Why the Baptism with the Holy Spirit is not for Today

[CS1]

I answered that specific question. Maybe instead of automatically disagreeing with me you should actually read my posts.

I did read your post and gave you many opportunities to respond to my question.


You believe from what I see in context to baptism in your understanding of scripture the following:

1. You must be baptized in the name of Jesus to be saved
2. Anyone not baptized in the name of Jesus and baptized in the name of The Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, that baptism is null and void
3. You think those in the Bible who were Spirit-Filled prior to water baptism in the Name of Jesus were not saved. Even when the word of God says the Holy Spirit was in them or empowered them. Which bring me to # 4
4. You believe the Holy Spirit will empower one with His Gifts or baptize them in The Spirit are not saved because they were not baptized in water in Jesus' name only.

That is false, error, and completely unbiblical. Jesus is the authority on the topic and HE believe and be baptized in the Name of the "Father, The Son, and the Holy Spirit." YOu cannot remove that with some kind of eliciting of a few verses.

 

[Wansvic]

FYI the little x mean only one disagree with you LOL it is not meme of anger unless the one who gets it sometimes they get mad LOL hahaha

I was explaining this in ref to 7seasrekeyed Post 876.

 

[Wansvic]

I did and you did not answer it as I asked my question. You beat around bush.

My post 834:

I thought my response answered your question. I used the Word itself to prove my point.

Jesus is the one who was crucified for us. So of course I believe the only acceptable way to perform water baptism is in the name of Jesus. And, yes, being "buried" with Jesus is a requirement of salvation. This fact is clearly documented in God’s Word.

We are told that all of mankind will be judged by what exists in the Word. To submit to water baptism in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is to follow a man-made tradition that began 300 after the apostolic era. Furthermore scripture is totally void of its usage. On the other hand water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ is firmly established within the pages of the bible. (Acts 2:38, 8:12-17, 10:44-48, 19:2-6, 22:16)

The choice to obey or refuse to be water baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ is something all must prayerfully consider.

The biblical record shows time and again that God expects nothing but absolute obedience to His commands. (Num 3:4, Ex 4:24, 30:20, 2 Sam 6:6-7) Whether one totally understands why something is necessary or not is irrelevant, God always has a purpose for designing things as He does.

What we do in the natural realm affects the spiritual realm. This truth is reflected in the following scriptures:

The following verse DOES NOT SAY a baptized person is buried with the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. It says they are buried with Him. Whom? The Lord Jesus Christ.

Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.


Again, the following verse DOES NOT SAY for as many of you as have been baptized into the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. It says baptized into Christ.

Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.


Yet again, the following verse DOES NOT SAY so many of us as were baptized into the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost were baptized into their deaths. It says that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into HIS DEATH.

Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?


As for Romans Chapter 10, one can see Paul's comments are consistent with one's need to comply with the initial instructions given at Pentecost. This is reflected in the record of Paul's own conversion as directed by Ananias. He was told to call on the name of Jesus in his water baptism. (Acts 22: 16)

Rom 10:9-13
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Paul goes on to instruct how one does this. His words convey Peter's message at Pentecost:
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

All who believe on Jesus and call upon His name shall be saved:
11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

 

[CS1]

My post 834:

I thought my response answered your question. I used the Word itself to prove my point.

Jesus is the one who was crucified for us. So of course I believe the only acceptable way to perform water baptism is in the name of Jesus. And, yes, being "buried" with Jesus is a requirement of salvation. This fact is clearly documented in God’s Word.

We are told that all of mankind will be judged by what exists in the Word. To submit to water baptism in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost is to follow a man-made tradition that began 300 after the apostolic era. Furthermore scripture is totally void of its usage. On the other hand water baptism in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ is firmly established within the pages of the bible. (Acts 2:38, 8:12-17, 10:44-48, 19:2-6, 22:16)

The choice to obey or refuse to be water baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus Christ is something all must prayerfully consider.

