Baptism, Born again, how are they connected?

[mailmandan]

"Mark 1:4 tells us that baptism is for the remission of sins....."John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins."

So was this baptism of repentance in Mark 1:4 (for/eis) "in order to obtain" the remission of sins or was it (for/eis) "in regards to/on the basis of" the remission of sins received upon repentance? Be careful before you answer! Elsewhere you stated that "the thief thief on the cross was not under the new covenant which requires water baptism" so the implication is that water baptism was not required for salvation before the new covenant was established and Mark 1:4 was before the new covenant. It appears you have contradicted yourself.

*In Matthew 3:11, we read - I baptize you with water (for/eis) repentance.. *Now was this baptism (for/eis) "in order to obtain" repentance? or was it (for/eis) "in regards to/on the basis of" repentance? Of course baptized in order to obtain repentance makes no sense at all. Repentance PRECEDES water baptism. Can you be honest for once and answer my questions?

Acts 2; 38-40.... Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost....."save yourself".

"Save yourself" or "Be saved from this perverse generation!” (Acts 2:40) does not mean we save ourselves by works/getting water baptized, as if Jesus needs our help in saving us. Now for the upteenth time, in Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

*So 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*

Acts 22;16..... (Saul required to be baptized)...."And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord."

As Greek scholar AT Robertson points out, "baptism here pictures the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ." The language in Acts 22:16 is similar to the statement of Christ when He took the bread and said, "This is my body" (Matthew 26:26). The bread was only the emblem of His body. Baptism is the emblem of the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ. Every time a believer is immersed he washes away his sins in the same SENSE Paul did: not literally, but ceremonially, pointing to the blood of Christ by which sins are actually washed away. (1 John 1:7; Revelation 1:5) *Excellent article on Acts 22:16 - https://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2015/03/acts-2216-baptism-essential-for.html

Matt.3;11...

I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit [] and fire.

Once again, in Matthew 3:11, we read - I baptize you with water (for/eis) repentance.. *Now was this baptism (for/eis) "in order to obtain" repentance? or was it (for/eis) "in regards to/on the basis of" repentance? Getting water baptized "in order to obtain" repentance makes no sense at all BECAUSE REPENTANCE PRECEDES WATER BAPTISM and any honest person would admit that.

END OF PART 1

 

[mailmandan]

PART 2

Matt 3;14,15... But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? 15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fullfill all righteousness. Then he suffered him.

In getting water baptized, Jesus replied that it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness. So getting water baptized is a "work of righteousness" and in Titus 3:5, we read that it is not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, which pertains to internal, spiritual washing by the Holy Spirit and not plain, ordinary H20 which has no power to cleanse the heart from sin and regenerate.

Matt., 28: 18-20... And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth.
19 Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:
20 Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen.

We have a command here from Jesus to go and make disciples of all nations, then baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and teach them to observe all things He has commanded. *However, it does not say here that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. Make disciples FIRST, then baptize them and teach them to observe all things He has commanded afterwards.

Mark 16;16... He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Mark 16:16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned. The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief, not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. *NOWHERE does the Bible say "baptized or condemned."

If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then why did Jesus not mention it in the following verses? (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). What is the ONE requirement that Jesus mentions 9 different times in each of these complete statements? BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics. Will you be honest this time and answer my questions?

*John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

I Peter 3;21....... The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

In 1 Peter 3:21, Peter tells us that baptism now saves you, yet when Peter uses this phrase he continues in the same sentence to explain exactly what he means by it. He said that baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh (that is, not as an outward, physical act which washes dirt from the body--that is not what saves you), "but an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (that is, as an inward, spiritual transaction between God and the individual, a transaction that is symbolized by the outward ceremony of water baptism). *Just as the eight people in the ark were "saved THROUGH water" as they were IN THE ARK. They were not literally saved "by" the water. Hebrews 11:7 is clear on this point (..built an ARK for the SAVING of his household). *NOTE: The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE. In contrast, ONLY THE WICKED IN NOAH'S DAY CAME IN CONTACT WITH THE WATER AND THEY ALL PERISHED.

