My take on water baptism...

  • 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.
May 22, 2020
2,382
358
83
But you agreed that God's word is both the OT and NT correct?

Acts 2;38 et al., search.... requires water baptism...right?

If you don't answer my direct question then we have no need for further discussion on this issue...because by default you agree water baptism is required.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
Acts 2;38 et al., search.... requires water baptism...right?
So I think basically what you are trying to tell me is that, God's word has changed from the OT to the NT.

The moment one turns their bible, pass that blank page that separates Matthew to Revelations from the OT, all of God's word in that latter half are written to us.

Is that what you are trying to say?
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
7,117
1,747
113
I was just trying to point out the implications of his belief that "God and His word does not change" and showed that he don't really believe in that.

As for your 2nd point about the new covenant, if you are willing to understand Hebrews 8:8 as it is literally written, this is what you will conclude

For finding fault with them, he saith, Behold, the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel and with the house of Judah:

1) The new covenant promised by God is not here yet, it will be made in the future, in the age to come, when Israel as a nation finally accepts Jesus as their Messiah.

2) And even then, it will be made with the nation Israel, and not the Body of Christ.
I believe you understand that scriptural quote incorrectly. This was said by Jeremiah, and was the prophecy of the coming of the Christ, and his new covenant with ALL people who respond to his call. And the prophecy was fulfilled in Jesus' ministry and the birth of his church....
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
I believe you understand that scriptural quote incorrectly. This was said by Jeremiah, and was the prophecy of the coming of the Christ, and his new covenant with ALL people who respond to his call. And the prophecy was fulfilled in Jesus' ministry and the birth of his church....
You do agree that, in the English language, "the days come" and "will make" must mean it is not made NOW correct?

Otherwise why would the author of Hebrews, who is writing to the Jews, use the words "will make"? You do agree that the book of Hebrews was written after the birth of the church in Acts?

As I said, you have to be willing to read the KJV English literally, to understand what I am saying.
 

Blain

The Word Weaver
Aug 28, 2012
19,212
2,547
113
WOW.......are you suggesting one does not have to repent of our sins?
Let me ask you this, Does the holy spirit come into an unrepented heart? Of course I am not saying we do not need to repent my question was to what he meant as I misunderstood him, He seemed to be say that our sins are washed away in water baptism and I asked him is that not what the blood of Jesus did, repentance is of the heart but water baptism is more of a declarion of repentance and dedication to God
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
7,117
1,747
113
You do agree that, in the English language, "the days come" and "will make" must mean it is not made NOW correct?

Otherwise why would the author of Hebrews, who is writing to the Jews, use the words "will make"? You do agree that the book of Hebrews was written after the birth of the church in Acts?

As I said, you have to be willing to read the KJV English literally, to understand what I am saying.
Luke (presumably) was quoting the scripture, to show that what was happening AT THAT TIME had been prophesied many years before... it was a fulfillment of a prophecy.
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
7,117
1,747
113
You do agree that, in the English language, "the days come" and "will make" must mean it is not made NOW correct?

Otherwise why would the author of Hebrews, who is writing to the Jews, use the words "will make"? You do agree that the book of Hebrews was written after the birth of the church in Acts?

As I said, you have to be willing to read the KJV English literally, to understand what I am saying.
And, I don't have to read King Jimmy's English to be able to understand what was said. There are more recent, better translations that say it in modern English. Very understandable. Perhaps you should try one of those translations.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
And, I don't have to read King Jimmy's English to be able to understand what was said. There are more recent, better translations that say it in modern English. Very understandable. Perhaps you should try one of those translations.
You mean there are other versions, for Hebrews 8:8, that actually changed the future tense into past tense?

Which versions, I am curious?
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
7,117
1,747
113
You mean there are other versions, for Hebrews 8:8, that actually changed the future tense into past tense?

