Path: utzoo!censor!geac!torsqnt!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!thunder.mcrcim.mcgill.edu!snorkelwacker.mit.edu!apple!usc!samsung!news.cs.indiana.edu!rutgers!aramis.rutgers.edu!athos.rutgers.edu!christian From: charles@rpi.edu (Charles K. Hurst) Newsgroups: soc.religion.christian Subject: Re: Is the Bible 100% correct? Message-ID: Date: 22 Jan 91 06:44:15 GMT Sender: hedrick@athos.rutgers.edu Organization: Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute, Troy NY Lines: 106 Approved: christian@aramis.rutgers.edu [This continues a discussion on the necessity of baptism. It's hard to be sure who said what beneath all the widgets, but I believe Frank Farkas cited Mark 16;16: >I believe that you are incorrect about your statement that Mark 16:16 >doesn't cover "one who believes but is not baptized". >In fact, it says that to be saved one must believe *and* must be baptised. --clh] Um, Frank, it says that if you have x and y, then you get z. This does not prove that if z, then you must have x and y. You could have x and v. A simple math demonstration will show this: 2 plus 2 equals 4, but 4 does not always equal 2 plus 2, you could have 3 plus 1, 0 plus 4, -3 plus 7, 2 times 2, square root of 16, all of these could give you 4. Thus your statement that Mark 16:16 says that to be saved one must believe *and* must be baptized" is not true. It only says that if [believe & baptized], then saved. Geoff Allen is right, you are wrong. You need to take some courses in logic and argument. I have, and it often helps me catch mistakes like this. >[text deleted] > >John 3:5 >======== >"Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto the, Except a man be born of the >water and of the spirit, he can't enter into the kingdom of God." > >Jesus clearly teaches that baptism by water and by the spirit is a >requirement for entry into the kingdom of God. > Umm, Frank, Christ talked to Nicodemus that man must be "born again", i.e. that man is not only born of the flesh, but he must also be born of the spirit. Now what does Christ mean by born of water? You say he means baptism, but I point out that when I child is in his mother's womb, he is supported in a fluid. At birth, this fluid often rushes out of the womb ahead of the child. (excuse my non-medical terminology, if I am wrong here, someone give me a quick flame of correction) Thus, people are born of the water, which is one way of describing that phenomena. This sounds likely to me, but then again, I am not looking at the original greek, so I may be way off-base. But this is a valid alternative to Christ meaning baptism, rendering his statement more as "You have to be born physically and spiritually to get into the kingdom of God", which is basically what he told Nicodemus. >Acts 2:37-38 >============ >"Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto >Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and bretheren, what shall we do?" > >"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in >the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the >gift of the Holy Ghost." > Again, this verse does NOT say that you are not saved if you believe but are not baptized, it only says that if [believe & baptized], then saved. >[text deleted] >>Baptism is a *very* important part of the faith, and is done as a >>testimony to one's faith. But the *only* requirement for salvation is >>faith in Christ. >> I agree whole-heartedly. Faith is the only requirement. > >That is not what Mark 16:16 says, it is not what Jesus said to >Nicodemus, and this is not what Peter said to those who have heard >him, and as a direct result had faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. > Sigh. Frank, I refuted this logic above. You are beginning to sound like a broken record. >Additional food for thaught. Jesus who was sinless was baptised by >John the Baptist. John resisted at first and used the arguement that >Jesus should baptise him and not the other way around. Jesus didn't >disagree, however, he told John that it should be done to fulfill all >righteousness. Now, if Jesus who was sinless was baptised to fulfill >all righteousness, how much more we sinners need to be baptised. Jesus >showed the way a man may be saved and I for one will not intellectualize >away the requirements he has set. > I was of the opinion that Christ's baptism was an anointing, and a sign to show that he was selected by God. Unfortunately, Frank, you have intellectualized your way into the baptism REQUIREMENT. I am not saying that believers don't need to be baptized, just that it is not required to be SAVED. Love in Christ, Charles [It is notoriously hard to convince people that their reading of a text is wrong. I can only say that every commentator I've ever read takes water and the Spirit as both referring to being born again. Those who do not believe that baptism is absolutely necessary (e.g. Calvin) see water here as symbolic of cleansing by the Holy Spirit or otherwise symbolic. I think the problem with this is that the NT doesn't really answer our question. The authors take it for granted that people who came to believe were baptized. That doesn't mean however that situations can't come up where this is unrealistic. Catholic tradition, which generally has accepted baptism as necessary for salvation, also has made allowances for situations where it is impossible or unreasonable for one reason or another. --clh]