SA position, and I am only assuming, it doesn't in light of what I said about their claim being that baptism is a spiritual experience. They would suggest that this is precisely what they do considering baptism is a spiritual experience.

[Anne and Dwayne Hood]

My mother always raised us to highly respect the Salvation Army.

[Meghan Schoonover]

-
Eric, I think you quoted this scripture as some kind of response rather than simply a random act..

I think he was responding to Ian's comment about Jesus not saying anything on the subject...I was going to respond with the same Scripture, but Eric beat me to it...

Paul mentions baptism, but Jesus doesnt! If it is so important wouldn't Jesus have said something on the subject?

[Hans Deventer]

Ralph, I moved your post to a new thread, for this thread is about baptism with water.

[Roland Hearn]

I think he was responding to Ian's comment about Jesus not saying anything on the subject...I was going to respond with the same Scripture, but Eric beat me to it...

You may be right, that would validate my claim that just quoting scripture without comment leave those reading lots of room for wondering what was intended. Just a thought to keep in mind.

[Eric Frey]

Paul mentions baptism, but Jesus doesnt! If it is so important wouldn't Jesus have said something on the subject? OK i am a stirrer ;)


My apologies Roland.

Go into the world making disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, and teaching them to obey everything I have commanded.

[Ian Gentles]

John 13:14
Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet.

Oh good one Barbara, i often wonder why we deliberatly miss this out?

[Eric Frey]

I thought we do this on Maundy Thursday?

[Ian Gentles]

I thought we do this on Maundy Thursday?


Not anywhere i have known!

http://iangentles.livejournal.com

[Barbara Moulton]

I thought we do this on Maundy Thursday?

Not anywhere I have been. Some of my Anglican priest friends have a foot washing ceremony in their diocese I think. And we had a woman in one of our Nazarene Churches who belonged to a holiness church in her youth that washed feet.

I just think it is interesting that on the night of the Passover, Jesus said,

"Do this in remembrance of me" about the Lord's supper
and
"Now that I, your Lord and Teacher, have washed your feet, you also should wash one another's feet."

Why is it that we have focused so much on doing the first, in which Christ actually gave rather vague directions and not the second, in which Christ seems to give explicit directions?

[Ian Gentles]

I see it as a sacrament that we avoid, maybe as its unpleasant, but wasn't that the point?

[Barbara Moulton]

I see it as a sacrament that we avoid, maybe as its unpleasant, but wasn't that the point?

The day that I saw a Salvation Army Officer, on her knees before a homeless man, taking off his filthy boots, rancid socks and bathing his feet which were oozing with sores...that was the day that I truly "got" the idea of sacramental living that The Salvation Army emphasizes. Although I do partake in communion now and although I have been baptized, my fervent prayer is that I will never lose sight of that.


Foot washing isn't about us sitting around with our socks off so that someone in our church can wash our feet (which I bet we already have washed before we came). Jesus was giving us an example of servanthood.

To me, the main point that Jesus was trying to make in communion and in baptism was to teach that everything we do can be a sacrament. The elements of that last supper were not something Jesus brought in...saying...look, I'm going to give you something new to eat. Rather He took an ancient ritual and breathed new life into it.

THAT is sacramental living. Asking that God the Holy Spirit will breathe His life into all that we do.

If I had a choice between never going into the hospital as chaplain again and never having communion again...I would choose the latter. Because the former is part of sacramental living which needs to permeate every moment of my day. And as I give to others...God gives to me. HIs grace flows through me to others and, in so doing, brings refreshing life to my spirit.

So..going back to the question of this thread. What takes place during baptism? My simple answer would be...absolutely nothing....unless the person being baptized has come before God with a witnessing heart and a faith that new life has come to them.

[Ian Gentles]

Though communion is important to me, do so very much understand what you are saying, witnessing and caring comes first, it has to.

[Doug Wise]

Thanks for your response Doug. .

