Should Christians be baptised with water?

[Caledonian Rhyfelwyr]

I've always felt that water baptism seemed like a bit of an empty ceremony, and I thought it was strange that it seems to be the only ritualistic practice that has survived in the more hardline Protestant churches.

Generally, such ritualistic practices have been rejected as a throwback to the bondage of the law and the old Jewish ceremonies.

At first you might think it is obvious that baptism is there in the New Testament. But when I was thinking over the third chapter of Matthew, I thought that the order of events might be significant.

Firstly, John the Baptist's ministry was unique, in that he preached the imminent coming of the promised messiah, but still before the work of the cross had been done. As it says is Matthew:

"I indeed baptist you with water unto repentance, but he that cometh after me is greather than I; whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptise you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire" (Matthew 3:11)

As such, John's water baptism was a symbol of the inner baptism we go through with Christ. Of course, Christ took up his ministry at the end of the same chapter, in effect making John and his water baptism redundant from that point. The baptism with Christ is greater, we now have the real deal, and not just the shadow.

Secondly, people might object that at that point, Jesus himself was baptised in water. However, an obvious response is that Jesus followed many Jewish observances. Again, timing is significant, since these were abolished when he fulfilled the law upon the cross (Hebrews demonstrates this point very well). The Jewish practice of 'mikvah'/baptism was given as a sort of ritual cleansing for those wishing to enter the temple - symbolically significant for Jesus, as the one who would claim to be the final and perfect high priest.

Why, then, do Christians today fascinate themselves with the ritual of the shadow, when they have the real deal? We are not made regenerate by baptism through water, but by being buried with Christ in a baptism of fire, when we receive the Holy Spirit.

I did some quick searching to see if anyone agreed with me, apparently the Quakers did (yay?)...

[Jaketh]

i dont think anyone should be baptised, i was and i had no say in it and if i had i choice i would have choosen not to

[Trax]

What's the point of having a religion if you can't have nice colourful ceremonies?

[Squiggle]

I actually agree with you Caledonian, I have not been baptized. At worst baptism seems to be superstitious magic [Catholicism] or a relatively meaningless ritual [most of Protestantism].

edit: I'd just like to point out that my understanding of Protestant baptism is that its an ordinance [at least for most], basically an overt sign of your religious faith and piety, where you are infused with the holy spirit. It is not required for salvation. As I said, I dont really think splashing water on your head constitutes being infused with the holy spirit, but yeah.

[jankren]

I actually agree with you Caledonian, I have not been baptized. At worst baptism seems to be superstitious magic [Catholicism] or a relatively meaningless ritual [most of Protestantism].

How is baptism any more superstitious than believing some Jewish carpenter 2000 years ago turned water into wine?

[basics]

" How is baptism any more superstitious than believing some Jewish carpenter 2000 years ago turned water into wine? "

jankren,

I understood that to be superstitious it was to believe that something can influence what a person may or may not do. The secret here is " to do " because it entails that person acting or working to act. Now in worldly jargon that brings in hope that something good can be had by the actions of the doer. That these actions can be repetative adds to the superstition.

Not so in the case of Jesus turning water into wine. He didn't hope that it would happen. He knew it would as did his mother when she called upon Him to intervene, very reluctantly I may add on His part. Now there is quite a difference here because this was done by faith not hope nor superstition, as much by His mother as Him.

It was that same faith that took Him onto the cross, faith that He would be resurrected, and it is the same faith by which we who are born again are saved for resurrection. It is no more hope rather a surety built on knowledge of Him as well as the experiencing of all that promised to them that do believe through regeneration. But if we believe that others who call on the same name are not led by superstition, we delude ourselves.

[Helm]

They should go back to how it was to begin with and be baptised with earth, water, air and fire, the four elements.

[CamilleBonparte]

Fire baptism sounds painful.

[basics]

" Why, then, do Christians today fascinate themselves with the ritual of the shadow, when they have the real deal? We are not made regenerate by baptism through water, but by being buried with Christ in a baptism of fire, when we receive the Holy Spirit."

Caledonian Rhyfelwyr,

Water baptism has become a symbol of going down into the grave and of coming back out as Jesus Christ did for us. Therefore we do it as an example, an announcement if you like to the world that we now belong to Christ. That is as far as it goes. John's baptism was for repentence but of course repentence is not regeneration and shouldn't be seen as such.

So when systems baptise children with water what repentence do children understand that would make them change into Christians? According to some they are born sacred and to others innocent so what difference does water make if in such cases as spoken they don't know sin? How can they repent of something they are supposedly alien to? There are many answers to this but none are from Scripture.

[Caledonian Rhyfelwyr]

So when systems baptise children with water what repentence do children understand that would make them change into Christians? According to some they are born sacred and to others innocent so what difference does water make if in such cases as spoken they don't know sin? How can they repent of something they are supposedly alien to? There are many answers to this but none are from Scripture.

Definitely, I agree with you here. This thread was actually inspired by the fact that another infant was baptised at my church today (and they later read the bit from Matthew 3 that got me wondering), and it just seemed pointless. They sprinked some water on a baby that didn't know what was going on, and its not like its parents are going to start attending church (yeah, the minister does it when they are not even church-goers). Pointless.

