False teaching by separating Scripture from Scripture

[ATG]

As usual, I can't find anything in your reply that makes any Biblical sense. You say,

"Only the wicked god of this world admires someone while committing adultery and murder". That again contradicts Gods Word, because His Word reveals in
Romans 5:8"But God demonstrates His own love toward us, in that while we were still sinners, Christ died for us."

So it sounds like you have confused the god of this world with the God of the Bible, at least you're consistent.
Now who does God love while they are unbelieving sinners????? yes thank you.

Unlike yourself, I have not yet attained sinless perfection. I'm like the Apostle Paul and King David, I still wrestle against the temptation to sin and it gets the better of me on a daily basis.

You probably have no time for sinners like us, but spare a thought for that wretched man Paul and his struggle with the power of sin that dominates him.

Romans 7:15 "For what I am doing, I do not understand. For what I will to do, that I do not practice; but what I hate, that do I."
Romans 7:19 "For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice."

You come across as a legalist, the Scribes and Pharisees were also self righteous legalists. But the Lord Jesus said they were children of the Devil.

This has got to be the most classic manifesto of unrepented transgressors justifying by their belief alone. I'll save it for better use elsewhere, thanks.

While I certainly appreciate your breath taking honesty, without any hint of the usual theological fluff words, it's also the reason I'll have to just leave you to it, with your continued daily evil doing against God and Jesus Christ.

There is simply no answer for anyone who believes they are justified with Jesus Christ the righteous, while also doing evil, so long as they believe He has died for the sins of men...

Rom 6:1
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

 

[ATG]

My question was, why do you think that most make the wrong choice.

I'll answer again, but also include another even worse choice than most make.

For the many that repent not to believe Jesus Christ and sin not, it's simple refusing to repent to believe Jesus Christ and sin not. God Himself does not understand that, as I've shown from the Scriptures.

I of course was one of those many unbelieving sinners, until I did repent to believe Jesus and sin not.

However, for those who now believe they are justified by Jesus Christ, while continuing to do daily evil against Him? And even plainly proclaim it? They are not at all the common many, and I was never one of them, nor ever seek to be.

But, as for why anyone would choose to believe in being justified while still doing evil, rather than repent and not do evil? God and Jesus Christ do understand that particular one:

Eze 13:10
Because, even because they have seduced my people, saying, Peace; and there was no peace; and one built up a wall, and, lo, others daubed it with untempered morter:

Jerem 3:10
And yet for all this her treacherous sister Judah hath not turned unto me with her whole heart, but feignedly, saith the LORD.

Rev 3:15
I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

2Th 2:10
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

 

[Dino246]

Col 2:11
In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

And just in case you need more little words to convince you of the Spirit's circumcision of the heart:

Rom 8:9
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

Christ is that Spirit that circumcises without hands.

Christ is also that Spirit that baptizes without water.

1Co 12:13
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

There is the baptism and circumcision of the Spirit, and that of the flesh with hands. The Spirit saves the soul by hearing of faith, not any flesh of circumcision, or water of baptism.

The human spirit does not get circumcised. The Holy Spirit does not get circumcised. Can it be put any clearer than that?

The circumcision of the human heart is done by the Holy Spirit. To put it another way, this is the circumcision in the Spirit.

 

[ATG]

Acts 10:43 actually says believers receive remission of sin through the name of Jesus. And all detailed conversion accounts note water baptism in the name of Jesus as an element of the NT rebirth.

Another slight diversion: Keeping all commandments of God is an 'element' of NT birth. No one can be transgressing His commandments and born again of Jesus Christ:

Jhn 8:34
Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever is committing sin is the servant of sin.

1Jo 3:8
He that is committing sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning.

1 John 5:18
We know that whosoever is born of God is not sinning; but he that is begotten of God is keeping himself, and that wicked one is touching him not.

Water baptism for remission of sins was only preached by John before Jesus' death, and only preached by Peter one first time after His resurrection.

Scripture never records any of the other apostles confirming water baptism for remission of sins. Including Peter in His later recorded preaching of Jesus Christ.

However, as with all the Lord's commandments, water baptism is recorded as His command for new converts, that have recieved the Spirit by repentance and faith in Jesus Christ.

Already given the Scriptures enough times before.

