water baptism in Jesus' Name.

Absolute bias and highly unlikely. He was being crucified as a thief, blaspheming, mocking and shaking his head at Jesus prior to having a change of mind (repentance) and placing his faith in Jesus Christ for salvation while still hanging on the cross.

What Scripture has led you to that conclusion? You think he was just being hung out to dry?

Still lots of confusion and misunderstanding regarding the thief on the cross I can see by postings on this thread, so once again, I'll repost a writing of mine on this subject which was also the subject of a thread on this forum.

REPOST

I continually encounter people trying to justify that baptism is not an absolute necessity for one's salvation by use (erroneously) of the thief on the cross as justification, as he was not baptized but yet saved by the Lord, which is true! BUT, the error in this is the lack of understanding of the scriptures. You must read and understand Hebrews 9:15-17 which clarifies why the thief on the cross was saved by Jesus without being baptized. Christ was still alive when this occurred meaning it was done while the old testament or covenant was still in effect; the new testament had not yet been established because Christ had not yet died. And since the Lord was still alive no one could possibly be baptized into Christ under NT salvation criteria. Baptism did not become a requirement as part of salvation until the new testament began which was after the death of Christ. Jesus forgave the thief on the cross no different than he forgave others during his earthly ministry, such as the woman caught in the act of adultery as recorded in John 8. Baptism should not even be an issue when discussing the thief on the cross, but unfortunately always is, but in error.

Hebrews 9:15-17

15 And for this cause he is the mediator of the new testament, that by means of death, for the redemption of the transgressions that were under the first testament, they which are called might receive the promise of eternal inheritance.

16 For where a testament is, there must also of necessity be the death of the testator.

17 For a testament is of force after men are dead: otherwise it is of no strength at all while the testator liveth.

Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android

My point was once again, scripture IS consistent, and it doesn't matter: either is OK, BUT, you'll find, as I pointed out, that baptizers of the biblical record said neither prior to their baptizing of persons. The baptizer DID NOT say "I baptize you in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost", or, "I baptize you in the name of Jesus Christ" prior to their immersion of individuals. They said nothing. Only those getting baptized said something or were told to such as the Ethiopian eunuch and Paul. Once there's belief, confession of belief, and repentance, the only thing remaining is immersion. No additional words of the baptizer are necessary as evidenced by the scriptures. Baptism is by the authority of God which is what is meant by "in the name of".

A Chuck Smith Disciple?

Calvary Chapel, literally begins a new built church building and congregation with Genesis 1:1 and will continue all the way through the entire Bible Verse for Verse, Chapter for Chapter Genesis to Revelation and when done with Revelation will flip to Genesis 1:1 and begins again. And will do that for the entire existence of the Church.

I can see how they Baptize Jesus Name and still believe Triune God.

The way they structurise the presentation of God and His Holy Word Verse by Verse eventually takes us to Book of Acts where we literally read 4 times Baptized in Water in Jesus Name. Of course, they would just do the same as the Bible shows how people were being Baptized in those days.

Other than OUTSIDE SOURCES, the Bible does not show us anywhere, where people are being Baptized trinity.

Petet said Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved. Paul said have faith and confess the Lord Jesus Christ and youmshall be saved .

Jesus said to call on me, and you shall be saved. He that believes in ME shall be saved. Ezekiel 36:25-27

your exegesis of Ezekiel is partly correct you must read a few verses before


in verse 25 the first word is ' Then " which is a verb meaning something was done first before the "then" was said God is doing something here to the Jews and it is bring them back to The land God said they would have.

Knowing the history and Theology behind Calvary Chapel, from past 4 years of indepth research about them, the fact they strictly Follow the BIBLE, and the BIBLE [[does not show us anywhere]] people Baptized like Matthew 28, that the BIBLE must clearly mean for us to be Baptized HOW the BIBLE does show people being Baptized???

And that must be why they Baptize Jesus Name.

They have a call in show on radio daily monday through friday. monday i will call and ask!

really let read shall we



Verse 20 says

20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water.