The biblical record shows time and again that God expects nothing but absolute obedience to His commands. (Num 3:4, Ex 4:24, 30:20, 2 Sam 6:6-7) Whether one totally understands why something is necessary or not is irrelevant, God always has a purpose for designing things as He does.

What we do in the natural realm affects the spiritual realm. This truth is reflected in the following scriptures:

The following verse DOES NOT SAY a baptized person is buried with the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. It says they are buried with Him. Whom? The Lord Jesus Christ.

Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.


Again, the following verse DOES NOT SAY for as many of you as have been baptized into the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost. It says baptized into Christ.

Gal 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.


Yet again, the following verse DOES NOT SAY so many of us as were baptized into the Father, and the Son, and the Holy Ghost were baptized into their deaths. It says that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into HIS DEATH.

Rom 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?


As for Romans Chapter 10, one can see Paul's comments are consistent with one's need to comply with the initial instructions given at Pentecost. This is reflected in the record of Paul's own conversion as directed by Ananias. He was told to call on the name of Jesus in his water baptism. (Acts 22: 16)

Rom 10:9-13
9 That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved.

Paul goes on to instruct how one does this. His words convey Peter's message at Pentecost:
10 For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

All who believe on Jesus and call upon His name shall be saved:
11 For the scripture saith, Whosoever believeth on him shall not be ashamed.

12 For there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek: for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him.

13 For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.

All of the scripture you posted from the word of God do not prove:

1. one baptized in the name of the Father, and the Son and the Holy Spirit is not valid
2. One who received the Holy Sprit( baptism in the Holy Spirit) before water baptism was not saved scriptural ref: Book of Acts
3. Confessing and believing saves the person did not happen until they were water baptized.

Water Baptism is an outwardly expression of an inward change . Your error is saying I am not saved because I was not baptized in the name of Jesus only.
You did not say that directly but that is what you are implying. If you are honest you know that is true. So, you are by your understanding of baptism in water would be saying million who died were not saved because they were not dunked, submerged , in water in Jesus name only. That is grossly false. nothing you used in " IT DOES NOT SAY" take away from the words of Jesus because they did not say

 

[CharliRenee]

It may not be essential for salvation but it is absolutely essential for the saved.

I'm just now going through this thread, but can you explain, help me understand, the difference between saved and salvation. Isn't salvation the act of being saved?

Sorry for going off topic, just that your response has me pondering.

 

[JBTN]

Galatians 3:27
For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

Romans 6:3
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

The Greek words used here for baptized mean immersed, not immersed into water. So, the immersions here are into (eis in Greek) Jesus Christ and into (eis) his death.

Think back to what Jesus said in Matthew 26:28.
For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for (eis or into) the remission of sins.

Jesus blood was shed or poured out in some translations into (eis) the remission (forgiveness) of sins.

Now think about what Peter said in Acts 2:38. See my post #856 for more detail.
Peter them to them, change your mind and be immersed everyone of you on the authority of Jesus Christ into (eis) forgiveness of the sins of you and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Jesus blood was poured out into forgiveness of sins. So, to be immersed into forgiveness of sins is to be immersed in Jesus blood.
The immersion in Galatians 3:27 and Romans 6:3 are into Jesus Christ (think into his blood which is in forgiveness of sins). This also makes clear what it means when he says immersed into his death (or into his blood which is in forgiveness of sins).

 

[JBTN]

Immersion into forgiveness of sins is essentially immersion into the new testament (new covenant) as Jesus mentioned in Matthew 26:28.

A similar immersion can be seen in 1 Corinthians 10:2.
And all were baptized unto (eis) Moses in the cloud and in the sea.

 

[Nehemiah6]

Sorry for going off topic, just that your response has me pondering.

My comment was regarding Christian baptism. It is not essential for salvation since salvation (justification) is by grace through faith. However, it is absolutely essential for those who have been saved, and in Scripture conversion and baptism are very closely tied together, and one followed the other generally on the same day, or very shortly thereafter. You could go all the way through the book of Acts and see this.

