One Baptism

[JBTN]

"as for acts 2: 38, it does not say what you think, it is a poor translation"

Can you show me any Bible version, in any language that translates Acts 2:38 in a way that you seem to think it means.

I guess when in doubt blame the translation, in this case all of them.

This may be a little different than EG meant, but it is a translation that demonstrates that Acts 2:38 isn’t about water baptism.

“Kefa answered them, “Turn from sin, return to God, and each of you be immersed on the authority of Yeshua the Messiah into forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Ruach HaKodesh!”
‭‭Acts of Emissaries of Yeshua (Act)‬ ‭2‬:‭38‬ ‭CJB‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/1275/act.2.38.CJB

When baptizo Is translated instead of transliterated it becomes obvious that this isn’t a water immersion. It’s an immersion into forgiveness of sins upon repentance. Exactly what Jesus told the Apostles to proclaim in his name.

“and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭24‬:‭47‬ ‭ESV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/59/luk.24.47.ESV

 

[DJT_47]

This may be a little different than EG meant, but it is a translation that demonstrates that Acts 2:38 isn’t about water baptism.

“Kefa answered them, “Turn from sin, return to God, and each of you be immersed on the authority of Yeshua the Messiah into forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Ruach HaKodesh!”
‭‭Acts of Emissaries of Yeshua (Act)‬ ‭2‬:‭38‬ ‭CJB‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/1275/act.2.38.CJB

When baptizo Is translated instead of transliterated it becomes obvious that this isn’t a water immersion. It’s an immersion into forgiveness of sins upon repentance. Exactly what Jesus told the Apostles to proclaim in his name.

“and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭24‬:‭47‬ ‭ESV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/59/luk.24.47.ESV

Baptizo isn't translated it is transliterated into baptism, so why would you attempt to "translate" it which would only distort it's true meaning which seems to be exactly what you're suggesting???? The translators of the scriptures didn't "translate", baptizo so why would you or anyone??? (Unless of course you don't like it's true meaning)

 

[GRACE_ambassador]

you have completely, or conveniently, overlooked the PURPOSE of what Paul was saying. It was not that he was not supposed to baptize anyone, it was his rebuttal of anyone claiming to be superior to someone else simply because "Paul baptized me" He was saying that his main task was to evangelize..... if he was not supposed to baptize, why did he do it?

Precious friend, Great question - thanks for asking - RE: #48:

What was God's PURPOSE, In His Two Different Programs?:

1) In prophecy/law/covenants, for Israel, the twelve "were sent"
to water baptize, correct?:

Mat 28:19 "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them
in The Name of The Father, and of The SON, and of The Holy Ghost"

Rightly Divided (2 Timothy 2:15) From “Things That Differ” (online)

2) In The Revelation Of The Mystery, To The One Body Of Christ,
God Inspires His One ( Grace ) apostle, Paul to write:

"Now I beseech you, brethren, by The Name of our LORD Jesus Christ,​

that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among​

you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in​

the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my​

brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are​

contentions among you. *​

​

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? I thank God that I baptized​

none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized​

in mine own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides,​

I know not whether I baptized any other.​

​

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach The Gospel: not with​

wisdom of words, lest The Cross of Christ should be made of none effect."​

(1 Corinthians 1:10-17)​

​

Now, should we, like some, arbitrarily interpret this to 'fit a theology'?:

"For Christ sent me not [ secondarily ] to baptize, but and to [ primarily ] preach​

The Gospel"? Does God Permit this "subtracting from And adding to" His Word?​

​

Why did Paul "water baptize { And 'thank God' } he baptized only these few"?
( Can you imagine the Twelve saying this ↑ ↑ about their commission from God? )

Was there not a Transition Period, God "Changing His Programs Over from law to
Grace"? Was not "The Revelation Of The Mystery" Revealed By Christ, From Heaven,
over many years ( while water baptism was still in effect? ), before it was Finally
Completed, before Paul departed to Glory?