I would mention one thing as it appears that you might have gone to The Salvation Army website and read some of their material when you talk about the "ceremony that mimics" baptism. I know the section you reference and I want to state that when I was in The Salvation Army, I was very uncomfortable with equating the "swearing in as a soldier" with baptism, simply because it was a public declaration of faith and identification with Christ.

The primary purpose of the ceremony is to receive someone into membership. Since other churches have similiar ceremonies, and don't claim that they are at all equivalent to baptism, I thought it was a faulty argument. Either you are confident enough in your non sacramental position to speak to it alone or you aren't. Don't try to say that something else you do sort of "counts" as baptism. And yes...I said this while I was in The Salvation Army.

For the record, this and other SA website comments certainly lean towards the premise that becoming a Soldier as an equivalent option to baptism.

“Instead of adult baptism, people can be made soldiers of The Salvation Army. This is the equivalent of gaining membership in any other church. People are "sworn-in" during a ceremony in which they give allegiance to God, the doctrines and the beliefs of The Salvation Army. “ - http://avenue.org/sarmy/symbols.htm





Now...I understand your "turtle on a fencepost" analogy. And here is my comment. I would say that if you reject the premise "it really isn't a turtle" then you accept that a "non turtle" force had to intervene and put it there. Maybe only to demonstrate that a turtle can be on a fence and still be a turtle. :-)

The one choice that isn't open to you is that it simply got up on the fence itself by accident.

Do you see where I am going with this? There could be a very valid reason why a "non human hand" might indeed have led The Salvation Army to its position (which I agree is out of sync with the rest of the Christian church).

Maybe that reason is simply to be a testimony to the fact that yes...one can be a Christian without being baptized. That when it comes right down to it...it isn't about ceremony but about belief.

Like the turtle, it might feel like an uncomfortable place to be, but it carries along until that same hand leads them off the fence.

The difficulty this creates is how big of an umbrella of acceptance should we build to accept or reject those we would call Christians?
Though the scriptures mandate baptism (Math: 28:19-20, Act 2:38) the Salvation Army does not comply with that request (Unless you buy that uniform = baptism). So if they are accepted as a part of the Church why would we reject the Jehovah Witnesses whose main difference from most other denominations is that they believe Jesus was God’s son, but not God himself. I could also make a similar argument for the Mormons, Christian Science, homosexual churches and several other beliefs that in the name Christ and do many good works but do not comply with certain scriptural mandates.
While good works are an important part of the Christian nature they should not come at the neglect or rejection of other parts of that very nature. Rejecting the sacrament God set forth as membership into His Church may tell the world this sacrament is not important, but what is more concerning is that it tells God that His sacrament that reflects the life, death and resurrection of His son is not important. The good works we do in life have importance, but pail in comparison to Christ’s works. Baptism reflects a joining with Christ by faith unto salvation and should not be neglected despite one’s many good works or best intentions.

Love in Christ,
Doug

[Ian Gentles]

Many Nazarene churches, certainly in UK offer no baptism to adult converts, so Salvation Army are at least up on us here.

http://iangentles.livejournal.com

[Anne and Dwayne Hood]

One thing I will not forget. A young single woman, would come here, and cover my feet and legs, below my knees, in lotion, after I had been in a tragic accident, and my skin had become so dry. My family would bathe me, but our daughter that was staying with me, had a young baby, and could not handle everything.
Then, after my cancer surgery, a number of years later, Julie would give up her Friday nights, with her friends to visit me. As I had chemo brain, there seemed to be nothing to smile about, and I felt I would always be that way, and a load on my family, until I died. She knew how to bring a smile to my face. She is married now, and lives in Minnesota, without a Nazarene church to attend. So, her and her husband, and now baby, attend the Lutheran church. Her adoptive dad is a Lutheran, but they had promised to raise her Catholic. Then, her dad's Naval Commander's daughter became a close friend, when she was a preteen, and she got into the Millington, Tn. church, but did not join, until she was 24. Her mother is gone now, and she calls us Dear and Papa.
She is a social worker on an Indian reservation near Duluth, Minnesota, and her husband, also has a job there.
I take communion, and have been baptized, but the love one shows seems to be so much more important--even though I feel that Christ wants us to do these other things, also.