 

[ATG]

Acts 15:1 cannot be used to dispute the NT teaching on water baptism because the comparison is fundamentally flawed.

False, since the comparison is abusing commanded works for NT remission of sins. Certain have done so with flesh circumcision, and certain are doing so with water baptism.

Both commanded works are being preached in Jesus' New Covenant for remission of sins. And the comparison also between the two, is a work of men's hands, not by the Spirit Himself.

 

[ATG]

Scripture repeatedly associates obedience to water baptism with the remission of sins (Acts 2:38; Acts 22:16)

Well now, you've finally given the only other Scripture after 2:38, that appears to be baptism for remission of sins. Better late then never.

Act 9:17
And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.

Act 22:14
And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard. And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

In the past, you have demanded any Scriptures where 'remission of sins', is not with water baptism. You have not accepted any other words that have to do with 'remission of sins', such as blotting out of sins by repentance and faith. Now, you are not so demanding, and relying on washing away of sins...Maybe that's why you've delayed using the verse.

Your past manner has been as though remission of sins and blotting out of sins, is not the same thing. That of course is an ongoing doctrinal debate. However, we see here that baptism and washing away sins in Acts 22, compares with baptism and remission of sins in Acts 2. Which you now accept as the same. I agree.

However, at the same, we have Paul receiving the Holy Ghost, and arising to be baptized. Which confirms Paul's gospel of receiving the Spirit by hearing of faith, not by commanded works.

So, what we have in Acts 22 with Saul of Tarsus is the same case of Acts 2 on Pentecost: Legally obedient Jews being commanded to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, after the manner of John, for the remission and washing away of sins.

And so, once again, unless it can be shown by Scripture, that when receiving the Spirit of Christ by faith, Jesus Christ does not remit and wash away sins until water baptism; I.e. the unwashed are filled with the Holy Ghost...

Then we must conclude as before, that receiving the Spirit and remission/washing away of sins from the soul, is first preached with the commanded work of baptism for the legal Jews, and now is also preached by hearing of faith without commanded works: The difference being those first Jews obediently keeping the law of Moses, vs the new converts not keeping the law of Moses, whic h began with Cornelius and his whole house.

So, if anyone wants to preach Acts 2:38 today, they certainly can, since all Scripture of God is profitable, including receiving Jesus Christ by hearing of faith without works of the law. However, if anyone wants to preach Acts 2:38 & Acts 22:14 exclusively for remission and washing away of sins, which was only preached to the obedient Jews keeping Moses' law, then they'll need to preach it to Mosaic Jews.

But certainly not to the brethren, that already have Jesus Christ by hearing and believing His gospel of salvation, with justification by His resurrection from the dead:

Act 16:30
And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Rom 10:9
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. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

 

[ATG]

No one is idolizing Peter. The issue is whether Peter faithfully proclaimed the message Jesus gave him to preach.

Once again, the issue is not about Peter first preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ on Pentecost. Scripture says so.

The issue of idolatry, is if Peter's first preaching of baptism for remission of sins, was preached by all the apostles of Jesus Christ. No. Nor did Peter himself always preach remission of sins with water baptism.

Peter's baptism is being exclusively preached, to the exclusion of the other apostles: Idolatry of We are of Peter's baptism.

Dividing the church, and confusing the converted brethren of the Lord, is nothing new, and so is certainly possible today.

1Co 1:12
Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

Especially when having to do with water baptism with men's hands...

Jesus entrusted Peter with the keys of the kingdom (Matt.:19), commanded the apostles to teach all nations (Matt. 28:19-20), and promised the Holy Ghost would guide them into all truth (John 16:13).

No keys to Peter alone, nor does Jesus build His church on Peter alone.

Acts 2:38 baptizers alone are as wanna-be baptismal popes, by the authority of Peter above all the apostles of Jesus Christ.

When Peter commanded repentance and water baptism in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38), he was not inventing a doctrine or elevating one work above all others. t.

He wasn't. Acts 2:38 baptizers alone are...

I am not choosing Peter over the other apostles.

You choose his baptism above all others. None of whom preached baptism for remission of sins.

It is evident that water baptism is always for remission of sins, since only converts are water baptized. No person is converted and receives the Spirit, without remission of sins by the Spirit of Christ...

If there is no conversion by faith, until water baptism, then faith in Jesus Christ is made void. Likewise, if there is no remission of sins, until water baptism, then having Jesus Christ by faith is of none effect.