Which versions, I am curious?
Are you being deliberately obtuse? Nothing changed the "tense" of what was said, because it was a PROPHECY. It was spoken in future tense, because it had not happened yet, and would NOT happen until Jesus established his church. That quotation will always be in future tense, because of when it was written........ just like ALL prophecies are written. This isn't difficult... at least it shouldn't be.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
Are you being deliberately obtuse? Nothing changed the "tense" of what was said, because it was a PROPHECY. It was spoken in future tense, because it had not happened yet, and would NOT happen until Jesus established his church. That quotation will always be in future tense, because of when it was written........ just like ALL prophecies are written. This isn't difficult... at least it shouldn't be.
No, when you replied to my post, I thought you were following up with the point I made about future tense, apparently you are not.

So you do agree that the new covenant has not come to pass as of now, since the nation Israel is currently blinded by God, as stated in Romans 11:25?

Or unless you believe in the doctrine of replacement theology, that us the Body of Christ has now become the house of Israel and the house of Judah?
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
7,117
1,747
113
No, when you replied to my post, I thought you were following up with the point I made about future tense, apparently you are not.

So you do agree that the new covenant has not come to pass as of now, since the nation Israel is currently blinded by God, as stated in Romans 11:25?

Or unless you believe in the doctrine of replacement theology, that us the Body of Christ has now become the house of Israel and the house of Judah?
I believe what the Word says.... we are IN the new covenant, and have been since Jesus established his church. It's pretty clear, scripturally, that the church is the symbolic "Israel".
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
I believe what the Word says.... we are IN the new covenant, and have been since Jesus established his church. It's pretty clear, scripturally, that the church is the symbolic "Israel".
I see.

So how you would understand Paul in Romans 11:25 is that "Physical Israel" is currently blinded until the fulness of the Gentiles are included in "symbolic Israel".

Once that latter happen, "all Israel" will then be saved.

Is that a correct representation of your view?
 

hornetguy

Senior Member
Jan 18, 2016
7,117
1,747
113
I see.

So how you would understand Paul in Romans 11:25 is that "Physical Israel" is currently blinded until the fulness of the Gentiles are included in "symbolic Israel".

Once that latter happen, "all Israel" will then be saved.

Is that a correct representation of your view?
I've never given it any thought. On the surface, it sounds like Paul is saying that many of the Jews will not accept Jesus as the Messiah, and will hold onto their ethnic and spiritual "roots". Which, while sad, has no impact on the new Israel, or covenant participants... the symbolic "israel". All Israel.... the church, will be saved... Jews and Gentiles alike
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
I've never given it any thought. On the surface, it sounds like Paul is saying that many of the Jews will not accept Jesus as the Messiah, and will hold onto their ethnic and spiritual "roots". Which, while sad, has no impact on the new Israel, or covenant participants... the symbolic "israel". All Israel.... the church, will be saved... Jews and Gentiles alike
So to confirm you regard the body of Christ as now the Israel In the eyes of God?
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
You are talking about the remnant of Israel being saved, which was stated in Romans 11

1 I say then, Hath God cast away his people? God forbid. For I also am an Israelite, of the seed of Abraham, of the tribe of Benjamin.

5 Even so then at this present time also there is a remnant according to the election of grace.

6 And if by grace, then is it no more of works: otherwise grace is no more grace. But if it be of works, then it is no more grace: otherwise work is no more work.

7 What then? Israel hath not obtained that which he seeketh for; but the election hath obtained it, and the rest were blinded.

Romans 11:25 made the nation's blindness clear right? You have an alternative interpretation of that verse?

25 For I would not, brethren, that ye should be ignorant of this mystery, lest ye should be wise in your own conceits; that blindness in part is happened to Israel, until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.
yeah it says blindness in part is happened to Israel. I agree with that.
 
Jan 12, 2019
7,497
1,399
113
yeah it says blindness in part is happened to Israel. I agree with that.
So you don't agree that the term Israel there in vs 25 refers to the nation Israel?

