Baptism, the simple version.

That's the point to the poster it was sent to. By works of the law shall no flesh be justified.

Water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ is a NT command. It has nothing to do with the OT law.

What I shared makes perfect sense. You are just having a difficult time understanding anything beyond your biased, church indoctrination.

In regards to John's baptism, in Mark 1:4, was this baptism of repentance for "in order to obtain" the forgiveness of sins or was it for "in regards to/on the basis of" the forgiveness of sins received upon repentance? *Be careful. John's baptism took place BEFORE Pentecost. Also, in Matthew 3:11, we read - I baptize you with water "for" repentance.. *Was this baptism for "in order to obtain" repentance? OR was this baptism for "in regards to/on the basis of" repentance? Getting water baptized in order to obtain repentance makes no sense at all. Repentance precedes water baptism. This was also BEFORE Pentecost.

Baptized into Christ does not mean water baptized into the body of Christ. That is accomplished through Spirit baptism. (1 Corinthians 12:13) Now in what "sense" would a believer be "water baptized into Christ?" In the same "sense" that the Israelites were "baptized into Moses.." (1 Corinthians 10:2) The Israelites were not literally water baptized into the body of Moses here and there is little dispute that being "baptized into Moses" signified the open allegiance and public identification of the Israelites with Moses as their leader. Moses was formally recognized as the leader of the covenant people. Water baptism signifies our allegiance and public identification with Christ as our Savior, so it's only in that sense.

So you are saying that EVERYONE who was baptized by John had to be re-baptized later or else they would not be saved? In regards to Acts 19:1-7, in verse 2, Paul asked these disciples of John if they had received the Holy Spirit when they believed and their answer in verses 2-3 reveals that they had not yet believed in Christ unto salvation. They had not even heard whether there is a Holy Spirit and they received the baptism of John, but did not realize that Jesus Christ was the One to whom John's baptism pointed. Paul gave them instructions about Jesus and after they believed Paul's presentation of the gospel and came to saving belief in Christ, they were then baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Paul laid hands on them to receive the Holy Spirit which is the exception, not the rule. We also see the laying on of hands in Acts 8:16-17. Again, exception, not the rule.

According to your logic, everyone who died prior to the death of Christ and could not be baptized into Christ will perish. Your gospel just does not hold water. It is full of holes.

That is your biased interpretation, but it's false. The only logical conclusion when properly harmonizing scripture with scripture is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

In regards to Acts 2:47, they were added to the Lord upon repentance/faith prior to receiving water baptism, just as we see in (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:7-9).

Acts 4:4 - However, many of those who heard the word believed; and the number of the men came to be about five thousand. *What happened to baptism?

Acts 5:14 - And believers were increasingly added to the Lord, multitudes of both men and women. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics.

We must properly harmonize scripture with scripture before reaching our conclusion on doctrine, and not distort and pervert passages of scripture in an effort to "patch together" your so called gospel plan.

This sounds similar to the Campbellite 4 step plan of salvation, although they typically reverse the order of #2 and #3 in your list. Repentance actually precedes saving belief/faith in Christ. (Acts 20:21) Confessing with our mouth that Jesus is Lord and believing in our heart that God raised Him from the dead are not two separate steps to salvation, but are chronologically together. (Romans 10:8-10) Water baptism "follows" saving belief/faith in Christ. (Acts 10:43-48)

Your false gospel is the result of bad semantics and flawed hermeneutics. Let me know when you are ready to change your mind and believe the gospel. (Romans 1:16)

You are predicating salvation on the action of men. That isn't grace...it's works.

So you deny that water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for remission of sin is a New Testament command?

God's grace is seen in His willingness to design a plan of salvation for sinful man, who in no way deserved it. And that plan included the need for those who believe in Jesus to be buried with Him by baptism wherein their sin is destroyed; as provided for by His shed blood on Calvary. The mixing of blood and water for purification is an ongoing theme seen in foreshadows throughout scripture.

Baptism, the simple version

grab em
dunk em
hold em
lift em
release em

Sounds like border policy.

It's obvious to me that you are very satisfied with what you already believe and don't want to be confused with the facts. Sadly, I can see that you are thoroughly indoctrinated and unteachable. I just hope and pray that something I shared with you will at least plant a seed that one day will be watered and lead you to faith in Jesus Christ for salvation. Water baptism cannot save you, but Jesus can only IF you place your faith in Him alone for salvation. (Acts 10:43; 16:31; Romans 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9)

Yes, you are correct. I'm unteachable. I can't be taught BS and untruth. Goodbye.

The idea that every scripture must specifically reference water baptism is incorrect. Once the components of the gospel message are established by 2-3 witnesses, as is the case with water baptism, there is no need to continually reference it. If that were so, then one could conclude that neither repentance, nor being filled with the Holy Spirit plays a part in acquiring the NT rebirth.

John the Baptist was sent to introduce the concept of the NT water baptism while the OT law was still in effect. It was an introduction to what was later modified and applied directly to the death, burial and resurrection of Jesus Christ. According to both Peter and Paul, obedience to the NT water baptism brought about the reality of an individual's sin being remitted in association with Jesus' sacrifice. (Acts 2:38, Rom. 6:3-6)

The NT command to repent AND be baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of one's sin was given to those who had already believed that Jesus was the Son of God. Consider that Jesus said unless one repents they will surely perish. (Luke 13:3, 5) So were the individual's who first heard the gospel message saved prior to their willingness to repent, and be baptized? Or, as scripture reflects, saved after both believing and being obedience to the command? (Mark 16:15-16, Acts 22:16...)