A further lesson for you: The Greek word “antitupon,” as used in I Peter 3: 21, is “an adjective, used as a noun,” and denotes, in the NT, “a corresponding type,” being “said of baptism.” “The circumstances of the flood, the ark and its occupants, formed a type, and baptism forms “a corresponding type,” each setting forth the spiritual realities of the death, burial, and resurrection of believers in their identification with Christ. It is not a case of type and antitype, but of two types, that in Genesis, the type, and baptism, the corresponding type.” Noah was saved by the ark “through (via) water.” Water was not the means of their salvation, but the ark. The ark is what both delivered and preserved them, the two aspects of “salvation.” Their “salvation” was typical of the salvation promised to the Christian. It pictured it. So also does Christian baptism picture the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. *By saying, "not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience -through the resurrection of Jesus Christ," *Peter guards against saving power to the physical ceremony itself.

John 3:5.... Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

In regards to the word "water" in John 3:5, there are those who would argue that the natural sense of the passage parallels "water" with being born out of a mother’s womb (verse 4) and with "flesh" (verse 6). Simply stated in that case, Jesus told Nicodemus that in order to see the kingdom of God two births are necessary. The first is a physical, literal, "flesh" birth (which is, of course, accompanied by amniotic "water") and the second is Spirit.

There are also those who would argue that Jesus mentions "living water" in John 4:10, 14; 7:37-39 and in John 7:38-39, we read - "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this He spoke concerning the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the source of living water and spiritual cleansing, hence "washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5). If "water" is arbitrarily defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again.

Yet there are still others who would argue that "water" is used in the Bible as an emblem of the Word of God, and in such uses it is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26) When we are born again, the Holy Spirit begets new life, Divine life, so that we are said to become "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4). The new birth is brought to pass through "incorruptible seed, by the Word of God, which lives and abides forever" (I Peter 1:23), but the Holy Spirit is the Agent who accomplishes the miracle of regeneration. The natural man can only seem to understand natural water/H20/baptism. (1 Corinthians 2:14) To automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted, yet that's what those who promote the false doctrine of baptismal regeneration (including Roman Catholics, Mormons and other works-salvationists) do in order to accommodate their biased church doctrine.

END OF PART 2

 

[mailmandan]

PART 3

Gal 3;26-27..... For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as were baptized into Christ have put on Christ

Galatians 3:26 - For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus (Period.) *Not through faith and water baptism. Also read John 1:12 - But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name. *Received Him, given the right to become children of God, through believing in His name, not through water baptism. Is the truth beginning to sink in yet? Galatians 3:27 - For as many of you as were "baptized into Christ" have put on/clothed yourself with Christ. The Greek word for "put on" is "enduo" and means to enclose oneself in, as when one "puts on" clothes or armor or some other item. Involved in this is the idea of "imitation" and "identification." Just as 1 Corinthians 10:2 says that all (the Israelites) were "baptized into Moses" in the cloud and in the sea, but this does not mean they were literally water baptized into the body of Moses. So believers are "baptized by one Spirit into one body" (1 Corinthians 12:13) upon believing the gospel (Ephesians 1:13) and water baptized into Christ in regards to "identification." Works-salvationists generally confuse water baptism with Spirit baptism.

Acts 9; 14,15,16,18..... And here he hath authority from the chief priests to bind all that call on thy name.
15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:
16 For I will shew him how great things he must suffer for my name's sake.
18 And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.

Paul had already believed in Christ when Ananias came to pray for him to receive his sight (Acts 9:17). It also should be noted that Paul at the time when Ananias prayed for him to receive his sight, he was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17)--this was before he was water baptized (Acts 9:18). Verse 17 connects his being filled with the Spirit with the receiving of his sight. We know that he received his sight prior to his water baptism. *It's also interesting that when Paul recounted this event again later in Acts (Acts 26:12-18), he did not mention Ananias or what Ananias said to him at all. Verse 18 again would confirm the idea that Paul received Christ as Savior on the road to Damascus since here Christ is telling Paul he will be a messenger for Him concerning forgiveness of sins for Gentiles as they have faith in Him. It would seem unlikely that Christ would commission Paul if Paul had not yet believed in Him and was not yet saved.

Acts 8:12...... But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

Believed and saved FIRST, then "afterwards" water baptized, just as we see in (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17,18)

Acts 19:5-6..... When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

Paul asked them in verse 2 if they had received the Holy Spirit when they believed and their answer in verse 3 reveals that they were not yet believers. They had 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 faith, they were then baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Paul laid hands on them to receive the Holy Spirit (which was not the case in Acts 2 and Acts 10 - so exception, not the rule). It did signify their inclusion into the church. Apostles were also present when the Samaritans (chapter 8) were included. God's purpose was to emphasize unity in the church.