Water baptism has become a symbol of going down into the grave and of coming back out as Jesus Christ did for us. Therefore we do it as an example, an announcement if you like to the world that we now belong to Christ. That is as far as it goes. John's baptism was for repentence but of course repentence is not regeneration and shouldn't be seen as such.

Again, I agree. But... is it not harmful to our Christian liberty to institutionalise such symbolic practices into the church, just as the Jews did with their own ceremonies that were given to foreshadow Christ? To turn Christianity into a religion of rituals and observances... it just doesn't sit well with me, and I don't think it has warrant in scripture.

Indeed, as Apostle to the Gentiles, Paul wrote to the Corinthians that "Christ sent me not to baptise, but to preach the Gospel" (1 Corinthians 1:17). Paul did administer baptisms, but it is known that those that were mentioned were for Jews, which is significant as I'll show in a minute.

Now, it is only Peter, as Apostle to the Jews, that is recorded actually carrying out baptisms. Because to the Jews, this was a sort of final observance, the last of their ritual cleansings, before they converted. It is Peter showing respect for their traditions, in the same way that Paul did in having Timothy circumcised.

And yet look how Paul railed against circumcision elsewhere on the grounds that it was an empty ritual, a symbol for the circumcision of our hearts. He didn't say to circumcise yourselves to symbolise the circumcision of your heart to other believers. It is inconsistent that this same person would encourage a ritual like baptism. Indeed, there is no scriptural evidence to suggest that he did.

[basics]

Caledonian Rhyfelwyr,

Baptism cannot be an essential because the thief on the cross was not baptised yet he was given to be in Paradise that night. The only thing that I can say as being now Baptist is that my own immersion and testimony was made to a congregation that I assume were all born again.

Indeed my own dear wife is not baptised but she is born again and probably a better Christian than me. Our problem is that none of us really knows who it is that Jesus Christ knows or whose names are written in the book of life but what we do know is that water baptism does not save.

You are quite right about the Jewish customs and as these were but types and shadows of the real thing then they really shouldn't matter that much to Gentile converts. I think we could look at it this way when Paul does not dictate what is essentially the Sabbath saying it could be any day and for some every day so the same for baptism.

The all important thing is, is where your heart is, that being centred on God our Saviour.

[Caledonian Rhyfelwyr]

Caledonian Rhyfelwyr,

Baptism cannot be an essential because the thief on the cross was not baptised yet he was given to be in Paradise that night. The only thing that I can say as being now Baptist is that my own immersion and testimony was made to a congregation that I assume were all born again.

Indeed my own dear wife is not baptised but she is born again and probably a better Christian than me. Our problem is that none of us really knows who it is that Jesus Christ knows or whose names are written in the book of life but what we do know is that water baptism does not save.

You are quite right about the Jewish customs and as these were but types and shadows of the real thing then they really shouldn't matter that much to Gentile converts. I think we could look at it this way when Paul does not dictate what is essentially the Sabbath saying it could be any day and for some every day so the same for baptism.

The all important thing is, is where your heart is, that being centred on God our Saviour.

Amen, especially to the bolded bit at the end.

I have one thought though... it would maybe be more appropriate to compare baptism to circumcision, rather than the observance of the sabbath day.

The reason I say this is that the circumcision was a truly empty ceremony, its only value was in what is foreshadowed, and hence we no longer observe it.

On the other hand, when it comes to the sabbath, it could be argued that it is a creation ordinance. As such, the ceremonial aspect is removed with Christ (the particular day, which was Saturday to the Jews), but the idea of having a day of rest every week is something that is integral to the condition of every person, and is as natural (and necessary, for they to whom it is given) as the marriage between one man and woman.

So, whether or not someone observes the sabbath on a particular day is... I guess you would call it a 'thing indifferent'. But purely ceremonial rituals, such as circumcision or water baptism, could actually (maybe) be said to be damaging to a persons' spiritual good.

Certainly, I know this is not the case for many people who like yourself who actually have a thorough knowledge of the scriptures. But for others keeping these rituals leads to complaceny. They think because they have had water sprinkled on them, they are OK with God. Also, I think the ritual surrounding baptism may spread the wrong message about Christianity, since it does seem rather arbitrary and superstitious.

For these reasons, I think we would be best to do away with it completely.

[Helm]

Baptism of fire I say.



Do you see how hardcore that is? Any sinful impurity will be burned clean out ye system. This is what real men do.

[Gromovnik]

Baptism of fire I say.



Do you see how hardcore that is? Any sinful impurity will be burned clean out ye system. This is what real men do.

they look more like tree huggers to me...

[Helm]

they look more like tree huggers to me...

They're Polynesians, at one with nature and the flame.

[Pious Agnost]

They're Polynesians, at one with nature and the flame.

I'm Polynesian.

You've fallen into a tourist trap.

[Sphere]

What's the point of having a religion if you can't have nice colourful ceremonies?

Especially since witch burning and heretic killing has gone out of style.

[Trax]

Especially since witch burning and heretic killing has gone out of style.

I was completely serious before.
Should I ever, for some strange reason, feel the urge to become religious, I will certainly choose the most colourful denomination available in my vicinity.

[Marie Louise von Preussen]

Especially since witch burning and heretic killing has gone out of style.

Typical stupid drivel - TSD above.

[nce_wht_guy]

I could debate this issue for days, but what I'd really like to know is if huns actually believe this nonsense or if they're just extremely lazy.