In light of the following, then, are not these important questions, Scripturally
Answered?:

Besides the last mention of "Paul's baptism" in Acts 22, the previous was
in chapter 19, Correct? Was it not shortly after this, that God Revealed to
Paul to send these carnal believers the scathing rebuke in 1:10-17 above?

Was it not 'at this time' That God Told Paul "he was not sent to baptize"?
( And then Revealed to him his Commission in 2 Corinthians 5:17-6:2? )
+
What else do we find, in the context of this same letter? Is it not this?:

"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. " (1 Corinthians 12:13)​

​

Is not this an indication that "water of the law" was disappearing, and
God Is Changing Over To His "ONE ( Spiritual ) Baptism, Under Grace"?

Confirmed By God's Completed ( by Paul ) "Revelation Of The Mystery" in
Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:27, Colossians 2:12, and Ephesians 4:5?

Amen?

* Should we not be praying for those today, having these same
contentions, being all Divided up over this very 'water ritual' issue?

 

[JBTN]

Baptizo isn't translated it is transliterated into baptism, so why would you attempt to "translate" it which would only distort it's true meaning which seems to be exactly what you're suggesting???? The translators of the scriptures didn't "translate", baptizo so why would you or anyone??? (Unless of course you don't like it's true meaning)

Isn’t the meaning of baptizo well understood as “to immerse”. It doesn’t mean to immerse in water. We can see that from Matthew 3:11 where three different mediums for immersion are given in one verse.

““I baptize you with water for 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.”
‭‭Matthew‬ ‭3‬:‭11‬ ‭ESV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/59/mat.3.11.ESV

 

[DJT_47]

Precious friend, Great question - thanks for asking - RE: #48:

What was God's PURPOSE, In His Two Different Programs?:

1) In prophecy/law/covenants, for Israel, the twelve "were sent"
to water baptize, correct?:

Mat 28:19 "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them
in The Name of The Father, and of The SON, and of The Holy Ghost"

Rightly Divided (2 Timothy 2:15) From “Things That Differ” (online)

2) In The Revelation Of The Mystery, To The One Body Of Christ,
God Inspires His One ( Grace ) apostle, Paul to write:

"Now I beseech you, brethren, by The Name of our LORD Jesus Christ,​

that ye all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among​

you; but that ye be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in​

the same judgment. For it hath been declared unto me of you, my​

brethren, by them which are of the house of Chloe, that there are​

contentions among you. *​

​

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? I thank God that I baptized​

none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized​

in mine own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides,​

I know not whether I baptized any other.​

​

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach The Gospel: not with​

wisdom of words, lest The Cross of Christ should be made of none effect."​

(1 Corinthians 1:10-17)​

​

Now, should we, like some, arbitrarily interpret this to 'fit a theology'?:

"For Christ sent me not [ secondarily ] to baptize, but and to [ primarily ] preach​

The Gospel"? Does God Permit this "subtracting from And adding to" His Word?​

​

Why did Paul "water baptize { And 'thank God' } he baptized only these few"?
( Can you imagine the Twelve saying this ↑ ↑ about their commission from God? )

Was there not a Transition Period, God "Changing His Programs Over from law to
Grace"? Was not "The Revelation Of The Mystery" Revealed By Christ, From Heaven,
over many years ( while water baptism was still in effect? ), before it was Finally
Completed, before Paul departed to Glory?

In light of the following, then, are not these important questions, Scripturally
Answered?:

Besides the last mention of "Paul's baptism" in Acts 22, the previous was
in chapter 19, Correct? Was it not shortly after this, that God Revealed to
Paul to send these carnal believers the scathing rebuke in 1:10-17 above?

Was it not 'at this time' That God Told Paul "he was not sent to baptize"?
( And then Revealed to him his Commission in 2 Corinthians 5:17-6:2? )
+
What else do we find, in the context of this same letter? Is it not this?:

"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. " (1 Corinthians 12:13)​

​

Is not this an indication that "water of the law" was disappearing, and
God Is Changing Over To His "ONE ( Spiritual ) Baptism, Under Grace"?

Confirmed By God's Completed ( by Paul ) "Revelation Of The Mystery" in
Romans 6:3-4, Galatians 3:27, Colossians 2:12, and Ephesians 4:5?