Are you saying the eight souls were saved through water means baptism? because it doesn't again. Verse 20 is speaking of Noah, who was saved by God in the ARK as they went through the flood. iF you want to speak of verse 21 ok let's talk about that. FYI God saved Noah, not baptism.

Now verse 21 says :


21 There is also an antitype which now saves us—baptism (not the removal of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God), through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,


The word ANTITPE means a symbol or represents something: that is the resurrection of Jesus Christ, AS Paul said in Roman 6:1-4

1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin that grace may abound? 2 Certainly not! How shall we who died to sin live any longer in it? 3 Or do you not know that as many of us as were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death?

4 Therefore we were buried with Him through baptism into death, that just as Christ was raised from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

wrong

Baptism doesn't save you, and the ones who are wrong on that period.

Peter and paul are not saying different things about Baptism. NOR did Jesus so sorry you're in error.

they don't

your doctrine is Oness and is errored to.

I disagree!
CC is very Trinity!
And the Bible does show people being Baptized Jesus Name and does not the other way. So, by the Bible example alone, they are following the Bible word for word here.

That not true

If you read the book of Acts, the reason why Peter said Baptism in the name of Jesus was because he was ordered to teach in that Name. Peter did as I believe, biblical baptism in the name of Jesus as a public rebuke of leaders and to bring attention to the Lord Jesus.

Acts 4:7


7 And when they had set them in the midst, they asked, “By what power or by what name have you done this?”
8 Then Peter, filled with the Holy Spirit, said to them, “Rulers of the people and elders of Israel: 9 If we this day are judged for a good deed done to a helpless man, by what means he has been made well, 10 let it be known to you all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom you crucified, whom God raised from the dead, by Him this man stands here before you whole.

Then Peter said something very telling to them.


11 This is the ‘stone which was rejected by you builders, which has become the chief cornerstone.’ 12 Nor is there salvation in any other, for there is no other name under heaven given among men by which we must be saved.”


Peter did not even mention water baptism to them.

After Peter spoke to them the rulers had a side meeting and came back and said:


17 But so that it spreads no further among the people, let us severely threaten them, that from now on they speak to no man in this name.”


18 So they called them and commanded them not to speak at all nor teach in the name of Jesus.

19 But Peter and John answered and said to them, “Whether it is right in the sight of God to listen to you more than to God, you judge. 20 For we cannot but speak the things which we have seen and heard.”

21 So when they had further threatened them, they let them go, finding no way of punishing them, because of the people, since they all glorified God for what had been done.


The context of Baptism in the Nae of Jesus was done in opposition to the command they received. That is why Baptism in Jesus' name was happening. Learn church history over a denomination's doctrinal teaching trying to elite one verse in scripture.

Also, Acts was written by Luke after the events that took place were recorded in the book. Context is important, sir.

What's important is the Bible shows people got Baptized one way. And Paul claims to be Baptized that way. So clearly, Paul, is Saved and going to Heaven. If Paul was Baptized Jesus Name when we read the Apostles were Baptizing one another, and they are in Heaven, then being Baptized that way clearly is Acceptable.

we can't add to the scriptures. Nothing in Acts chapter 9 says Paul was baptized in Jesus' name. YOu assume that.

As the Greek word for "and" is "kai" which can be translated "even;" thus we have the following verses rendered,

1Jo 5:6, This is he that came by water and blood, even Jesus Christ; not by water only, but by water <even> blood. And it is the Spirit that beareth witness, because the Spirit is truth.
1Jo 5:7, For there are three that bear record in heaven, the Father, the Word, and the Holy Ghost: and these three are one.
1Jo 5:8, And there are three that bear witness in earth, the Spirit, <even> the water, <even> the blood: and these three agree in one.

Whether or not it is "by" or "through" "water" refers to salvation and baptism in the passage. Changing the middle word does not make your case for you in the slightest; but is merely a deflection of the reality of the passage.

I am not the natural man...I have received baptism in Jesus' Name and therefore I have the Holy Ghost; for I have fulfilled the condition for the promise of the Holy Ghost.

As for your verses, yes, they do appear to say that a person can be saved apart from baptism in Jesus' Name.

I just would like to know one thing....how you interpret a comparison of Acts 2:39 to Romans 8:30.