The ones in Acts 10:47,48 being saved are the ones that obey Peters command to be water baptized the same as in Acts 2:38, the ones that obey Peter command to be baptized for remission of sin. AS Peter said in Acts 15:11 in how Jew and Gentile are saved in like manner. The like manner way the Jews in Acts 2 and Gentiles in Acts 10 were saved is water baptism in the name of the Lord for remission of sins and NOT baptism with the Holy Spirit. Peer's listeners in Acts 2 were NOT baptized with the Holy Spirit.
Baptism Essential to Salvation
- Thread starter apostolic862004
- Start date
-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
The ones in Acts 10:47,48 being saved are the ones that obey Peters command to be water baptized the same as in Acts 2:38, the ones that obey Peter command to be baptized for remission of sin. AS Peter said in Acts 15:11 in how Jew and Gentile are saved in like manner. The like manner way the Jews in Acts 2 and Gentiles in Acts 10 were saved is water baptism in the name of the Lord for remission of sins and NOT baptism with the Holy Spirit. Peer's listeners in Acts 2 were NOT baptized with the Holy Spirit.
Re: Trying to Escape the Non-Baptism of the Thief on the Cross
That whole argument of yours about the thief was based upon the "CLAIM" the thief had not been baptized. So if you cannot prove the thief had never been water baptized, then that argument fails.
How do you know that the thief was not among those in Mk 1:5 that was water baptized?
The thief was not hanging on that cross all his life
Luke tells us the thief knew there was a God and that God was to be feared, The thief knew Christ was an innocent man and the thief knew that the cross would not be the end of Christ that Christ would have a kingdom and the thief knew he needed to be in that kingdom. The thief knew as much or more about Christ than some of Christ's own disciples. So it could be possible the thief was once a disciple himself but fell away into a life of crime.
That whole argument of yours about the thief was based upon the "CLAIM" the thief had not been baptized. So if you cannot prove the thief had never been water baptized, then that argument fails.
How do you know that the thief was not among those in Mk 1:5 that was water baptized?
The thief was not hanging on that cross all his life
Luke tells us the thief knew there was a God and that God was to be feared, The thief knew Christ was an innocent man and the thief knew that the cross would not be the end of Christ that Christ would have a kingdom and the thief knew he needed to be in that kingdom. The thief knew as much or more about Christ than some of Christ's own disciples. So it could be possible the thief was once a disciple himself but fell away into a life of crime.
What leads you to suppose that such a thing exists as "NT salvation"?
What makes you think that there has ever been any requirement except faith?
Why does scripture use OT Abe as the example in Gal & Rom?
Gal 3:
"by the hearing of faith? Even as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness. Know therefore that they that are of faith, the same are sons of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand unto Abraham,"
Rom 4:
"What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, hath found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not toward God. For what saith the scripture? And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness."
Why does scripture use OT David as an example?
Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness. Even as David also pronounceth blessing upon the man, unto whom God reckoneth righteousness apart from works, saying,
Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not reckon sin.
Why does Hebrews 11 trot out a Hall of Fame of OT saints to encourage us to the same exercise of faith?
What makes you think that there has ever been any requirement except faith?
Why does scripture use OT Abe as the example in Gal & Rom?
Gal 3:
"by the hearing of faith? Even as Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness. Know therefore that they that are of faith, the same are sons of Abraham. And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the Gentiles by faith, preached the gospel beforehand unto Abraham,"
Rom 4:
"What then shall we say that Abraham, our forefather, hath found according to the flesh? For if Abraham was justified by works, he hath whereof to glory; but not toward God. For what saith the scripture? And Abraham believed God, and it was reckoned unto him for righteousness. Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness."
Why does scripture use OT David as an example?
Now to him that worketh, the reward is not reckoned as of grace, but as of debt. But to him that worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is reckoned for righteousness. Even as David also pronounceth blessing upon the man, unto whom God reckoneth righteousness apart from works, saying,
Blessed are they whose iniquities are forgiven,
And whose sins are covered.