I am pointing out that none of the other apostles ever corrected Peter's message or preached a different plan of salvation.

Once again, irrelevant: The issue is if all the apostles preached baptism for remission of sins. No.

No need to correct Peter, who first preached the gospel by the Holy Ghost. It's not about disannulling Acts 2:38, but all about not making that one verse an exclusive law, that excludes all doctrine of baptisms preached by the apostles of Christ:

Heb 6:1
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

No apostle corrected Peter's baptism for remission of sins; Neither did Peter correct any apostles' baptism not for remission of sin.

Instead, they preached in harmony.

They did. No apostle contradicted the others. Nor did any corrected another's peaching of water baptism, whether for remission of sin, or not for remission of sins.

Peter alone preached baptism for remission of sins. All other apostles preached baptism after remission of sins, including Peter at the house of Cornelius.

Paul himself taught there is one foundation built upon the apostles (Eph. 2:20), and wrote, "whether it were I or they, so we preach, and so ye believed" (1 Cor. 15:11). That is the opposite of competing apostolic messages.

You've departed the argument.

Nor is water baptism being isolated from the rest of God's commands. It is one of Christ's appointed commands concerning the new birth, just as repentance and receiving the Holy Ghost are.

Departed even further away.

Obeying a specific command that Scripture associates with the remission of sins is not idolatry—it is simply believing and obeying what Christ revealed through His apostles.

Another sidestep. Preaching a specific command of baptism for remission of sins, to the exclusion of all other commands of baptism after remission of sins, that is idolizing one verse of Scripture, as well as the one and only apostle who preached.

It's classic false personal doctrine by separating Scripture from Scripture, and apostle from apostles.

1Co 1:12
Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

If the claim is that Acts 2:38 is merely Peter's opinion and not Christ's command,

Now you've abandoned the argument entirely, for a degraded accusation, that no one makes against Peter nor Acts 2:38.

Unless you want to draw back from your downhill dive, or have something new to respond to, then I'm moving on.

 

[Journey_man]

So, you think it's wise to separate God's words from God's words.

1Jo 1:8
If we say that we have no sin, we deceive ourselves, and the truth is not in us.

1Jo 3:5
And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin.
How can any member of the body of Christ have sin, and Jesus Christ has no sin in Him?

We who have Jesus Christ, in whom is no sin, have no sin in us; We have Jesus Christ in us, not sin of the devil.

1Jo 3:5
And ye know that he was manifested to take away our sins; and in him is no sin. Whosoever abideth in him is sinning not: whosoever is sinning hath not seen him, neither known him.

Only those sinning have sin in them, and not Jesus Christ. If we sin, and say we have no sin, the truth Jesus Christ is not in us. Neither if we do works of darkness, and say we walk in the light with Jesus Christ...


Read again. I corrected your bad teaching of it, which justifies still having sin, as though any member of the body of Christ does have sin in Him.



Of course the difference is that I give the Scriptures to correct others. You just accuse others when hearing what you don't like.

2 Tim 3:16
All scripture is given by inspiration of God, and is profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, for instruction in righteousness:

The wise man receives correction from the words of God.

You're still rejecting Gods Word, by avoiding what 1 John 1:8 plainly says.

Yes, 1 John 1:8 affirms that born-again believers still commit sin in this life, and this verse is a direct refutation of your false sinless perfectionism. John includes himself ("if we say") to show that even mature Christians retain an ongoing struggle with indwelling sin.

While a believer is regenerated and given a new nature, the old corrupt nature (the flesh) remains active, meaning Christians stumble and sin daily. To claim freedom from sin is a delusion that rejects God's truth. Believers must "keep short accounts with God," meaning they should regularly confess their sin and look to Christ for ongoing cleansing rather than pretending to be sinless.

1 John 3:9 ("born of God does not sin") refers to a continuous lifestyle of wilful rebellion, not an absolute absence of sin. A true Christian's life is marked by a general direction of holiness and repentance, whereas 1 John 1:8 addresses the specific, individual acts of sin that still occur along the way.

 

[Journey_man]

This has got to be the most classic manifesto of unrepented transgressors justifying by their belief alone. I'll save it for better use elsewhere, thanks.