[Barbara Moulton]

Doug, for the record, I already said I didn't agree with the SA argument about soldiership being equivalent to baptism. It was a weaker argument and not even introduced until the latter part of the 20th century. I think they have erred in using that argument but that doesn't mean they are out of God's will in this matter. I have always believed that God does use the witness of The Salvation Army, as a reminder that...yes...a turtle can still be a turtle...even if it has been placed on a fence. :)

I might as well be completely truthful here. Regardless of the fact that I have now been baptized, I will never feel as passionately about it as some do. It's a ceremony. God given but ultimately...only a ritual.

Jesus placed more emphasis on the state of one's heart than compliance with ritual or sacrifice. Despite the "great commission", Paul said that Christ had not sent him to baptize. John seemed to indicate that the baptism of Christ was different than the baptism of water. Jesus Himself did not baptize. If baptism was a "make or break" for salvation or full Christian obedience, than I don't think we would see any of these things written in Scripture.

Ultimately, Jesus said that people would know that we were His disciples by our love. Baptism, as I see it in the church today, is a testimony in front of other believers. The love for others that I saw demonstrated as I grew up in The Salvation Army seemed to speak to more non believers about a life transformed by Christ. Being raised in that environment means that I will always place more emphasis on that daily surrender to transforming flow of the spirit in my life than on outward ritual.

And I can't really think that God is less pleased with those who live their lives in that way, ministering to those who are in dark places of sin...then those who have driven out to a member's swimming pool after church on Sunday or gone behind the blue curtain in the sanctuary for immersion.

You said, "I could also make a similar argument for the Mormons, Christian Science, homosexual churches and several other beliefs that in the name Christ and do many good works but do not comply with certain scriptural mandates."

If this is truly your feeling than it is obvious that I should probably not discuss this with you further. And you might want to have a chat with the GS who received our credentials from The Salvation Army. He was obviously in deep error.

Blessings,
Barbara

From a hill I know
Healing waters flow,
O rise, Immanuel’s tide,
And my soul overflow.

Light, life, and love are in that healing fountain,
All I require to cleanse me and restore;
Flow through my soul, redeem its desert places
And make a great garden there for the Lord I adore.
Albert Orsborn, Salvation Army Song Book 647

[Meghan Schoonover]

I could also make a similar argument for the Mormons, Christian Science, homosexual churches and several other beliefs that in the name Christ and do many good works but do not comply with certain scriptural mandates.

I see that POV as making baptism into a works-based oddity. As a borderline regenerist, I personally believe that baptism, particularly paedo-baptism, can create faith through Water and Word, but I would never go so far as to equate the lack of baptism with religions who deny foundational aspects of God's character and personhood. Barbara isn't talking about simply "doing good works" but evidence of faith through good works and a changed heart...and that IS scriptural, according to James.

[Greg Farra]

A sacrament in Protestant terms consists of three things: a command of Christ's, a physical element, and a promise. Foot washing, therefore, would not meet all three, lacking a biblical promise, if I remember correct.

I've been reading Rob Staples' excellent book on the sacraments for awhile. It would be good reading for anyone here.

As far as baptism and salvation, from what I've gleaned so far is that baptism and salvation are closely related. It may be said that it is the usual way that God works salvation in us. This does not mean that an unbaptized
person cannot be saved, but that the usual method is baptism. It is God coming to us. Now faith is involved on our part, and even this is a gift from God. But it is a secondary part. God is the one who initiates salvation.

[Meghan Schoonover]

As far as baptism and salvation, from what I've gleaned so far is that baptism and salvation are closely related. It may be said that it is the usual way that God works salvation in us. This does not mean that an unbaptized person cannot be saved, but that the usual method is baptism. It is God coming to us. Now faith is involved on our part, and even this is a gift from God. But it is a secondary part. God is the one who initiates salvation.

