question: Can an unsaved person be baptized in the Holy Spirit?

[Lamar]

I have no problem conceeding that point although there are still many that believe that, but my main point remains the same. Water baptism is not a condition for salvation.
It is by faith alone.

The "condition for salvation" is removing the guilt of sin. Sin is what separates us from God. God has commanded baptism as the vehicle for the remission of sins, not faith alone. It is not for us to second guess or cross reference Him.

There is no verse that states faith alone for the remission of sins but there is a verse that states baptized for the remission of sins.

People don't accept Acts 2:38 because of its verbiage but because it goes against their theology.

 

[Gideon300]

Can unsaved person be baptized in the Holy Spirit?

No. The gift of the Holy Spirit is for believers only.

 

[George71]

This simply is not true. If it is true, then Peter is a liar because he said:

Acts 10:34-38

"Then Peter opened his mouth, and said, Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of persons: But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him. The word which God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching peace by Jesus Christ: (he is Lord of all) That word, I say, ye know, which was published throughout all Judaea, and began from Galilee, after the baptism which John preached; How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him."
Why wouldn't he be true to it? God, in his foreknowledge, or because he foreknew how Cornelius and those assembled together with him would respond to Peter's gospel presentation, referred to these specific Gentiles to whom Peter was being sent as being "clean". God confirmed it by having the Holy Ghost fall upon them as they apparently believed what Peter was telling them, and then Peter water baptized them. Normally, water baptism would precede any type of Holy Ghost baptism, but you need to understand that Peter and other Jews at that time thought that salvation was only for the Jews. God corrected their theology in this special incident by putting his outward seal upon them first or before they were water baptized. Had they not had the Holy Ghost fall upon them first, then Peter might have forbidden them water baptism, and this is implied by Peter's statement:

Acts 10:47-48

"Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days."

Notice the words "can any man forbid water?" In other words, the implication is that God was not only correcting Peter's theology, but also the theology of the other Jews who were assembled there with him.

Read Acts chapter 11. Peter initially got grilled for being with these Gentiles when he returned to Jerusalem, so God was also correcting the theology of those Jews as well.

Furthermore, even after this incident, Paul had to rebuke Peter to his face at Antioch because Peter was still incorrectly making a distinction between Jews and Gentiles, and that is after God had previously shown him the vision that you mentioned thrice.

Anyway, there is no reason whatsoever to believe that Cornelius and those assembled with him were unsaved when the Holy Ghost fell upon them. Apparently, they believed Peter's message before the Holy Ghost fell upon them, and God simply reversed the normal order of water baptism followed by Holy Ghost baptism because of the special circumstances surrounding this one incident.

Good catch that Cornelious was aware. Would have been more accurate to say he was aware but excluded from pursuing salvation because he was not Jewish. Good catch!

I agree with your statements on God correcting Peter and the Jew's theology only I don't think you go far enough. If Jesus had not stepped in and immersed them in the Holy Spirit, with the hindsight given by Gal:2:11-21, I think Peter would definite not have baptized them.

I agree that Cornelius et. al. believed/were saved/given knowledge of salvation in Christ and faith as they heard Peter's message. But I do not see in verses 46-48 (or any other scripture) where God/Jesus ordered Cornelius et. al. to be water baptized. Peter did. It may have been prudent on Peter's part to do so, knowing that the community of Jewish believers would react negatively to Peter's preaching the gospel to gentiles, let alone water baptizing them. But Jesus had already cleansed them when He baptized (immersed) them in the Holy Spirit - from that perspective there was no need for a second cleansing by water (Jesus baptizing in the Holy Spirit trumps Water Baptism. John the Baptist essentially states that in Luke 3:15-18; Mark 1:7-8; Matthew 3: 11-15; John 1:26-35.) I honestly believe that Peter ordered water baptism to mollify the Jewish converts and because it was what he was used to doing.

As to Galatians 2:11-21, where Paul rebukes Peter. The rebuke seems to be for more than just incorrectly making a distinction between Jews and Gentiles. Verse 11 states that Peter stood condemned. Verse 12 states that Peter was afraid of those who belong to the circumcision group. Verse 13 charges Peter (along with the other Jews and Barnabas) with hypocrisy. And verse 14 indicates that they were not acting in line with the truth of the gospel. Seems that Peter was still not clear about the meaning of the vision given him in Acts 10: 11-16.