While I certainly appreciate your breath taking honesty, without any hint of the usual theological fluff words, it's also the reason I'll have to just leave you to it, with your continued daily evil doing against God and Jesus Christ.

There is simply no answer for anyone who believes they are justified with Jesus Christ the righteous, while also doing evil, so long as they believe He has died for the sins of men...

Rom 6:1
What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?

It sounds like the Lord Jesus didn't come for righteous people like yourself. Luke 5:32 reveals that the Lord Jesus came to save people like me.
Luke 5:32 ("I have not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance") means that Christ's saving mission targets the spiritually sick who know their guilt, it exposes human self-righteousness, and wields an effective call that actually produces repentance.

Jesus uses the word "righteous" ironically to mean those who think they are righteous. Because the Pharisees trusted in their own goodness, they felt no need for a spiritual doctor.

Tax collectors and outcasts knew they broke God’s law. Their honest grief over sin opened the door for grace. Jesus sat with outcasts like Levi to show that His medical bag is for the dying, not those who pretend they are well. when Jesus calls a sinner, it is an effectual or powerful call that changes the heart. It does not merely invite; it creates the repentance it asks for.

 

[Journey_man]

I'll answer again, but also include another even worse choice than most make.

For the many that repent not to believe Jesus Christ and sin not, it's simple refusing to repent to believe Jesus Christ and sin not. God Himself does not understand that, as I've shown from the Scriptures.

I of course was one of those many unbelieving sinners, until I did repent to believe Jesus and sin not.

However, for those who now believe they are justified by Jesus Christ, while continuing to do daily evil against Him? And even plainly proclaim it? They are not at all the common many, and I was never one of them, nor ever seek to be.

But, as for why anyone would choose to believe in being justified while still doing evil, rather than repent and not do evil? God and Jesus Christ do understand that particular one:

Eze 13:10
Because, even because they have seduced my people, saying, Peace; and there was no peace; and one built up a wall, and, lo, others daubed it with untempered morter:

Jerem 3:10
And yet for all this her treacherous sister Judah hath not turned unto me with her whole heart, but feignedly, saith the LORD.

Rev 3:15
I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth.

2Th 2:10
And for this cause God shall send them strong delusion, that they should believe a lie: That they all might be damned who believed not the truth, but had pleasure in unrighteousness.

None of that negates the reality that Gods Saints and Prophets all sinned, after they were saved.

I mentioned Pauls honesty in, Romans 7:19 "For the good that I will to do, I do not do; but the evil I will not to do, that I practice."
So then, with the mind I myself serve the law of God, but with the flesh the law of sin.

These verses expose your Arminian theology, with it's imaginary sinless perfectionism. All you can do with these inconvenient verses, is avoid them and pretend they don't exist.

 

[Wansvic]

We'll see. However, we first see that you do not deny the common understanding from Acts 2:38 baptism preachers, that it's Peter's baptism they preach.

You also do not deny the exact comparison between certain people teaching the brethren to do a commanded work, else you cannot be saved.
The only difference being the commanded work, both of which are with men's hands: Flesh circumcision and water baptism.

You certain people are not come out to preach the gospel of Jesus Christ to unbelievers, but come only to the brethren, with a teaching of our own, not of all the churches of God. And so fulfill the exact same comparison of those certain agitators for flesh circumcision:

Act 15:24
Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which went out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls, saying, Ye must be circumcised, and keep the law: to whom we gave no such commandment:

You depart from the teaching of all the apostles, but only one, Peter, whom you place above all the rest. And Peter himself, only preached baptism for remission of sins the first one time only, but no more afterward, even to the Jews in Jerusalem.

And you expect an brother in Christ to believe that Peter was speaking for all apostles for all time in Acts 2:38, and yet neglected to preach baptism specifically for remission of sins thereafter...Just left that part out for the next new believers to assume, because it was preached once however many days, weeks, or years before.

Those who preach water baptism in the name of Jesus for remission of sin are in fact preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ.

In Acts, Luke reveals that the commands presented by the apostles came straight from Jesus through the Holy Ghost: "The former treatise have I made, O Theophilus, all that Jesus began both to do and teach, Until the day in which he (Jesus) was taken up, after that he through the Holy Ghost had given commandments unto the apostles whom he had chosen:" Acts 1:1-2

And again, Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom, and told him to feed both His lambs and sheep. (Jews, Samaritans, Gentiles)
The keys (plural) of the kingdom are in fact the instructions presented to both the lambs and sheep beginning at Jerusalem.