Rom. 6;3,4...know ye not,that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 ....Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: like Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

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.

In Romans 6:4, the phrase "buried with Him through baptism," (on the surface) appears to support the false notion that baptism is the instrumental cause of justification. However, even here baptism could be understood as the sign of justification. It's not unusual in scripture to call the reality by the name of its sign. Thus, for example, Paul says that all Christians are circumcised (even though one may not be physically circumcised) - meaning that they possess what circumcision signifies (Philippians 3:3). Using this kind of language, Paul can speak of the great reality of the believers’ spiritual union with Christ, and the benefits which flow from that union, in terms of baptism, its sign.

We are forced to give this interpretation by the context. Before mentioning baptism in chapter 6, Paul had repeatedly emphasized that FAITH, not baptism is the instrumental cause of salvation/justification (Romans 1:16, 3:22-30; 4:4-6, 13; 5:1). That is when the old man was put to death and united in the likeness of His death, which water baptism symbolizes and pictures. Righteousness is "imputed to us who believe in Him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead, who was delivered up because of our offenses, and was raised up because of our justification" (Romans 4:24,25).

Since believers receive the benefits of Christ’s death and resurrection (justification), and that through faith, believers must be spiritually united to Him (delivered and raised up with Him). If baptism is taken as the instrumental cause, then Paul contradicts what he had established before, namely that justification is by FAITH, not baptism. *Hermeneutics. Paul clearly teaches that what is signified in baptism (buried and raised with Christ) actually occurs "through faith." Christians are "buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead" (Colossians 2:12). Justification on account of union in Christ's death, burial and resurrection is brought about "through faith" - and is properly symbolized by dipping the new believer in and out of the water.

There are more.
But, if you don't accept these of G-d's word no others will help you, probably.

There are a multitude of Bible verses which make it clear that man is saved through BELIEF/FAITH "apart from additions or modifications." (Luke 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24, 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 11:17; 13:39; 16:31; 26:18; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:2-6, 9-12; 5:1; 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; 3:6-9; 3:26; Ephesians 2:8; Philippians 3:9; Hebrews 10:39; 2 Timothy 3:15; 1 John 5:13 etc..). If you refuse to accept God's Word that man is saved by grace through faith and not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9)...Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us.. (Titus 3:5)...God saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works.. (2 Timothy 1:9) then you won't accept the truth no matter times that me or my brothers and sisters in Christ on Christian Chat explain it to you and we will just continue to waste our time beating a dead horse.

I don't appreciate your accusations...pal.

We don't appreciate your perverted water gospel. (2 Corinthians 4:3,4) Let me know when you are ready to repent and believe the gospel. (Romans 1:16; 1 Corinthians 1:21)

 

[preston39]

Hi Preston,

EG has his frame of reference, his belief system and ignores anything in scripture that suggests otherwise.
Do not imagine everyone you speak to is rational or does not suffer from cognitive dissonance.
This means his mind will not allow him to see things that contradict his beliefs, ie he see what he wants
to see.

Emotionally I have been there, it is a tough place. Scripture clearly teaches baptism of John was for the
forgiveness of sins. We are commanded by implication to incorporate this into our theology, as it is scripture
the highest authority in our lives, but then for some the highest authority is really their own ideas and
theology, which this situation demonstrates.

God bless you as you walk in His ways.

Thank you and you are so correct.

One of my faults is to see pure black and white and lack ability to convince someone that is so.....frustrating. Yet, I understand that some are blocked from comprehension because of their lack of .....clean heart.
It is sad....but righteous...... as part of G-d's plan.

 

[preston39]

PART 2

In getting water baptized, Jesus replied that it is fitting for us to fulfill all righteousness. So getting water baptized is a "work of righteousness" and in Titus 3:5, we read that it is not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, which pertains to internal, spiritual washing by the Holy Spirit and not plain, ordinary H20 which has no power to cleanse the heart from sin and regenerate.

We have a command here from Jesus to go and make disciples of all nations, then baptize them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit and teach them to observe all things He has commanded. *However, it does not say here that baptism is absolutely necessary for salvation. Make disciples FIRST, then baptize them and teach them to observe all things He has commanded afterwards.

Mark 16:16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned. The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief, not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. *NOWHERE does the Bible say "baptized or condemned."

If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then why did Jesus not mention it in the following verses? (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). What is the ONE requirement that Jesus mentions 9 different times in each of these complete statements? BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics. Will you be honest this time and answer my questions?