That would be pretty close to, say, a Lutheran's baptismal regenerist position. I don't think most Nazarenes would subscribe that much "power" to baptism. Do you know the denominational affiliation of the author? I can see how this view could align with some elements of prevenient grace, though...

[Hans Deventer]

6 Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
but my ears you have pierced;
burnt offerings and sin offerings
you did not require.
7 Then I said, "Here I am, I have come—
it is written about me in the scroll.
8 I desire to do your will, O my God;
your law is within my heart." (Ps 40:6-8)

11 "The multitude of your sacrifices—
what are they to me?" says the LORD.
"I have more than enough of burnt offerings,
of rams and the fat of fattened animals;
I have no pleasure
in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats.
12 When you come to appear before me,
who has asked this of you,
this trampling of my courts?
13 Stop bringing meaningless offerings!
Your incense is detestable to me.
New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations—
I cannot bear your evil assemblies.
14 Your New Moon festivals and your appointed feasts
my soul hates.
They have become a burden to me;
I am weary of bearing them.
15 When you spread out your hands in prayer,
I will hide my eyes from you;
even if you offer many prayers,
I will not listen.
Your hands are full of blood;
16 wash and make yourselves clean.
Take your evil deeds
out of my sight!
Stop doing wrong,
17 learn to do right!
Seek justice,
encourage the oppressed. [a]
Defend the cause of the fatherless,
plead the case of the widow. (Isaiah 1:11-17)

Now one can argue quite convincingly that God actually DID command to sacrifice burnt offerings. Why would it be that the Psalmist and the prophet speak like this if the burnt offerings were essential? To me, this is analogous with baptism and any symbolic action commanded by God. It is all about changed hearts, faith in God, justice, about obedience in our daily lives.

If we live like that, the symbolic commandments have their place. Bot as soon as they themselves become the focus, something is already going wrong.

[Barbara Moulton]

A sacrament in Protestant terms consists of three things: a command of Christ's, a physical element, and a promise. Foot washing, therefore, would not meet all three, lacking a biblical promise, if I remember correct.

I've been reading Rob Staples' excellent book on the sacraments for awhile. It would be good reading for anyone here.

As far as baptism and salvation, from what I've gleaned so far is that baptism and salvation are closely related. It may be said that it is the usual way that God works salvation in us. This does not mean that an unbaptized
person cannot be saved, but that the usual method is baptism. It is God coming to us. Now faith is involved on our part, and even this is a gift from God. But it is a secondary part. God is the one who initiates salvation.

So you believe that baptism actually WORKS salvation in us?

[Kevin Rector]

Anyway, for the people in Corinth (and the first believers in general), baptism followed faith, right? One first comes to faith in the Lord Jesus, and then, generally, baptism follows. The NT knows of no unbaptized Christians, apart from the man who died on the cross next to Jesus, but that was because there was no opportunity. And of course it is commanded by the Lord.

Yet I cannot find a trace of the teaching that people who were not baptized, would be lost (as has been taught in the church). In fact, Peter says that "the pledge of a good conscience toward God" is what saves us "by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3 :21 ff). Elsewhere Paul makes clear that we are saved by grace through faith. Which is a similar statement. But I'm starting to ramble :basic01

No one ever responded to this post Hans, but I wanted to thank you for it because I think that this post sums up so much.

We are saved by trusting God to save us through Jesus Christ. Every action and activity that is "Christian" then follows that includes the sacraments.

[Greg Farra]

That would be pretty close to, say, a Lutheran's baptismal regenerist position. I don't think most Nazarenes would subscribe that much "power" to baptism. Do you know the denominational affiliation of the author? I can see how this view could align with some elements of prevenient grace, though...

Rob Staples,at least at the time of this book, was professor of theology at Nazarene Theological Seminaryand formerly taught theology at Southern Nazarene University. He also had pastored two churches and was at one time the president of the Wesleyan Theological Society, according to the bio on the cover.

[Greg Farra]

So you believe that baptism actually WORKS salvation in us?

