Is Baptism Just an Inert Outward Symbol?

[zecryphon_nomdiv]

Indeed, God chooses whom He wills. God redeems whom He wills. God brings whom He wills to repentance. Baptism not needed for any of it. Therefore, God calls us to obedience in baptism, not because it saves us or forgives sins, but because it expresses to foreigners that we are citizens of God's Kingdom and are no longer citizens of the worldly kingdoms who are in rebellion against God.

Then why does Jesus say to go baptize and teach in The Great Commission, if Baptism is unnecessary?

 

[atpollard]

Please read the opening post and title of the thread. (1)

You have the wrong thread; there is a thread about the Anabsptist invention in the 16th Century about an AGE requirement BUT THIS IS NOT THAT THREAD. Attempts to get the thread closed and trashed failed, it seems now the desire is to hijack it to ANY other topic; meanwhile, over at the thread that IS about AGE, no one can get you to list any Scriptures on Baptism that so much as even mention some AGE, for anything, about anyone... just endless repetitions that the Bible states mystical age of X (you just won't list it) and endless repetitions that we cannot do anything is not clearly illustrated as done in the Bible (such as posting on the internet) and cannot do what is not clearly illustrated as done in the Bible - a rubric you clearly reject and never once actually follow (in anything, not even Baptism). Oh, and the endless claim that every baptism in the BIble was of one over this page of we-won't-tell-you, while proving the clsim is not true. IF - finally - you an show the Bible states this prohibition on Baptism because of AGE - then finally quote that Scripture. BUT NOT HERE.


This thread is for you to list all those Scriptures (and other voices, if you chose) that confirms the Anbaptist/Baptist distinctive dogma that baptism is ONLY a symbol, "an outward symbol of a previous accomplishment by the recipient." (2) An inert, purely symbolic jesture. I listed much that suggests it's not true in post #1.... we are now on page 8, and so far, NOTHING - not one Scripture, not one ANYTHING - has been presented to support the reinvention of Baptism by the Anabaptist in the 16th Century, the distinctive dogma of Baptists, the dogma you and others echo endlessly. If you have nothing - okay, I understand, no problem. MennoSota at least stated that (to his credit) but if you too have nothing, then why are you posting here? If this defining, distinctive Dogma Baptists so powerfully stress has nothing in Scripture (or anywhere else before that Anabaptist wrote stuff such as quoted above), OK. I suspect if any had anything, it would have been stated by now, however.



Thank you.



- Josiah







.

1. I will stop making off-topic responses when paedobaptists stop making false, off-topic claims.

2. That’s easy ... Ephesians 2:1-10 (to provide context).

3. I had not attempted to provide any contribution to this discussion based on the OP because you wanted verses that stated that baptism was “nothing” and I do not view symbolism as nothing. Ebeneezers are real and they are important. The Passover lamb that commemorated what God had done and who they were as a people was real and it was important. The blood of lambs and bulls shed on the altar in the Temple was real and was important. The Rainbow is real and it is important. The bread and wine at communion is real and it is important. THEY ARE ALL SYMBOLS AND THEY ARE ALL REAL AND THEY ARE ALL IMPORTANT. So, too, Baptism is real and it is a symbol of our burial and resurrection with Christ and it is important.

As a Baptist, baptism is a symbol of what God has already done (past) since our sins were forgiven on the cross so long ago, we are already children of God in Christ ... and baptism is a symbol of what God is doing (present) since our sin nature is being changed into the nature of Christ as we are being sanctified day by day, dying each day to the old man and choosing to renew our mind with Christ ... and baptism is a symbol of a (future) promise that God has made and that God will fulfill in which the perishable will die one last time and be raised imperishable and perfected to join Christ where He is in the eternal home of the Father. So I cannot argue that baptism is “merely” anything and I certainly cannot argue that baptism is “nothing”, but I can affirm that baptism is symbolic of what God HAS DONE, IS DOING and WILL DO ... and that is EVERYTHING (not nothing).

 

[Josiah]

Then why does Jesus say to go baptize and teach in The Great Commission, if Baptism is unnecessary?

Good question (don't expect it to be addressed)....


Yup. Jesus Himself placed it central in the Great Commission - with only one other thing and seemly equal to it, that of teaching. And clearly it was very important in the Early Church and for 1500 years. I think that's undeniable. Now, we can compare that to another act, the only ritual I can think of that Jesus did and everyone (always) understood as ONLY SYMBOLIC, that of foot washing. It's interesting to look at how a SYMBOLIC ACT was regarded - in the Bible, in the Early Church, in the writings of the Church Fathers, and ever since. And then compare that to Baptism. IF Baptism is ONLY a symbol (and again, no one denies it IS that), if it is ONLY a "SYMBOL" a purely symbolic act just like foot washing, why was it SO radically different in how Baptism was regarded?


I think this is clear, obvious and undeniable: In the Opening post, I shared a large corpus of Scriptures as well as important early Christians that certainly suggests Baptism is MORE than "just a symbol" "only a symbol" "Only an outward symbol of a previous, personal accomplishment." And in 9 pages of posts, no one has presented even one Scripture or even one important quote before the Anabaptists in the 16th Century to support the Anabaptist/baptist view that "Baptism is ONLY an outward symbol.... just an outward symbol of a previous personal accomplishment, that's all."


Thank you.


- Josiah



.

 

[Albion]

1. I will stop making off-topic responses when paedobaptists stop making false, off-topic claims.

Is there some sort of guarantee that comes with that? Past experience suggests that we really need something other than your suspicion that anything which doesn't make sense to you is, ipso facto, false. Especially because there have been quite a few in that category.

 

[atpollard]

.

 

[Particular]

Perhaps this will tickle ears.
http://www.eng.auburn.edu/~sjreeves/personal/baptism_faq.html