 

[Guojing]

I'm just now going through this thread, but can you explain, help me understand, the difference between saved and salvation. Isn't salvation the act of being saved?

Sorry for going off topic, just that your response has me pondering.

Yes, that has already been a puzzle to me too. What is the difference between

1. Water baptism is necessary to be saved versus
2. Water baptism is necessary after you are saved, otherwise, there is reason to doubt that you are truly saved.

 

[Wansvic]

Water Baptism is an outwardly expression of an inward change .

I am not trying to be argumentative. I would seriously like to know what scriptures cite your assertion.

Your error is saying I am not saved because I was not baptized in the name of Jesus only.
You did not say that directly but that is what you are implying. If you are honest you know that is true. So, you are by your understanding of baptism in water would be saying million who died were not saved because they were not dunked, submerged , in water in Jesus name only. That is grossly false. nothing you used in " IT DOES NOT SAY" take away from the words of Jesus because they did not say

I did not imply but stated honestly that Jesus' name was used consistently in water baptism. Since the biblical record is void of baptism being done any other way, how can one conclude that they are not required to use the name that is above all names? You may not believe it but my intention is to try to be a help by pointing out what many do not even know exists in the word.

At least consider that Jesus said to use a name. (Matt 28:19) Jesus was instructing and opening the disciples understanding during the 40 days He was with them after His resurrection. After Jesus ascended every time the disciples administered water baptism they did it in the name of Jesus. (2:38, 8:12-17, 10:44-48, 19:2-9, 22:16)

Does it make sense that the disciples would command people to be water baptized differently than Jesus had instructed?

 

[7seasrekeyed]

The following post has been made by wansvic in her old thread from last summer. post 365 she just tacked that post on to a thread that died out August 9 of last year, but since I have been referring to the things said by her in that thread, she has gone back and tried to 'fix' it. That thread states over and over the importance of the sequence of the 5 step list she made, it is sad and actually disingenuous, to try to state at this time we have all misunderstood her because she meant to add something...yet she never did and whoops...now that she sees the error in her beliefs, she is trying to spin a different outcome

wansvic:
you have repeatedly ignored my asking you why Paul spoke in tongues BEFORE being baptized if being baptized was #2 on your list and being filled with the Holy Spirit was #3 on your list (and this is not the only occurrence of that order in scripture by any means)

did they coach you in this hypocritical response in church this AM? I would be embarrassed to try to pretend I meant something else other than what I had been saying for 7 months by PRETENDING I had forgotten the little detail that makes me right still and everyone else wrong

this is one of the worst ploys for keeping egg off of your face I have seen anywhere by anyone in this forum



"Wansvic, post: 4180119, member: 277938"]I was puzzled by comments regarding my supposed belief that water baptism and the infilling of the Holy Ghost had to be done in a specific order. What I neglected to convey accurately in this OP is that people complied with ALL of God's instructions before the blood was applied.

As the biblical record shows the Apostle Peter did command all to repent, be water baptized in Jesus’ name, and receive the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:38) The OT requirements for ordination of priests parallel Peter’s instructions as seen in Exodus 29.

What I should have made clear was that the NT record expresses that at times God intervened and poured His Spirit into individuals first. (Acts 2:38, 10:44-48) Afterward all those who had been filled with God’s Spirit submitted to water baptism in the name of Jesus. In addition, there are two times in scripture where individuals were water baptized in Jesus’ name first, and afterward they received the infilling of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 8:12-17, 19:2-6) These examples confirm that all of the components Peter mentioned had to be followed regardless of the order in which they occurred.


you know, I hesitate to call anyone a liar and we are not supposed to do so really

but you must have at the very least a SEARED conscience to be so free with your backpedaling and desire to be right rather than righteous


here is what you said in the thread from last summer I have quoted from several times

After stating how the priestly office is secured, the Word instructs us about our Christian walk and how to honor God with various types of offerings.