*John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

In 1 Peter 3:21, Peter tells us that baptism now saves you, yet when Peter uses this phrase he continues in the same sentence to explain exactly what he means by it. He said that baptism now saves you-not the removal of dirt from the flesh (that is, not as an outward, physical act which washes dirt from the body--that is not what saves you), "but an appeal to God for a good conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (that is, as an inward, spiritual transaction between God and the individual, a transaction that is symbolized by the outward ceremony of water baptism). *Just as the eight people in the ark were "saved THROUGH water" as they were IN THE ARK. They were not literally saved "by" the water. Hebrews 11:7 is clear on this point (..built an ARK for the SAVING of his household). *NOTE: The context reveals that ONLY the righteous (Noah and his family) were DRY and therefore SAFE. In contrast, ONLY THE WICKED IN NOAH'S DAY CAME IN CONTACT WITH THE WATER AND THEY ALL PERISHED.

A further lesson for you: The Greek word “antitupon,” as used in I Peter 3: 21, is “an adjective, used as a noun,” and denotes, in the NT, “a corresponding type,” being “said of baptism.” “The circumstances of the flood, the ark and its occupants, formed a type, and baptism forms “a corresponding type,” each setting forth the spiritual realities of the death, burial, and resurrection of believers in their identification with Christ. It is not a case of type and antitype, but of two types, that in Genesis, the type, and baptism, the corresponding type.” Noah was saved by the ark “through (via) water.” Water was not the means of their salvation, but the ark. The ark is what both delivered and preserved them, the two aspects of “salvation.” Their “salvation” was typical of the salvation promised to the Christian. It pictured it. So also does Christian baptism picture the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. *By saying, "not the removal of dirt from the flesh, but an appeal to God for a good conscience -through the resurrection of Jesus Christ," *Peter guards against saving power to the physical ceremony itself.

In regards to the word "water" in John 3:5, there are those who would argue that the natural sense of the passage parallels "water" with being born out of a mother’s womb (verse 4) and with "flesh" (verse 6). Simply stated in that case, Jesus told Nicodemus that in order to see the kingdom of God two births are necessary. The first is a physical, literal, "flesh" birth (which is, of course, accompanied by amniotic "water") and the second is Spirit.

There are also those who would argue that Jesus mentions "living water" in John 4:10, 14; 7:37-39 and in John 7:38-39, we read - "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this He spoke concerning the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the source of living water and spiritual cleansing, hence "washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit" (Titus 3:5). If "water" is arbitrarily defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again.

Yet there are still others who would argue that "water" is used in the Bible as an emblem of the Word of God, and in such uses it is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26) When we are born again, the Holy Spirit begets new life, Divine life, so that we are said to become "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4). The new birth is brought to pass through "incorruptible seed, by the Word of God, which lives and abides forever" (I Peter 1:23), but the Holy Spirit is the Agent who accomplishes the miracle of regeneration. The natural man can only seem to understand natural water/H20/baptism. (1 Corinthians 2:14) To automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted, yet that's what those who promote the false doctrine of baptismal regeneration (including Roman Catholics, Mormons and other works-salvationists) do in order to accommodate their biased church doctrine.

END OF PART 2

You are conflicting scripture..........scripture is not conflicted.
Are you a baptist?

 

[preston39]

PART 3

Galatians 3:26 - For you are all sons of God through faith in Christ Jesus (Period.) *Not through faith and water baptism. Also read John 1:12 - But as many as received Him, to them He gave the right to become children of God, to those who believe in His name. *Received Him, given the right to become children of God, through believing in His name, not through water baptism. Is the truth beginning to sink in yet? Galatians 3:27 - For as many of you as were "baptized into Christ" have put on/clothed yourself with Christ. The Greek word for "put on" is "enduo" and means to enclose oneself in, as when one "puts on" clothes or armor or some other item. Involved in this is the idea of "imitation" and "identification." Just as 1 Corinthians 10:2 says that all (the Israelites) were "baptized into Moses" in the cloud and in the sea, but this does not mean they were literally water baptized into the body of Moses. So believers are "baptized by one Spirit into one body" (1 Corinthians 12:13) upon believing the gospel (Ephesians 1:13) and water baptized into Christ in regards to "identification." Works-salvationists generally confuse water baptism with Spirit baptism.