Do you suppose the keys of the kingdom are swapped out on occasion? I think not. Especially since every detailed converstion account includes the same instructions that were initially presented at Pentecost. (Acts 2:4-42, 8:12-18, 9:17-18, 10:43:48, 19:1-7. 22:16)

 

[Wansvic]

Another slight diversion: Keeping all commandments of God is an 'element' of NT birth. No one can be transgressing His commandments and born again of Jesus Christ:

Jhn 8:34
Jesus answered them, Verily, verily, I say unto you, Whosoever is committing sin is the servant of sin.

1Jo 3:8
He that is committing sin is of the devil; for the devil sinneth from the beginning.

1 John 5:18
We know that whosoever is born of God is not sinning; but he that is begotten of God is keeping himself, and that wicked one is touching him not.

Water baptism for remission of sins was only preached by John before Jesus' death, and only preached by Peter one first time after His resurrection.

Scripture never records any of the other apostles confirming water baptism for remission of sins. Including Peter in His later recorded preaching of Jesus Christ.

However, as with all the Lord's commandments, water baptism is recorded as His command for new converts, that have recieved the Spirit by repentance and faith in Jesus Christ.

Already given the Scriptures enough times before.

The commands associated with the NT rebirth were instituted for those living after Jesus' death, burial, and resurrection. Scripture reveals these include repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins, and receiving the Holy Ghost.

The idea that simply keeping all of God's commandments results in the rebirth is not consistent with Scripture. Rather, Scripture reveals that the new birth is specifically connected to obedience to the gospel as Christ and His apostles proclaimed it. Those who believe are commanded to repent, be baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins, and receive the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38). These are not merely general acts of obedience but the God-appointed response to the gospel under the New Covenant.

The notion that remission of sin is not connected to water baptism in the name of Jesus after Pentecost is disputed by what Ananias (a man sent directly by God) told Saul/Paul.

Paul's testimony demonstrates that the New Testament rebirth was not complete simply because he believed Jesus was the Messiah. The Lord directed him to receive further instruction, and Ananias revealed what remained: obedience to water baptism for the washing away of sins. Scripture also reveals that Paul was filled with the Holy Ghost (Acts 9:1-18), completing the pattern consistently seen throughout Acts of repentance, water baptism in Jesus' name for the remission of sins, and receiving the Holy Ghost.

Why this matters:
Paul's testimony was given some 25 years after Pentecost, yet he described his own conversion in terms fully consistent with the message first preached by Peter. Rather than presenting a different gospel or a different way of entering the New Covenant, Paul's account confirms the same apostolic message that had been proclaimed from the beginning: faith in Jesus expresses itself through obedience to the gospel, including water baptism associated with the washing away of sins and the reception of the Holy Ghost.

 

[Wansvic]

False, since the comparison is abusing commanded works for NT remission of sins. Certain have done so with flesh circumcision, and certain are doing so with water baptism.

Both commanded works are being preached in Jesus' New Covenant for remission of sins. And the comparison also between the two, is a work of men's hands, not by the Spirit Himself.

Water baptism in the name of Jesus is commanded of everyone in the NT whereas circumcision is not.

 

[Wansvic]

Well now, you've finally given the only other Scripture after 2:38, that appears to be baptism for remission of sins. Better late then never.

Act 9:17
And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.

Act 22:14
And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard. And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

In the past, you have demanded any Scriptures where 'remission of sins', is not with water baptism. You have not accepted any other words that have to do with 'remission of sins', such as blotting out of sins by repentance and faith. Now, you are not so demanding, and relying on washing away of sins...Maybe that's why you've delayed using the verse.

Your past manner has been as though remission of sins and blotting out of sins, is not the same thing. That of course is an ongoing doctrinal debate. However, we see here that baptism and washing away sins in Acts 22, compares with baptism and remission of sins in Acts 2. Which you now accept as the same. I agree.

However, at the same, we have Paul receiving the Holy Ghost, and arising to be baptized. Which confirms Paul's gospel of receiving the Spirit by hearing of faith, not by commanded works.