The New Testament parallel is as follows:

1. Acceptance of Jesus sacrifice and repentance

2. Water Baptism (receive the priestly garments)

3. Infilling of the Holy Ghost

4. Priestly office secured

5. Blood of Jesus sacrifice is applied

see that in heavy type? that is you saying we must follow the New Testament 'parallel' which you then go ahead and say is the list, in order of occurrence, that YOU say MUST be followed

actually, it is from your actual op...opening post...

you now know you are wrong, you KNOW you are mistaken....it has been proven you are wrong...and instead of seeing that, instead of allowing for the fact your eyes should be open and understanding should enter, you continue to lie, manipulate and otherwise try to take us all for fools

but it is not us you are cheating. first, you are cheating yourself and second, you are cheating everyone you try to convince that you are always right

you teach baptism is regenerative. it is not

you teach a person is filled with the Holy Spirit before they are saved. they are not. God does not give His Spirit to the unregenerate. that is ONLY given to those who are a part of the body of Christ

you teach the blood of Christ is step 5, AFTER baptism, AFTER speaking in tongues .. in fact it is the last thing on your list. you are not saved if you have not had your sins forgiven so NOTHING follows if that has not occurred and here you have it as #5

you also teach that if you are not baptized, you are not saved and you have also said that one must be baptized in Jesus name only or you have to be re-baptized

you also teach that if you do not speak in tongues you are not saved

none of it is true. none of this meandering exclusive little club you belong to is part of the gospel as we find in scripture

and again, your problems seem to begin with amalgamating the temple of the Old Testament with the New Covenant procured by the sinless blood of Jesus

 

[CS1]

I am not trying to be argumentative. I would seriously like to know what scriptures cite your assertion.


I did not imply but stated honestly that Jesus' name was used consistently in water baptism. Since the biblical record is void of baptism being done any other way, how can one conclude that they are not required to use the name that is above all names? You may not believe it but my intention is to try to be a help by pointing out what many do not even know exists in the word.

At least consider that Jesus said to use a name. (Matt 28:19) Jesus was instructing and opening the disciples understanding during the 40 days He was with them after His resurrection. After Jesus ascended every time the disciples administered water baptism they did it in the name of Jesus. (2:38, 8:12-17, 10:44-48, 19:2-9, 22:16)

Does it make sense that the disciples would command people to be water baptized differently than Jesus had instructed?

Rom 6 is symbolic. Were you actually buried in a tomb? the context of Rom 6 is symbolic , figurative.

Jesus said baptized in the name of the Father and of The Son and of The Holy Spirit yet you have not issue with changing that LOL

 

[7seasrekeyed]

no mention of baptism . confess and believe. those are the conditions that the Bible gives for salvation

They replied, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved—you and your household.”
Acts 16:31

9 If you declare with your mouth, “Jesus is Lord,” and believe in your heart that God raised him from the dead, you will be saved.
10 For it is with your heart that you believe and are justified, and it is with your mouth that you profess your faith and are saved.
Romans 10:9-10

For in the gospel the righteousness of God is revealed—a righteousness that is by faith from first to last, just as it is written: “The righteous will live by faith.” Romans 1:17

For it is by grace you have been saved, through faith—and this is not from yourselves, it is the gift of God—not by works, so that no one can boast. Ephesians 2: 8-9

Now, brothers and sisters, I want to remind you of the gospel I preached to you, which you received and on which you have taken your stand. By this gospel you are saved, if you hold firmly to the word I preached to you. Otherwise, you have believed in vain.
I Corinthians 15: 1-2

 

[7seasrekeyed]

I am not trying to be argumentative. I would seriously like to know what scriptures cite your assertion.