It's God that works salvation in us, and it can be done through baptism. I wouldn't say that's it's a magical guarantee, as some hyper-sacramentalists seem to think, but God initiates salvation, not us.

[Doug Wise]

Megan,
I would say that according to your description we are actually pretty close on our understanding of what baptism is.

The purpose of my comparison was to draw attention to where we draw lines of which denominational beliefs are considered orthodox and which are not.
In the case of Arianism knock offs like the Jehovah Witnesses or Unitarians one of the major objections is that they don’t hold to the Trinity. First, there is no scriptural mandate that one must believe Jesus is God unto salvation. The formulated idea of the trinity was developed over time in the early church and was supported through several councils starting around 250 years after the birth of the church.
The need and want to be baptized however was never in question. The earliest argument in the church over baptism I am aware of occurred over some wanting to baptize infants before 8 days old and those who said baptism was so solidly connected to circumcision they should wait until the 8th day.

So Megan, please help me to understand exactly why, considering your baptismal beliefs, you believe the Salvation Army’s rejection of biblically mandated, historically supported baptism allows them to be fully accepted by most as an unquestionably orthodox Christian denomination, while JW’s and/or Unitarians rejection of the trinity, a non-mandated belief and with which the early church was divided, makes them heretical?



Love in Christ,
Doug

[Ian Gentles]

Our good works, done in faith, go before us.

[Meghan Schoonover]

So Megan, please help me to understand exactly why, considering your baptismal beliefs, you believe the Salvation Army’s rejection of biblically mandated, historically supported baptism allows them to be fully accepted by most as an unquestionably orthodox Christian denomination, while JW’s and/or Unitarians rejection of the trinity, a non-mandated belief and with which the early church was divided, makes them heretical?
Doug

1) The other examples you gave believe in false gods...their denial of the Trinity makes it so. Their "faith" is in the wrong thing, no matter how sincere.

2) Baptism is not the only way to come to faith. It is *a* way. Hearing the Word is probably the most common way, and I readily accept that is what's happening for members of the SA.

[Ian Gentles]

SA is certainly different, but what bodies have bettered them, in love, ministering to the needy? Give me actions rather than sacraments, even though i hold sacraments very dear indeed.

[Doug Wise]

SA is certainly different, but what bodies have bettered them, in love, ministering to the needy? Give me actions rather than sacraments, even though i hold sacraments very dear indeed.


Hmm, actions verses sacraments?
Herein lies the problem; we are meant to participate in both. There is no reason to place one over the other. To do so devalues both.

Love in Christ,
Doug

[Doug Wise]

6 Sacrifice and offering you did not desire,
but my ears you have pierced;
burnt offerings and sin offerings
you did not require.
7 Then I said, "Here I am, I have come—
it is written about me in the scroll.
8 I desire to do your will, O my God;
your law is within my heart." (Ps 40:6-8)

11 "The multitude of your sacrifices—
what are they to me?" says the LORD.
"I have more than enough of burnt offerings,
of rams and the fat of fattened animals;
I have no pleasure
in the blood of bulls and lambs and goats.
12 When you come to appear before me,
who has asked this of you,
this trampling of my courts?
13 Stop bringing meaningless offerings!
Your incense is detestable to me.
New Moons, Sabbaths and convocations—
I cannot bear your evil assemblies.
14 Your New Moon festivals and your appointed feasts
my soul hates.
They have become a burden to me;
I am weary of bearing them.
15 When you spread out your hands in prayer,
I will hide my eyes from you;
even if you offer many prayers,
I will not listen.
Your hands are full of blood;
16 wash and make yourselves clean.
Take your evil deeds
out of my sight!
Stop doing wrong,
17 learn to do right!
Seek justice,
encourage the oppressed. [a]
Defend the cause of the fatherless,
plead the case of the widow. (Isaiah 1:11-17)

Now one can argue quite convincingly that God actually DID command to sacrifice burnt offerings. Why would it be that the Psalmist and the prophet speak like this if the burnt offerings were essential? To me, this is analogous with baptism and any symbolic action commanded by God. It is all about changed hearts, faith in God, justice, about obedience in our daily lives.