Amen?

* Should we not be praying for those today, having these same
contentions, being all Divided up over this very 'water ritual' issue?

To understand 1 Cor 1:17 correctly you must read further to 1 Cor 3:6

6I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase

Paul was the great speaker, the orator. Paul preached and Apollos baptized.

 

[ResidentAlien]

To understand 1 Cor 1:17 correctly you must read further to 1 Cor 3:6

6I have planted, Apollos watered; but God gave the increase

Paul was the great speaker, the orator. Paul preached and Apollos baptized.

LOL, this story gets funnier every time you tell it.

 

[DJT_47]

LOL, this story gets funnier every time you tell it.

You obviously think it's referring to planting tulips. Your lack of understanding is the only thing that's laughable. Hahaha 😆

 

[ResidentAlien]

You obviously think it's referring to planting tulips. Your lack of understanding is the only thing that's laughable. Hahaha

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths people will to twist scripture to fit their preconceived notions. And this from people who claim to value highly corrects scripture understanding.

 

[DJT_47]

It never ceases to amaze me the lengths people will to twist scripture to fit their preconceived notions. And this from people who claim to value highly corrects scripture understanding.

If you're so smart what does 1 cor 3:6 mean??

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

You are not understanding John's statement. I recently posted a clear explanation of what his statement meant and who it pertained to due to the current day misunderstanding of it and related scriptures involving spiritual gifts or manifestations of the Spirit. I'll repost here for your review and edification.

I understand it perfectly

REPOST

Start with Luke 3:16 and Luke 24:47-49 both restated in Acts 1:4-5. What's it say? One will come that will baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire, in Luke 3:16, and in Luke 24:47-49, it says repentance and remission of sins should be preached starting at Jerusalem and to tarry there until they received power from on high. And what's Acts 1:4-5,say? It restates both of these.4And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. 5For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.And in Luke 24:47-49, who was this addressed to? Starting in verse 36 of Luke 24, Jesus appears to the APOSTLES and verses 47-49 is his instructions to them, the apostles.

47And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. 48And ye are witnesses of these things. 49And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but tarry ye in the city of Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on high.

Then Acts 1:8 says the following

8But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth

It's clear that the falling of the Holy Ghost with fire was meant for THE APOSTLE'S as well as the power from on high, and that this occurred as recorded in Acts 2; read it all carefully.

Futher, Acts 10 was also a unique demonstration of the Holy Ghost and unilaterally by the Holy Ghost falling on the Gentiles first and unlike Acts 2 where it fell on the apostles, but also as a sign and validation from on high which there validated it was God's plan to bring the Gentiles into the body of Christ. In that case, it was validation to Peter and company. It fell on the Gentiles prior to baptism but they were then immediately baptized. Why? Because that's how you become part of the Lord's body; you're baptized into Christ as noted in scripture such as Acts 2:38-47 and elsewhere.

The power from on high and the miraculous manifestation of the gifts of the Spirit, not the Spirit itself, but it's gifts as noted in 1 Cor 12:8-10, are manifested by the laying on of the APOSTLE'S hands as noted in Acts 6:6, Acts 8:18 and Acts 19:6, and it was the apostles who performed the miraculous gifts of the Spirit as noted in Acts 5:12 and those that they laid their hands on such as Stephen as recoreded in Acts 6:6.

The scriptures prove themselves.

sorry, I do not buy your explanation.

Just stick to the passage. i explained it quite well..

You are trying to make the anointing of the spirit (the act of the HS coming into you) equal with the baptism of the holy spirit. they are two desperate events.

Look in the OT. what moses do to arron and his sons?

1. He washed them (baptize)
2. He annointed them with holy oil (which represented the HS)

they are two seperate events.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

By your comments you've confirmed that you don't understand

lol. by your comment, You have confirmed you are not teachable

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

read the rest of my previous comments regarding who John's comments referred to. It referred to the APOSTLES, and it DID happen as recorded in Acts 2.