Paul had already believed in Christ when Ananias came to pray for him to receive his sight (Acts 9:17). It also should be noted that Paul at the time when Ananias prayed for him to receive his sight, he was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17)--this was before he was water baptized (Acts 9:18). Verse 17 connects his being filled with the Spirit with the receiving of his sight. We know that he received his sight prior to his water baptism. *It's also interesting that when Paul recounted this event again later in Acts (Acts 26:12-18), he did not mention Ananias or what Ananias said to him at all. Verse 18 again would confirm the idea that Paul received Christ as Savior on the road to Damascus since here Christ is telling Paul he will be a messenger for Him concerning forgiveness of sins for Gentiles as they have faith in Him. It would seem unlikely that Christ would commission Paul if Paul had not yet believed in Him and was not yet saved.

Believed and saved FIRST, then "afterwards" water baptized, just as we see in (Acts 10:43-47; 11:17,18)

Paul asked them in verse 2 if they had received the Holy Spirit when they believed and their answer in verse 3 reveals that they were not yet believers. They had 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 faith, they were then baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. Paul laid hands on them to receive the Holy Spirit (which was not the case in Acts 2 and Acts 10 - so exception, not the rule). It did signify their inclusion into the church. Apostles were also present when the Samaritans (chapter 8) were included. God's purpose was to emphasize unity in the church.

In Romans 6:4, the phrase "buried with Him through baptism," (on the surface) appears to support the false notion that baptism is the instrumental cause of justification. However, even here baptism could be understood as the sign of justification. It's not unusual in scripture to call the reality by the name of its sign. Thus, for example, Paul says that all Christians are circumcised (even though one may not be physically circumcised) - meaning that they possess what circumcision signifies (Philippians 3:3). Using this kind of language, Paul can speak of the great reality of the believers’ spiritual union with Christ, and the benefits which flow from that union, in terms of baptism, its sign.

We are forced to give this interpretation by the context. Before mentioning baptism in chapter 6, Paul had repeatedly emphasized that FAITH, not baptism is the instrumental cause of salvation/justification (Romans 1:16, 3:22-30; 4:4-6, 13; 5:1). That is when the old man was put to death and united in the likeness of His death, which water baptism symbolizes and pictures. Righteousness is "imputed to us who believe in Him who raised up Jesus our Lord from the dead, who was delivered up because of our offenses, and was raised up because of our justification" (Romans 4:24,25).

Since believers receive the benefits of Christ’s death and resurrection (justification), and that through faith, believers must be spiritually united to Him (delivered and raised up with Him). If baptism is taken as the instrumental cause, then Paul contradicts what he had established before, namely that justification is by FAITH, not baptism. *Hermeneutics. Paul clearly teaches that what is signified in baptism (buried and raised with Christ) actually occurs "through faith." Christians are "buried with Him in baptism, in which you also were raised with Him through faith in the working of God, who raised Him from the dead" (Colossians 2:12). Justification on account of union in Christ's death, burial and resurrection is brought about "through faith" - and is properly symbolized by dipping the new believer in and out of the water.

There are a multitude of Bible verses which make it clear that man is saved through BELIEF/FAITH "apart from additions or modifications." (Luke 8:12; John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 5:24, 6:40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 11:17; 13:39; 16:31; 26:18; Romans 1:16; 3:22-28; 4:2-6, 9-12; 5:1; 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; 3:6-9; 3:26; Ephesians 2:8; Philippians 3:9; Hebrews 10:39; 2 Timothy 3:15; 1 John 5:13 etc..). If you refuse to accept God's Word that man is saved by grace through faith and not by works (Ephesians 2:8,9)...Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us.. (Titus 3:5)...God saved us and called us with a holy calling, not according to our works.. (2 Timothy 1:9) then you won't accept the truth no matter times that me or my brothers and sisters in Christ on Christian Chat explain it to you and we will just continue to waste our time beating a dead horse.

We don't appreciate your perverted water gospel. (2 Corinthians 4:3,4) Let me know when you are ready to repent and believe the gospel. (Romans 1:16; 1 Corinthians 1:21)

Can we anticipate part #4 ...where you accept G-d's biblical teachings as written and consistent with His intent?

 

[eternally-gratefull]

So was this baptism of repentance in Mark 1:4 (for/eis) "in order to obtain" the remission of sins or was it (for/eis) "in regards to/on the basis of" the remission of sins received upon repentance? Be careful before you answer! Elsewhere you stated that "the thief thief on the cross was not under the new covenant which requires water baptism" so the implication is that water baptism was not required for salvation before the new covenant was established and Mark 1:4 was before the new covenant. It appears you have contradicted yourself.