If we live like that, the symbolic commandments have their place. Bot as soon as they themselves become the focus, something is already going wrong.


Hans,
I of coarse find some difficulty in your analogy ;-)
The Jews were a covenant people and baptism is about covenant. In our western thought we may place little importance on covenant but to the Jews it held great importance. Your analogy places baptism a one-time covenant-sealing event in the same light as sacrifices, a common event made continually under the old covenant. While neither one of the scriptures you chose is directly related to baptism it is interesting that the author of Hebrews (10:1-25) sees a very different analogy in Ps 40 than you do. To him it is the end of the old covenant (The Law) and a new covenant (new life) in Christ. He even goes so far as to as to draw the representative figure of baptism into new covenant theology (Vs 22).

Why do you only address the symbolic in your analogy?

If we live like changed hearts, faith in God, justice, about obedience in our daily lives, what purpose if any do you see in the “symbolic” commandments?

If the physical day to day actions we do (no matter how virtuous) if they themselves become the focus is not that also a sign something is already going wrong?

I see this thread as developing into which is better; good works or participation in a God ordained sacrament. My position is both and neither. Both have great synergy and accomplishment when working together. Neither accomplishes much without the other.
Baptism, God’s mark of His new covenant in Christ, is of the greatest importance, but if one does not operate inside that covenant of love I would greatly question the faith in which they entered or continue to operate within that covenant. As for works of love, if they are ones focus and not an outcropping of the new covenant what is their real eternal worth? There are many fine groups from various cultures and religions helping people throughout the world, but good works will not earn one a trip to eternity. The price has already been paid and baptism is the monolith that marks one as a part of that covenant.
So as I see it baptism without obedience and works without the New Covenant can both join old covenant animal sacrifice without repentance as not being fully acceptable to God.

So what do you think?

Love in Christ,
Doug

[Ian Gentles]

If sacraments are seen as a means of salvation, i am totally opposed, its only faith in Jesus that saves. Sacraments are a sign, nothing more,of what has been achieved through saving faith.

http://iangentles.livejournal.com

[Paul Willis]

A sermon by John Wesley that helped me greatly:

The Means of Grace (http://wesley.nnu.edu/john_wesley/sermons/016.htm)

[Eric Frey]

If sacraments are seen as a means of salvation, i am totally opposed, its only faith in Jesus that saves. Sacraments are a sign, nothing more,of what has been achieved through saving faith.

http://iangentles.livejournal.com

A sacrament is an outward sign of an inward grace AND A MEANS BY WHICH WE RECIEVE THE SAME. We often forget the second half. Baptism is a outward sign of the inward grace of salvation and a means by which we are saved.

What is faith. I doubt very seriously that faith is limited to some inner feeling. I much prefer to see faith in action. That action can be any number of things, but what is clear that faith must be EXPRESSED in divine action.

[Barbara Moulton]

I see this thread as developing into which is better; good works or participation in a God ordained sacrament.

I wasn't going to enter this thread again but I am concerned that I am being misunderstood. It was never my intent to say that "good works" were better than sacraments. If any of my wording led to that conclusion, I apologize.

I do maintain that God wants us to live a life of loving sacrifice to those around us, so that His grace can flow through us. I believe in the sacraments. But I believe they go beyond rituals to the very heart of how we live our Christian life in a fallen, hurting world. This is sacramental living.

And I believe God wants us to have both in our lives yes. But God, being God, can choose to lead a "peculiar people" on a different path if He so chooses...for His own reasons.

Blessings,
Barbara

[Hans Deventer]

Hmm, actions verses sacraments?
Herein lies the problem; we are meant to participate in both. There is no reason to place one over the other. To do so devalues both.