Blessed is the man to whom the Lord will not reckon sin.
Why does Hebrews 11 trot out a Hall of Fame of OT saints to encourage us to the same exercise of faith?
Because those that lived under the OT law did not have the shed blood of Christ to remit their sins, (Heb 10:1-4) they only had the blood of bulls and goats that could not remit sins. So NT salvation includes the shed blood of Christ in water baptism that remits all sins....something NOT in OT salvation.
Hebrews 10 says nothing about the responsibility of man being something different in different dispensations. The subject we are discussing now is What is man's responsibility?" You are off subject. Heb 10:1-4 says nothing about baptism. Salvation did exist in the OT.
We are not discussing God's actions in salvation, but man's. Now where does the Bible teach that different dispensations have different ways for man to be saved???
Where does the Bible speak of "NT Salvation"?
We are not discussing God's actions in salvation, but man's. Now where does the Bible teach that different dispensations have different ways for man to be saved???
Where does the Bible speak of "NT Salvation"?
Neither I nor any Greek Scholar needs to get rid of the conjunction "and" that does not tie repentance to baptism making both necessary for remission of sins. The Greek rule regarding agreement between verbs and pronouns requires that the remission of sins be connected with repentance, not with baptism. I see that you dodged my question again - Does "..baptism of repentance for the remission of sins" in Mark 1:4; Luke 3:3 mean that baptism is "in order to obtain" the remission of sins or that baptism is "in regards to" the remission of sins received upon repentance? Be careful, this was under the old law. The church of Christ teaches that water baptism was not necessary for salvation under the old law but is under the new law (in order to get around the thief on the cross being saved through faith apart from water baptism) but it doesn't work. The burden of proof is on you.
The conjunction "and" does not need to be out of the verse in order to make my case. Reposting your argument over and over again does not change the fact that your interpretation of Acts 2:38 is not in harmony with Acts 3:19; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31. You can try all you want to "shoe horn" baptism into believes or try to force these passages of scripture to "conform" to your interpretation of Acts 2:38 but the shoe DOES NOT FIT. Believing is not baptism and believing precedes baptism and we are saved through believing in Him (John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4;5,6; 10:4 etc..). You are not fooling any genuine believers on this forum with your works based false gospel.
The conjunction "and" does not need to be out of the verse in order to make my case. Reposting your argument over and over again does not change the fact that your interpretation of Acts 2:38 is not in harmony with Acts 3:19; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31. You can try all you want to "shoe horn" baptism into believes or try to force these passages of scripture to "conform" to your interpretation of Acts 2:38 but the shoe DOES NOT FIT. Believing is not baptism and believing precedes baptism and we are saved through believing in Him (John 3:15,16,18; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4;5,6; 10:4 etc..). You are not fooling any genuine believers on this forum with your works based false gospel.
Last edited:
Then you neither have room for assumptions in making yourself one of the "you" in Acts 2:38 -
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 "you" shall receive the gift of Holy Spirit. Who is speaking? Who is being spoken to? and what is being said?
Nor make yourself one of the "them" in "Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit".
By your "proper exegesis" none of the scripture is written to any of us because we are not the "you", "us", "we" directly in any scripture but we are the "you", "us", "we" indirectly - especially in the church epistles.
Marvel not that I said unto thee [you]; You must be born again. who is speaking, who is being spoken to and what is being said?
By your "proper exegesis" you cannot even use the verses you have been using . . . . . So prove to me that the pronouns "you" refer to YOU.
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 "you" shall receive the gift of Holy Spirit. Who is speaking? Who is being spoken to? and what is being said?
Nor make yourself one of the "them" in "Go ye therefore and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit".
By your "proper exegesis" none of the scripture is written to any of us because we are not the "you", "us", "we" directly in any scripture but we are the "you", "us", "we" indirectly - especially in the church epistles.
Marvel not that I said unto thee [you]; You must be born again. who is speaking, who is being spoken to and what is being said?
By your "proper exegesis" you cannot even use the verses you have been using . . . . . So prove to me that the pronouns "you" refer to YOU.