So, what we have in Acts 22 with Saul of Tarsus is the same case of Acts 2 on Pentecost: Legally obedient Jews being commanded to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, after the manner of John, for the remission and washing away of sins.

And so, once again, unless it can be shown by Scripture, that when receiving the Spirit of Christ by faith, Jesus Christ does not remit and wash away sins until water baptism; I.e. the unwashed are filled with the Holy Ghost...

Then we must conclude as before, that receiving the Spirit and remission/washing away of sins from the soul, is first preached with the commanded work of baptism for the legal Jews, and now is also preached by hearing of faith without commanded works: The difference being those first Jews obediently keeping the law of Moses, vs the new converts not keeping the law of Moses, whic h began with Cornelius and his whole house.

So, if anyone wants to preach Acts 2:38 today, they certainly can, since all Scripture of God is profitable, including receiving Jesus Christ by hearing of faith without works of the law. However, if anyone wants to preach Acts 2:38 & Acts 22:14 exclusively for remission and washing away of sins, which was only preached to the obedient Jews keeping Moses' law, then they'll need to preach it to Mosaic Jews.

But certainly not to the brethren, that already have Jesus Christ by hearing and believing His gospel of salvation, with justification by His resurrection from the dead:

Act 16:30
And brought them out, and said, Sirs, what must I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved, and thy house.

Rom 10:9
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. For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

Evidently you have not been reading my entire posts as I've included Acts 22:16 previously.

You are missing the point that ALL NT believers are commanded to be water baptized in the name of Jesus.

Paul’s testimony in Acts 22 does not present water baptism as a special requirement for Jews. Throughout the NT, all who believe the gospel are commanded to be water baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Peter gave this universal command on the Day of Pentecost:

“Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins...For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off," even as many as the Lord our God shall call. (Acts 2:38-39).

And as pointed out to you many times, the same command continued to be given to Samaritans, Gentiles, and the disciples at Ephesus (Acts 8:16; Acts 10:47–48; Acts 19:5).

Because Scripture connects obedience to water baptism in Jesus’ name with the remission or washing away of sins, that same reality is associated with every biblical example of New Testament baptism, even when each account does not repeat the purpose in full. Acts 2:38 explains what baptism in Jesus’ name is for, while Acts 22:16 describes the same result as the washing away of sins.

The saving power is not in water by itself. Jesus’ shed blood made remission of sins possible. However, Scripture reveals that God appointed water baptism in the name of Jesus as the point at which a believing and repentant person obediently receives that remission and is joined with Christ in His death.

 

[Wansvic]

Once again, the issue is not about Peter first preaching the gospel of Jesus Christ on Pentecost. Scripture says so.

The issue of idolatry, is if Peter's first preaching of baptism for remission of sins, was preached by all the apostles of Jesus Christ. No. Nor did Peter himself always preach remission of sins with water baptism.

Peter's baptism is being exclusively preached, to the exclusion of the other apostles: Idolatry of We are of Peter's baptism.

Dividing the church, and confusing the converted brethren of the Lord, is nothing new, and so is certainly possible today.

1Co 1:12
Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?

Especially when having to do with water baptism with men's hands...



No keys to Peter alone, nor does Jesus build His church on Peter alone.

Acts 2:38 baptizers alone are as wanna-be baptismal popes, by the authority of Peter above all the apostles of Jesus Christ.



He wasn't. Acts 2:38 baptizers alone are...


You choose his baptism above all others. None of whom preached baptism for remission of sins.

It is evident that water baptism is always for remission of sins, since only converts are water baptized. No person is converted and receives the Spirit, without remission of sins by the Spirit of Christ...

If there is no conversion by faith, until water baptism, then faith in Jesus Christ is made void. Likewise, if there is no remission of sins, until water baptism, then having Jesus Christ by faith is of none effect.



Once again, irrelevant: The issue is if all the apostles preached baptism for remission of sins. No.

No need to correct Peter, who first preached the gospel by the Holy Ghost. It's not about disannulling Acts 2:38, but all about not making that one verse an exclusive law, that excludes all doctrine of baptisms preached by the apostles of Christ:

Heb 6:1
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God, Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment.

No apostle corrected Peter's baptism for remission of sins; Neither did Peter correct any apostles' baptism not for remission of sin.



They did. No apostle contradicted the others. Nor did any corrected another's peaching of water baptism, whether for remission of sin, or not for remission of sins.