Acts 7 tells us Israel's leaders rejected the Holy spirit by killing Stephen.

And in the eyes of God, as the nation leaders go, so goes the entire nation.

2 Chronicles 12:1 – But when Rehoboam was firmly established and strong, he abandoned the Law of the Lord, and all Israel followed him in this sin.

1 Kings 15:33-34

In the third year of Asa king of Judah, Baasha the son of Ahijah became king over all Israel in Tirzah, and reigned twenty-four years. He did evil in the sight of the Lord, and walked in the way of Jeroboam, and in his sin by which he had made Israel sin.
 

Hevosmies

Well-known member
Sep 8, 2018
3,612
2,633
113
So you don't agree that the term Israel there in vs 25 refers to the nation Israel?

Acts 7 tells us Israel's leaders rejected the Holy spirit by killing Stephen.

And in the eyes of God, as the nation leaders go, so goes the entire nation.

2 Chronicles 12:1 – But when Rehoboam was firmly established and strong, he abandoned the Law of the Lord, and all Israel followed him in this sin.

1 Kings 15:33-34

In the third year of Asa king of Judah, Baasha the son of Ahijah became king over all Israel in Tirzah, and reigned twenty-four years. He did evil in the sight of the Lord, and walked in the way of Jeroboam, and in his sin by which he had made Israel sin.
You are right in that. Its like we speak in general terms you know? "Europe is in apostasy" which is true.
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
I believe you understand that scriptural quote incorrectly. This was said by Jeremiah, and was the prophecy of the coming of the Christ, and his new covenant with ALL people who respond to his call. And the prophecy was fulfilled in Jesus' ministry and the birth of his church....

Jesus from the tribe of Judah was used to represent the new order of a kingdom of priest (Melchizedek.) Previously the tribe of Levi.. . they died

Water is still used. We have a better high Priest one without beginning or end of days

The unbelieving faithless Jew wanted to know why Jesus was baptizing.

John3:25-26 Then there arose a question between some of John's disciples and the Jews about purifying. And they came unto John, and said unto him, Rabbi, he that was with thee beyond Jordan, to whom thou barest witness, behold, the same baptizeth, and all men come to him.

They were unaware of the purpose of the order of Melchizedek.

Psalm 110:4 The Lord hath sworn, and will not repent, Thou art a priest for ever after the order of Melchizedek.

We must look to the foundation of doctrines. Like David said.; If we destroy them how could we find the doctrines of our living God?

Water Baptism has its foundation in the old order it was a applied to a person who had a desire to serve the gospel .It was not what some call a "sign gift" of self edifying. Many try to use it in that way as self evidence .

Aaron's two son the first to have that honor of serving the gospel using water as a metaphor . They added a little self edifying personal touch and were consumed while the ceremonial clothing suffered no harm .

No such thing as a sign gift. Not with tongue or water baptism .We walk by faith the unseen eternal.
 
L

lenna

Guest
We were discussing water baptism, and I am trying to tell you that water baptism was a necessary requirement for Israel's program.

Without understanding how Israel has fallen in Acts and the rise of the gentiles thru that fall (Romans 11:11), it will be hard for you to understand why I see water baptism is no longer a requirement now.

But I do understand it may be hard for you to discuss with me in a constructive manner without personal remarks, after the history of our exchange in the CS1 thread previously.

what a pompous self serving reply

go check out what others have said to you about your issues with misinterpretation

putting you back on ignore
 
Mar 28, 2016
15,954
1,528
113
You are right in that. Its like we speak in general terms you know? "Europe is in apostasy" which is true.
God is not concerned with the pollical nation of this world under the control of the evil one. One world government.

Christians do not wrestle against flesh and blood the temporal things seen. And neither are they supported by the temporal things seen as if His kingdom did come by out of sight out of mind, observation. Paganism

God does not save whole nations or families. He walks individually with each person as two walking together..