Your trying to equate the anointing of the spirit (the act of the spirit coming INTO or ON a person) with the baptism of the spirit. which is the act of God baptizing us.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Repentance is one of the elements of salvation, as is belief, as is confession of belief, and as is baptism. They all are necessary. John's baptism was stated as being the baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins, Luke 3:3, Mark 1:4. Likewise is it so in Acts 2:38.

You just condemned all of the OT to Hell since they did not get baptized. Not to mention the thief on the cross and many others

 

[ResidentAlien]

If you're so smart what does 1 cor 3:6 mean??

It doesn't matter; your mind's made up. Besides, you know already how people with reading comprehension understand this verse. Not interested in a battle of "wits" that will only end in you telling me goodbye.

 

[DJT_47]

I understand it perfectly




sorry, I do not buy your explanation.

Just stick to the passage. i explained it quite well..

You are trying to make the anointing of the spirit (the act of the HS coming into you) equal with the baptism of the holy spirit. they are two desperate events.

Look in the OT. what moses do to arron and his sons?

1. He washed them (baptize)
2. He annointed them with holy oil (which represented the HS)

they are two seperate events.

You can't just "stick with the passage" for anything in scripture. If that'd be the case you wouldn't need all the gospels or the various letters etc. They all are rgere for a reason and you must look at them cumulatively.

 

[The_Watchers_2017]

If you're so smart what does 1 cor 3:6 mean??

it means:
the first person told the Gospel of Christ to unbelievers.
the second person kept saying the same thing the first one did so the SEED originally PLANTED would stick in their minds.
but for it to be a complete success, it takes God after that to bring them to actual Salvation.

this literally has everything to do with Baptism like coffee can be used for gasoline.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

The qualifier in your statement is "into christ".


Without a qualifier a shower is with water.
Without a qualifier baptism means with water.

If someone told you to buy a bag of ice, would you come back with dry ice?
Of course not. It's tacit.

You are struggling with this simple notion because it undermines your theology.

You whole argument fails when we look at the facts

Rom 6 says we are baptized into Christ. and his death and burial

1 cor 12 says we baptized into one body, and low and behold. it says by who (one spirit)

and Gal 3 says we were baptized again into Christ.

Col 2 said we are circumcised by the circumcision without hands, by being buried with him in baptism, through faith in the working of God (not a pastor or preacher. not with the hands of men.

So nice try.. But your qualifer argument fails

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

"as for acts 2: 38, it does not say what you think, it is a poor translation"

Can you show me any Bible version, in any language that translates Acts 2:38 in a way that you seem to think it means.

I guess when in doubt blame the translation, in this case all of them.

The closest you can find is the origional english or olde english versions where it says repent YE (plural) and let every one of you (singular) be baptized

if you look in the Greek text. Repent and Be baptized are used differently and spoken to different people..

Repent is a command given to everyone.

Be baptized is a command given only to individuals.

the assumption is remission of sin is because of baptism. it does not fit.. those who received the spirit because they repented were told to be baptized because (eis can be translated a few ways) they received remission of sin.

which fits with John 3 4 5 6 and other passages which show our forgiveness and new life was based on belief.. not belief plus works.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

You can't just "stick with the passage" for anything in scripture. If that'd be the case you wouldn't need all the gospels or the various letters etc. They all are rgere for a reason and you must look at them cumulatively.

you also can not just pull different verses out to try to interpret a different passage to fit your belief.

The fact you can not answer me regauring your attempt to relate the baptism of the spirit with the anointing of the spirit. just shows you are doing what so many others do and doing that very thing

 

[DJT_47]

it means:
the first person told the Gospel of Christ to unbelievers.
the second person kept saying the same thing the first one did so the SEED originally PLANTED would stick in their minds.
but for it to be a complete success, it takes God after that to bring them to actual Salvation.

this literally has everything to do with Baptism like coffee can be used for gasoline.

That's your view. When linked with 1 Cor 1:17, it means Paul planted the seed being the preacher of the word, his forte, Apollos watered meaning he baptized, and God added to the body of Christ as in Acts 2:47