 

[ResidentAlien]

Do you happen to belong to the sect of the Pharisees by chance?

Yeah, I'm a proud Pharisee. Thank you for noticing.

 

[ResidentAlien]

A myth? Why would you think that?

I live and breathe; I live and breathe.

 

[jb]

Yeah, I'm a proud Pharisee. Thank you for noticing.

I thought so, as they also rejected the workings of the Holy Spirit in signs, wonders and miracles! Mark 3v28-30

 

[ResidentAlien]

I thought so, as they also rejected the workings of the Holy Spirit in signs, wonders and miracles! Mark 3v28-30

True, but I don't see any signs, wonders or miracles. At least Jesus did something; people today just pretend to do something.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Let me guess. You know that we can not accept Acts 2:38 at face value because.....it does not fit your theology? Was this knowledge given to you by means of the esoteric?

You can do whatever you want.

But God told us to test each spirit. To diligently search the scriptures. To STUDY the word..

if you are unwilling to do that. You will be stuck in your bias.

The knowledge was not given to me by Anyone. I did what I was told to do. And I studied it by looking into it, and I found it does not say what I thought it said.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Go study some more while you're gone.

You should study some more while your here

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

copy pasting scripture does not make what you say biblical

you fling the word 'baptize' around with random glee, attaching your interpretation to that word which again, is not biblical

water baptism occurs AFTER salvation in Christ. It does not save you

Spirit baptism also occurs AFTER salvation in Christ. However wonderful, that does not save you either

these two are not the same and you are confusing and mashing them together

we are saved only by faith in Christ. none of what I have said does away with baptism with or in the Holy Spirit. It is real but does not save anyone

you are using scripture out of context, have created no comments and seem to believe you have proved what you say

you are actually creating confusion and are saying that baptism in the Spirit saves us. none of that is biblical

Lol

Then interpret those scriptures for me in a way that being baptized INTO Christ, and INTO his death, and with the SPIRITUAL CIRCUMCISION made without hands. Does not SAVE US.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Are you going to become rude now? I will drop you faster then you can blink and I don't care what you think if that is the route you intend to take. If it is really rude I will report you.

I don't make threats.

See, you still can not respond to me.

You’re the one who first said I failed. I just returned the favor..

I speak to others the way they speak to me..

funny how once again, you could not respond to my post.

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

I have no problem conceeding that point although there are still many that believe that, but my main point remains the same. Water baptism is not a condition for salvation.
It is by faith alone.

It’s amazing they use John 3. yet not once did Jesus mention baptism to Nicodemus, Not once.

For somethign so important. Jesus must have forgot

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

"It's about the Holy Spirit Baptism." You are aware that "Holy Spirit Baptism" is metaphysical in nature? Please tell me that you are aware of this.

Wow this is leading toward blasphemy

Are you aware that Hly Spirit Baptism, is the Holy Spirit immersing you into Christ, His death and burial (where your sins are washed away) and his body, where you are secure in him?

Without baptism of God you are still lost.

replace his baptism with baptism of water. And you are working towards blasphemy

 

[Everlasting-Grace]

Your understanding of this subject is beyond fallacious, it is absurd.

All these mentions of baptism must have qualifier to mean water baptism??? Are you serious?

What was Bathsheba bathing in? Do we need a qualifier to know it was water? Have you thought this out?

When baptism is mentioned it would need a reason (qualifier) to mean something other then (H2O) water.

Baptized into christ. Is not baptized into water. It is baptized into christ.
Again, you need to study. Baptism is not a native english word. You need to get the interpretation from the language it came from the greek) not the english, for which it is just a transliteration (baptizo from greek went to baptize in english.

 

[DJT_47]

First off, These Scriptures ALL take place AFTER the Resurrection.

Mk 16:15-16

15 And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature.
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.


Lk 24:46-48

46 and said to them, “Thus it is written, that the Christ should suffer and on the third day rise from the dead,
47 and that repentance for the forgiveness of sins should be proclaimed in his name to all nations, beginning from Jerusalem.
48 You are witnesses of these things

Mt 28:

18 And Jesus came and said to them, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me.
19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,


Ever get the feeling, this was NEVER about Water Baptism, and Matthew 28 has been flubbed with because it should match Mark and Luke?

Let's say this is about BAPTISM, because, it is about Baptism.
I do not believe Jesus was ever talking about Water Baptism, but Baptism in the Holy Spirit.
Water Baptism is important, but I don't believe Matthew, Mark and Luke are saying Jesus is talking about Water Baptism, but Holy Spirit.
I think Catholics added Names and turned it into Water Baptism.