There is reason, for we have Christians who do not participate in sacraments. What are we to say about them? That they aren't saved? Aren't Christians? Of course not. So if only from that point of view, we have all the reason to place one above the other. Without works, faith is dead. Without faith, no salvation. Without sacraments, you miss out on what God has intended for us, but you can full well be saved. Faith (there is no such thing as faith without works) and sacraments simply aren't equal in a salvific way. By grace we are saved through faith. Even if the turtle is sitting on a fence and it should not be there, it is still true that faith and sacraments are not equal.

[Hans Deventer]

Hans, I of course find some difficulty in your analogy ;-)

Doug, that's OK, but I myself find it very convincing. The prophets spoke strongly against those that tried to maintain the forms while denying the heart of God's message. I believe people can be saved without the outer forms, but they cannot without a changed heart.
And because church history has seen ages of totally useless discussions on outer forms, I have come to hate those discussions and particularly if people start to argue in the "yes, but" vein and try to turn some outer form into an essential. This is to explain where I'm coming from. It's one of the reasons I'm a Nazarene. It was the only church that accepted Hannie and me. (Hannie was baptized as a child, I was baptized in the Dutch Reformed Church at the age of 20, so by sprinkling, and we wanted to have our children dedicated. There was no church but the CotN who would receive us.)

Why do you only address the symbolic in your analogy?

Because I see no other value than in the symbolic realm. The blood of bulls and goats did not actually accomplish salvation, only God's grace, as you probably have read yourself as well in Hebrews 10. And now you are trying to replace the one ceremony that didn't save people with another that doesn't save either, because salvation in both OT and NT is only by faith in God? I must be misunderstanding you.

If we live like changed hearts, faith in God, justice, about obedience in our daily lives, what purpose if any do you see in the “symbolic” commandments?

The purpose of the symbolic commands (without quotation marks) is to be a proclamation without words. It is much like the Passover meal. "Lest we forget". It is to nurture our faith, remind us of the great deeds of God. Of his immense love for sinners, for the entire world! And we need that.

If the physical day to day actions we do (no matter how virtuous), if they themselves become the focus is not that also a sign something is already going wrong?

No, it is the sign that the Kingdom of God is among us and we are actually fulfilling God's purpose with our lives. We're not merely "playing church". If the focus is on what should nurture our faith, in stead of what God would want to accomplish through us by our faith, our focus would indeed be mistaken.
Like a football team that keeps watching training video's, but never actually gets to play a real match. The training video's have their purpose, but they are there in order to have the team play better. There is a clear goal to the Christian life. Sacraments remind us of the first part of what Paul describes, but are to lead to the second part.
For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this not from yourselves, it is the gift of God— not by works, so that no one can boast. For we are God's workmanship, created in Christ Jesus to do good works, which God prepared in advance for us to do. (Eph 2:8-10)


I see this thread as developing into which is better; good works or participation in a God ordained sacrament. My position is both and neither. Both have great synergy and accomplishment when working together. Neither accomplishes much without the other.

I disagree when this is expanded to the salvific realm.

Baptism, God’s mark of His new covenant in Christ, is of the greatest importance

Again, I disagree. The faith of which baptism is an expression, is of the greatest importance. And that is a crucial difference.


but if one does not operate inside that covenant of love I would greatly question the faith in which they entered or continue to operate within that covenant. As for works of love, if they are one's focus and not an outcropping of the new covenant what is their real eternal worth? There are many fine groups from various cultures and religions helping people throughout the world, but good works will not earn one a trip to eternity.

I presume you will agree I never even remotely hinted to the idea that we are not saved by grace alone?


The price has already been paid and baptism is the monolith that marks one as a part of that covenant.

Yes. Just a marker. Not the real thing. Useful, but not essential. A marker indeed and as such, it has value.


So as I see it baptism without obedience and works without the New Covenant can both join old covenant animal sacrifice without repentance as not being fully acceptable to God. So what do you think?

With that I can agree, though I would not include the word "fully". Baptism without obedience, faith without works, sacrifices without repentance aren't acceptable at all.

[Doug Wise]

Hans,
Thank you for your very thoughtful reply.

God's Peace,
Doug


If passion drives you, let reason hold the reins - Benjamin Franklin