*In Matthew 3:11, we read - I baptize you with water (for/eis) repentance.. *Now was this baptism (for/eis) "in order to obtain" repentance? or was it (for/eis) "in regards to/on the basis of" repentance? Of course baptized in order to obtain repentance makes no sense at all. Repentance PRECEDES water baptism. Can you be honest for once and answer my questions?

"Save yourself" or "Be saved from this perverse generation!” (Acts 2:40) does not mean we save ourselves by works/getting water baptized, as if Jesus needs our help in saving us. Now for the upteenth time, in Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

*So 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*

As Greek scholar AT Robertson points out, "baptism here pictures the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ." The language in Acts 22:16 is similar to the statement of Christ when He took the bread and said, "This is my body" (Matthew 26:26). The bread was only the emblem of His body. Baptism is the emblem of the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ. Every time a believer is immersed he washes away his sins in the same SENSE Paul did: not literally, but ceremonially, pointing to the blood of Christ by which sins are actually washed away. (1 John 1:7; Revelation 1:5) *Excellent article on Acts 22:16 - https://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2015/03/acts-2216-baptism-essential-for.html

Once again, in Matthew 3:11, we read - I baptize you with water (for/eis) repentance.. *Now was this baptism (for/eis) "in order to obtain" repentance? or was it (for/eis) "in regards to/on the basis of" repentance? Getting water baptized "in order to obtain" repentance makes no sense at all BECAUSE REPENTANCE PRECEDES WATER BAPTISM and any honest person would admit that.

END OF PART 1

One thing bro

John the baptised REFUSED to baptise the jewish religious leaders. He demands they show FRUITS worthy of repentnance (prove you have repented and have remission) before I will baptize you.

 

[mailmandan]

You are conflicting scripture......

I see that you once again failed to answer my questions.

scripture is not conflicted.

Scripture is certainly not conflicted when we *properly harmonize scripture with scripture* before reaching our conclusion on doctrine.

Are you a baptist?

I attend a non-denominational Christian church, which is closer to baptist than what you are peddling.

 

[eternally-gratefull]

One other things, He said I will baptise (water)

He (jesus) will baptise with the spirit.

Water baptism is a symbol of jesus baptising in the spirit. It is also a way for us to give a testimony,

 

[mailmandan]

Can we anticipate part #4 ...where you accept G-d's biblical teachings as written and consistent with His intent?

I have accepted God's Biblical teachings as written and consistent with His intent in parts #1, #2 and #3. I see that you have no proper rebuttal or answers to my questions, which is very telling.

 

[preston39]

I see that you once again failed to answer my questions.

Scripture is certainly not conflicted when we *properly harmonize scripture with scripture* before reaching our conclusion on doctrine.

I attend a non-denominational Christian church, which is closer to baptist than what you are peddling.

Now I understand your comprehension stance of scripture........sad.

Until you let go of a man made organization and rely on scripture you will nearly always be in default.

 

[mailmandan]

Now I understand your comprehension stance of scripture........sad.

Until you let go of a man made organization and rely on scripture you will nearly always be in default.

What's sad is your failure to properly harmonize scripture with scripture in order to reach the proper conclusion on doctrine. Let me know when you are ready to answer my questions and present a Biblically based rebuttal, instead of false accusations and straw man arguments. Also let me know when you are ready to REPENT AND BELIEVE THE GOSPEL.

 

[Azawah]

Yes.....Hebrew Christian.

Can you explain How you are a Hebrew? I also wondered why you leave the O out.

 

[fredoheaven]

Out of utmost respect should a document fall into a disrespectful environment...best summarized here:

"Why do we leave out the "o" G-d?

A Note About the Spelling of G-d's Name

Why do we leave out the "o" when referring to G-d?According to Jewish tradition we do not write out the Creator's name in any language, unless as part of a printed book which we know will be preserved with dignity and treated as holy. Refraining from writing out His name is a sign of reverence and awe for the Creator. If this name were to be written out and then, the paper on which it was written would become lost or destroyed, or even if it was brought into an unclean place, this would be showing disrespect and it would be a desecration of His name."

It is a long held Hebrew practice.

God's name is Jealous. So what letter you are going to Omit?

 

[preston39]

Can you explain How you are a Hebrew? I also wondered why you leave the O out.

You can ask mom and dad...why they were Hebrew....? Otherwise I can't help you.
What has this got to do with the Bible/G-d?