Just my understanding of these Scriptures. They all happened AFTER the Resurrection. Because the Promise of the Holy Spirit was coming. Jesus was saying they are Baptized in the Holy Spirit.



I also say this, because most read everyone's posts here and I have posted several times about the Church Father who wrote in the 5th and 6th Century, evidence of being Saved was Baptized in Holy Spirit and Speaking in Tongues.

and of course, we can also read Catholic history and know around the 6th Century, Catholics sent troops killing people who Spoke in Tongues.

No wonder people stopped Speaking in Tongues, they were being Murdered for it!


but anyway, I still believe Jesus is talking about Holy Spirit Baptized, not Water in Matthew, Mark, and Luke.

The earliest record of baptism in the NT is the baptism of John. It was the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. Was it in the spirit or in water? It was water baptism, and in the Jordan River. This is identical to the baptism recorded in Acts 2:38 except it was in the name of Jesus Christ, for repentance, for the remission of sins, to receive the Holy Ghost, and to be added to the church by the Lord (verse 47). Hence, the need for the Ephesians to be re-baptized as recorded in Acts 19. All baptisms can or should be assumed to be water baptism unless otherwise stated, and those are clearly otherwise stated in scripture. Why would anyone assume anything different? On what basis, other than anti-baptism bias? How can one ignore scriptures such as Acts 22:16 or the account of the conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch in Acts 8? Clearly, baptism is in water unless otherwise stated in scripture, and the account in Acts 8 also indicates that Philip obviously included the need for water baptism as part of his preaching of the gospel to the eunuch.

Luke 3:3

3And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;

Mark 1:4-5

4John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. 5And there went out unto him all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.

Acts 22:16

16And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Acts 8:36-38

36And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 37And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 38And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

 

[DJT_47]

Hmm, the like figure
Other translation: "and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also"

Again, reconcile it with by faith alone are you saved, apart from works, least any man can boast.
When we get to Heaven, I guess we should let him know.... Lord, just so you're aware, I did get my baptism as part of gaining my salvation.

This may help you:

[URL]https://christianchat.com/bible-discussion-forum/the-importance-of-how-to-interpret-a-biblical-text.212049/[Code/][/URL]

Scripture does not contradict itself. You cannot take a scripture and extract it on a stand-alone basis while ignoring other scriptures on the same subject that say something more or a bit different, and base your belief system on it. If you do, that's pretty dumb, dangerous, and makes zero sense.

 

[NewYorkHarry]

We believe that all people will be saved. It is our duty to try our best to be a good person throughout life and God will handle the rest. That’s what we teach @ https://BibleHeaven.org 🙏❤️🙏

 

[Seorsum]

Again Seorsum, this is what you wrote: "Well, except that salvation does not depend on any work."

Post #39 has nothing in it that says anything about "saved by works". As a matter of fact the only mention of works by DJT_47 in this post is the following; "Baptism us not a work of anything or any law." You are simply being dishonest.

If you want to label baptism as a "work" that is your choice but please do not inject your personal understanding into another persons verbiage. Your words are misleading at best.

Works is doing anything yourself to gain salvation. If you cannot understand that it was said, you must be baptized as a work to gain salvation, in the same vein as following the commandments, then no, you won't understand.

 

[Seorsum]

Scripture does not contradict itself. You cannot take a scripture and extract it on a stand-alone basis while ignoring other scriptures on the same subject that say something more or a bit different, and base your belief system on it. If you do, that's pretty dumb, dangerous, and makes zero sense.

You are the one contradicting scripture. There is no command to us to be baptized by water as a condition of salvation. I don't know if this will help you are not, but read Galatians 2 and see if that helps you to understand.

And, if you believe that water baptism is a condition of salvation, then you have it wrong and that contradicts scripture.
You can call it a command, a law or whatever you want. It's trying to throw works into a free gift.

 

[DJT_47]

You are the one contradicting scripture. There is no command to us to be baptized by water as a condition of salvation. I don't know if this will help you are not, but read Galatians 2 and see if that helps you to understand.

And, if you believe that water baptism is a condition of salvation, then you have it wrong and that contradicts scripture.
You can call it a command, a law or whatever you want. It's trying to throw works into a free gift.

Sorry, untruth will not help me.