Peter alone preached baptism for remission of sins. All other apostles preached baptism after remission of sins, including Peter at the house of Cornelius.




You've departed the argument.



Departed even further away.



Another sidestep. Preaching a specific command of baptism for remission of sins, to the exclusion of all other commands of baptism after remission of sins, that is idolizing one verse of Scripture, as well as the one and only apostle who preached.

It's classic false personal doctrine by separating Scripture from Scripture, and apostle from apostles.

1Co 1:12
Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?



Now you've abandoned the argument entirely, for a degraded accusation, that no one makes against Peter nor Acts 2:38.

Unless you want to draw back from your downhill dive, or have something new to respond to, then I'm moving on.

Again, quoting portions of my posts gives the wrong impression of what I stated clearly. You may want to actually study out what the posts reveal when read in their entirety.

 

[ATG]

When my points from post 546 are kept intact the meaning is clear:

When my responses are acknowledged, they also become clear.

Galatians is about circumcision, not water baptism.

Galatians is about making void faith in Jesus Christ and receiving the Spirit, until doing commanded works, whether OT flesh circumcision or NT water baptism.

Act 15:1
And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.

And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be baptized after the manner of Peter, ye cannot be saved.

I.e. Believing brethren of the Lord Jesus having the Spirit, cannot be saved, until ye are water baptized.

• Receiving the Spirit comes through faith that obeys the gospel.

Receiving the Spirit by faith that obeys is not without remission of sins.

Brethren of the Lord having the Spirit by faith, are not without remission of sins, until obeying the commandments of God.

• Water baptism is not an isolated saving act.
  • It specifically states that "water baptism in and of itself does not save anyone."

Water baptism is not a saving act. It's a work of God's NT commandments.

And, Water baptism is nothing without repentance and faith toward God. No commandment of God can be kept without repentance and faith toward God.

• • Instead, it presents baptism as one essential part of the New Testament new birth, alongside:
    • faith in Jesus,
    • repentance,
    • baptism in Jesus' name for remission of sins,
    • receiving the Holy Ghost.

And here is your error in works of the law: You make a work of law essential to becoming born again.

Repentance, faith in Jesus, and receiving the Spirit is made nothing, until the act of water baptism.

Act 15:1
And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved.

And certain men which came down from Judaea taught the brethren, and said, Except ye be baptized after the manner of Peter, ye cannot be saved.

By making the work of water baptism essential to salvation, you make repentance, faith, and the Spirit Himself without power to save, until water baptized, with men's hands.

Which is the idolatry of a work of men's hands being made essential to becoming saved by Jesus Christ: Ye cannot be saved, until I water baptize you...

Your work of law gospel declares that no man can repent, have faith in Jesus, and receive the Spirit, until water baptized with your hands. Repentance and faith toward God depends on being water baptized by you. Without your essential hands on work, no man can repent from dead works, nor have any faith in Jesus Christ.

Saving faith is in your hands also, not in Jesus Christ only.

Conclusion: Your baptismal error is in withholding salvation from any person, until water baptized with men's hands.

You are not preaching against faith alone without works, but against having any faith until works. The former is rebuked by James, the later is rebuked by Paul.

Faith is not made void, until keeping the commandments of God. Faith is only made void, unless keeping the commandments of God.

Rev 14:12
Here is the patience of the saints: here are they that keep the commandments of God, and the faith of Jesus.

Faith alone salvation makes void the commandments of God: Lawless.

Works essential salvation makes void faith: Legalism.

Remission of sins salvation is not withheld by the Spirit from a new convert, that is repented, but not yet water baptized with men's hands.

Nor is the new convert not keeping God's commandments, while doing so before water baptism. Keeping the commandments by faith in Jesus, is not made void, until keeping the command to be baptized.

Nor is the new convert's remission and salvation made void, by dying enroute to the baptismal water.

All of God's gospel is utterly practical in this life. Men's commandments perverting God's gospel are not practical in all things of this life.

Mat 15:9
But in vain they do worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.

Tit 1:14
Not giving heed to commandments of men, that turn from the truth.

Jesus Himself taught these elements.

Jesus teaches believing and being baptized.

Only greedy men's hands teach faith is void until baptized.