And this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also—not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ. I Peter 3:21

water baptism symbolizes a 'clear conscience'....meaning you now have a clear record before God...your sins are forgiven because of your faith in Jesus as the verses above, post 913, illustrate or prove

and what does that scripture say? it states plainly that it is the resurrection of Jesus that saves us

water is symbolic of our death with Christ and rising out of the water is symbolic of His resurrection


misunderstanding that verse, taking it out of context and over emphasizing baptism as salvation, is not the gospel

and here Paul states plainly that baptism is not what Jesus sent him to preach:

For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void. I Corinthians 1:17

Paul, does not even include baptizing as part of the gospel! that could not be made more plain

we understand baptism and we understand salvation and we also understand the what occurs first and that God requires only ONE single thing for salvation....belief in His Son

when I say we, I am referring to the accepted understanding of the meaning of the verses

 

[Wansvic]

Your last slam is absolutely amazing.

You acknowledged my point as I stated in post 889 in your post 892:

My point was that the OT foreshadow depicted that the blood was applied after God's commands were obeyed.

well that is a good enough point...

I included the updated information into the thread because your posts pointed to the fact that people could see the information being relevant to ONLY a specific sequence. When in fact I was trying to express that all of the components were required prior to the blood being applied. Anyone who has read my many posts on the topic of salvation knows I consistently reference biblical records showing people experience compliance to the components outlined at Pentecost in different sequences.

The following post has been made by wansvic in her old thread from last summer. post 365 she just tacked that post on to a thread that died out August 9 of last year, but since I have been referring to the things said by her in that thread, she has gone back and tried to 'fix' it. That thread states over and over the importance of the sequence of the 5 step list she made, it is sad and actually disingenuous, to try to state at this time we have all misunderstood her because she meant to add something...yet she never did and whoops...now that she sees the error in her beliefs, she is trying to spin a different outcome

wansvic:
you have repeatedly ignored my asking you why Paul spoke in tongues BEFORE being baptized if being baptized was #2 on your list and being filled with the Holy Spirit was #3 on your list (and this is not the only occurrence of that order in scripture by any means)

did they coach you in this hypocritical response in church this AM? I would be embarrassed to try to pretend I meant something else other than what I had been saying for 7 months by PRETENDING I had forgotten the little detail that makes me right still and everyone else wrong

this is one of the worst ploys for keeping egg off of your face I have seen anywhere by anyone in this forum



"Wansvic, post: 4180119, member: 277938"]I was puzzled by comments regarding my supposed belief that water baptism and the infilling of the Holy Ghost had to be done in a specific order. What I neglected to convey accurately in this OP is that people complied with ALL of God's instructions before the blood was applied.

As the biblical record shows the Apostle Peter did command all to repent, be water baptized in Jesus’ name, and receive the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:38) The OT requirements for ordination of priests parallel Peter’s instructions as seen in Exodus 29.

What I should have made clear was that the NT record expresses that at times God intervened and poured His Spirit into individuals first. (Acts 2:38, 10:44-48) Afterward all those who had been filled with God’s Spirit submitted to water baptism in the name of Jesus. In addition, there are two times in scripture where individuals were water baptized in Jesus’ name first, and afterward they received the infilling of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 8:12-17, 19:2-6) These examples confirm that all of the components Peter mentioned had to be followed regardless of the order in which they occurred.


you know, I hesitate to call anyone a liar and we are not supposed to do so really

but you must have at the very least a SEARED conscience to be so free with your backpedaling and desire to be right rather than righteous


here is what you said in the thread from last summer I have quoted from several times




see that in heavy type? that is you saying we must follow the New Testament 'parallel' which you then go ahead and say is the list, in order of occurrence, that YOU say MUST be followed

actually, it is from your actual op...opening post...

you now know you are wrong, you KNOW you are mistaken....it has been proven you are wrong...and instead of seeing that, instead of allowing for the fact your eyes should be open and understanding should enter, you continue to lie, manipulate and otherwise try to take us all for fools

but it is not us you are cheating. first, you are cheating yourself and second, you are cheating everyone you try to convince that you are always right

you teach baptism is regenerative. it is not

you teach a person is filled with the Holy Spirit before they are saved. they are not. God does not give His Spirit to the unregenerate. that is ONLY given to those who are a part of the body of Christ

you teach the blood of Christ is step 5, AFTER baptism, AFTER speaking in tongues .. in fact it is the last thing on your list. you are not saved if you have not had your sins forgiven so NOTHING follows if that has not occurred and here you have it as #5

you also teach that if you are not baptized, you are not saved and you have also said that one must be baptized in Jesus name only or you have to be re-baptized

you also teach that if you do not speak in tongues you are not saved

none of it is true. none of this meandering exclusive little club you belong to is part of the gospel as we find in scripture

and again, your problems seem to begin with amalgamating the temple of the Old Testament with the New Covenant procured by the sinless blood of Jesus