The act of repentance involves turning to God acknowledging one's sin after acceptance that Jesus was the Son of God. And, trusting that being buried with Jesus in the likeness of His death brings about what God says it does, the destruction of one's sins in accordance with Jesus' sacrifice. (Rom. 6:3-6)

You stated in your previous post:

I find it interesting that people refuse to accept what is so obvious in the detailed conversion accounts of the Acts of the Apostles. The God-designed rebirth clearly parallels the elements He put in place regarding one's natural birth. (Rom. 1:20) Birth requires coming out of the waters of the womb. And drawing in life sustaining air (a picture of receiving the Holy Spirit into the body) in order to become a viable human being.

What I find interesting, is so many people refuse to accept the obvious from what is taught in John 3:3-10. In order that one may "SEE" and "ENTER" the Kingdom of God, (John 3:3 & 5), one must be "born anew". Jesus Christ was the Kingdom of God on earth. Therefore, in order to see and enter into Him, one must be "born anew". Because, what is flesh is flesh and what is spirit is spirit.

John 3:6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

If one is not "born of the Spirit, then that one has a "natural mind" (born of the flesh is flesh), and the natural mind does not discern the things that are spiritual in nature. (1 Cor. 2:14). Without this discernment, one cannot properly understand the Gospel and the need for it's message.

John 3:7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born anew.

The persons that are born of the flesh, had no decision or part in their conception. They had no choice as to whom their mother and father would be. They could not say, "I do not want to be born". or "I want to be born." Their life, if you will, was completely decided outside of their decision or will.

John 3:8 The wind bloweth where it will, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but knowest not whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that has been born of the Spirit.

In this same way, John 3:8, teaches the Sovereign Work of the Spirit. He moves as He wills and comes to those that He wills. We have no more say so in being born from above, than we had in our physical birth. This is the proper understanding of the parallel of the "two" births. First, physical - second, spiritual.

This fact is further backed-up, by the writers choice of word in the Greek. The Greek word translated in verse 8, as" "has been born", is the word: γεγεννημενος. It is a Perfect. Passive. Participle of: γεννάω. The perfect tense emphasizes the verbs past action and it's continuing results but the part we should pay close attention to, is the passive voice. This means the recipient is not active in it's taking effect. The recipient receives this new birth in the same manner as one received their physical birth. They were acted upon but had no say in it's action. If it were in the "active voice", then we would say that they birthed themselves.

Enochanti wrote:
The existence of God answers the atheists who says there is no God and the lordship and sovereignty of God answers the word of faith adherent who in their core teachings deny the sovereignty of God by claiming God needs man’s permission before he can operate in this world. But that is not the God of the Bible for the God of the Bible is Lord over all.

In the receiving of the Holy Spirit, in the Book of Acts, as I stated earlier, was the blessing promised by Jesus and why the disciples were told to tarry until Pentecost. At Pentecost, the fledgling church was empowered with the various gifts needed for it's early earthly ministry. In Acts 1:5, this is called the "Baptism of the Holy Spirit" and is not referred to as the "New Birth".

We must remember, the NT Scriptures did not yet exist. The preaching of the Gospel, needed to be authenticated with signs and wonders because it was proclaimed by word of mouth without any written prooftext, except when the OT passages were referenced. Jesus Christ's ministry was also authenticated in a similar manner. So too, Moses' ministry before Pharaoh.

Those that the Holy Spirit fell upon, were already in a "born anew" position and were partakers of the Faith. The Sovereignty of God's Grace, is shown throughout the Book of Acts: (KJV)

Acts 2:39 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 2:47 Praising God, and having favor with all the people. And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved.
Acts 16:14 And a certain woman named Lydia, a seller of purple, of the city of Thyatira, which worshipped God, heard us: whose heart the Lord opened, that she attended unto the things which were spoken of Paul.

Lydia - was a business woman of purple dye and may have been a Jewish woman or at least a proselyte because the Scripture says she worshipped or was a devout woman before God. This proves she knew of the God of Israel but like Israel, was worshipping out of an incorrect knowledge. At this time, she knew not Jesus Christ whom Paul had come to proclaim. Scripture says that the Lord opened her heart (the New Birth), and subsequent to this event, she gave head to what Paul proclaimed.

But this takes us away from the discussion of Baptism and it's purpose and enters into the Sovereign work of God in Salvation.

1st Cor.15 vs 1-5 is our Gospel. If one believes in the Lord Jesus Christ and believing that He was the Son of God, died for us, and rose to be with the Father in Heaven is what is required. Anything else is a works which doesn't save anyone. Water doesn't have the power of forgiveness. Only the shed blood of Christ can forgive sins. Without the shedding of blood there can be no forgiveness of sin.

I'll be praying for you. 🙏

1st Cor.15 vs 1-5 is our Gospel. If one believes in the Lord Jesus Christ and believing that He was the Son of God, died for us, and rose to be with the Father in Heaven is what is required. Anything else is a works which doesn't save anyone. Water doesn't have the power of forgiveness. Only the shed blood of Christ can forgive sins. Without the shedding of blood there can be no forgiveness of sin.

Pray for yourself. God has blessed me beyond measure.

We, each, receive the gift of the Spirit individually per Acts 2:38. That is not the baptism of the spirit such as in Acts 2 on the day of Pentecost.

That and Acts 10 are 2 unique events that happened twice per the scriptures in this unique fashion and doesn't happen today.

The Holy Spirit fell unilaterally on individuals as a sign and validation of those events which in both cases, the church was initiated.

Any other time the spirit fell miraculously in the form of a gift was as the result of the laying on of the apostle's hands.

Happened twice in biblical times, and doesn't happen today.

Better?