2Pe 2:3
And through covetousness shall they with feigned words make merchandise of you: whose judgment now of a long time lingereth not, and their damnation slumbereth not.

Matth 23:15
Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye compass sea and land to make one proselyte, and when he is made, ye make him twofold more the child of hell than yourselves.

 

[ATG]

Amen! To say, "I repented, but I don't have faith," is an oxymoron,

Repentance without faith toward God, is for advantage among menpleasers:

Matthew{23:5}
But all their works they do for to be seen of men:

just as to say, "I have faith, but I never repent,"

Faith without any repentance is dead.

Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

Faith with some repentance is lukewarm:

Jerem 3:10
And yet for all this her treacherous sister Judah hath not turned unto me with her whole heart, but feignedly, saith the LORD.

Hosea{7:8}
Ephraim, he hath mixed himself among the people; Ephraim is a cake not turned.

Rev 3:15
I know thy works, that thou art neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot. So then because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee out of my mouth

is also an oxymoron. In regard to receiving salvation, repentance and faith are two sides to the same coin. Acts 20:21 - testifying both to Jews and to Greeks of repentance toward God and of faith in our Lord Jesus Christ.

True. No one not yet repented of dead works, has no faith in Jesus Christ.

Heb 6:1
Therefore leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection; not laying again the foundation of repentance from dead works, and of faith toward God,

 

[ATG]

Likewise, Mark 1:15 establishes the necessity of repentance and faith, and I fully agree. But neither Mark 1:15 nor Hebrews 6:1–2 teaches that repentance and faith are the complete NT response to the gospel after Christ's death, burial, and resurrection.

True. Repentance from dead works and faith toward God keeps the commandments of the Lord.

The apostles consistently preached belief in Jesus, repentance, water baptism in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins, and receiving the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38; Acts 8; Acts 10; Acts 19; Acts 22:16). That is the biblical response of faith to God's revealed plan of salvation.

Only in Acts 2:38, was faith in Jesus Christ and receiving the Spirit with water baptism. In Acts 19 faith was before water baptism and receiving the Spirit. In Acts 10, faith and receiving the Spirit was before water baptism. In Acts 8, faith and baptism was before laying on hands and receiving the Spirit.

And so we see that repentance with faith toward God, and receiving His Spirit, is not exclusive to water baptism. Repentance and faith toward God is not made void, until water baptism with men's hands. Neither until laying on hands for the Holy Ghost.

Act 8:16
(For as yet the Holy Ghost was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

Faith is what moves a person to obey God's commands.

True.

Repentance, water baptism, and receiving the Holy Ghost are not additions to faith—they are acts of obedient faith

Repentance is the beginning of faith toward God and receiving the Holy Ghost. Keeping commandments is the work of faith through the Spirit.

Scripture never separates genuine faith from obedience.

True.

Nor does Scripture nullify faith, until obedient works. Scripture only nullifies faith without obedience.

James{2:14}
What doth it profit, my brethren, though a man say he hath faith, and have not works? can faith save him?...Even so faith, if it hath not works, is dead, being alone.

Commanding the brethren to be baptized with water, else ye cannot repent and have faith toward God, is the work of men's hands nullifying the faith of Jesus Christ, until water baptized by you.

 

[ATG]

The human spirit does not get circumcised. The Holy Spirit does not get circumcised. Can it be put any clearer than that?

For some mystical cosmic Christ religion, I suppose. Otherwise, I'm not interested.

The circumcision of the human heart is done by the Holy Spirit. To put it another way, this is the circumcision in the Spirit.

Ok. Back to the gospel of Jesus Christ.

There is the circumcision and baptism of Christ by the Spirit with the inner man, that is not by hands of men with the body.

Men can circumcise the flesh, and baptize the body, but only the Spirit can circumcise lust from the heart, and wash clean the soul:

Jhn 1:29
The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world.

 

[Dino246]

Col 2:11
In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

And just in case you need more little words to convince you of the Spirit's circumcision of the heart:

Rom 8:9
But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his.

Christ is that Spirit that circumcises without hands.

Christ is also that Spirit that baptizes without water.

1Co 12:13
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit.

There is the baptism and circumcision of the Spirit, and that of the flesh with hands. The Spirit saves the soul by hearing of faith, not any flesh of circumcision, or water of baptism.

Do you honestly think you are correcting me?