 

[Wansvic]

Rom 6 is symbolic. Were you actually buried in a tomb? the context of Rom 6 is symbolic , figurative.

Jesus said baptized in the name of the Father and of The Son and of The Holy Spirit yet you have not issue with changing that LOL

Again, what is the name? In Jesus dwells the fullness of the Godhead bodily.

The Lord (Father), Jesus (Son), Christ (Holy Ghost).

 

[Wansvic]

Rom 6 is symbolic. Were you actually buried in a tomb? the context of Rom 6 is symbolic , figurative.

Jesus said baptized in the name of the Father and of The Son and of The Holy Spirit yet you have not issue with changing that LOL

The above was your response to my following post.

I am not trying to be argumentative. I would seriously like to know what scriptures cite your assertion.




I did not imply but stated honestly that Jesus' name was used consistently in water baptism. Since the biblical record is void of baptism being done any other way, how can one conclude that they are not required to use the name that is above all names? You may not believe it but my intention is to try to be a help by pointing out what many do not even know exists in the word.

At least consider that Jesus said to use a name. (Matt 28:19) Jesus was instructing and opening the disciples understanding during the 40 days He was with them after His resurrection. After Jesus ascended every time the disciples administered water baptism they did it in the name of Jesus. (2:38, 8:12-17, 10:44-48, 19:2-9, 22:16)

Does it make sense that the disciples would command people to be water baptized differently than Jesus had instructed?

I am very interested in seeing the scriptures that state the water baptism is to be done as a public display.

 

[garee]

The above was your response to my following post.

I am very interested in seeing the scriptures that state the water baptism is to be done as a public display.

If a person would look to the foundation .It was used as a public display to the whole word. as it still helps us to believe today. This is when a person had a desire to become a priest and preach the gospel Like Aaron's two sons. It did not confirm they knew Christ but as a shadow pointed ahead to John 3:25. When the priesthood of believers was changed over from the Levites to all the nations of the world. Men and woman as prophets declaring the gospel, the spiritual seed, Christ .

 

[7seasrekeyed]

Your last slam is absolutely amazing.

You acknowledged my point as I stated in post 889 in your post 892:




I included the updated information into the thread because your posts pointed to the fact that people could see the information being relevant to ONLY a specific sequence. When in fact I was trying to express that all of the components were required prior to the blood being applied. Anyone who has read my many posts on the topic of salvation knows I consistently reference biblical records showing people experience compliance to the components outlined at Pentecost in different sequences.

you consistently fudge what you say, back peddle and post scripture unrelated to water baptism

anyone can see what you do is true though...and I don't mean posting scripture either

not many are reading your posts because we had this harangue by you last

I just like to point out the fallacies in what you post and you have outdone yourself

you concern yourself with baptism and baptizing in Jesus name only, this is what you major on.... while the author of nearly half the NT says this

For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not in cleverness of speech, so that the cross of Christ would not be made void. I Corinthians 1:17

 

[7seasrekeyed]

I included the updated information into the thread because your posts pointed to the fact that people could see the information being relevant to ONLY a specific sequence. When in fact I was trying to express that all of the components were required prior to the blood being applied. Anyone who has read my many posts on the topic of salvation knows I consistently reference biblical records showing people experience compliance to the components outlined at Pentecost in different sequences.

that's baloney

you actually put a spin on your 5 point list because I pointed out to you that people spoke in tongues BEFORE baptism while you insist they must be baptized first

further, you would have God filling people with His Spirit before salvation

you are not fooling anyone