The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to be Saved! (HOF thread)

[o2bwise]

Get Away From Me, Satan!

Get Away From Me, Satan!

You are a false teacher. Your the one claiming that baptism unto a false Jesus will save one.

Even were this to be so, this does not IN ANY WAY nullify the fact that YOU ARE A LIAR.

Your whole point, in starting this topic, was to point out that I am heretical because I believe baptism is a part of the gospel.

YOU DID NOT OFFER ANY CONDITIONS, SUCH AS "A BAPTISM UNTO A FALSE JESUS." You said baptism, PERIOD and you even cited 1 Corinthians 15 and stated that Paul makes no mention of baptism.

YOU PATHETIC LIAR. YOU ARE UNSCHOOLED IN THE FIRST PRINCIPLES OF THE SCHOOL OF RIGHTEOUSNESS WHICH IS TO ACKNOWLEDGE WHEN ONE'S OWN SIN IS AT HIS DOOR. YOU HAVE DONE IT BEFORE AND YOU DO IT AGAIN.

NOW YOU CHANGE THE "STORY" SO AS TO DECEITFULLY STEER YOURSELF AWAY FROM ANY WRONGDOING. WHAT A PATHETIC, DECEITFUL LIAR YOU ARE.

LIAR!!!

 

[tralon]

Observing from the sidelines

Observing from the sidelines

Well, there's no love lost between Freak and Ob.Anyway when one receives the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" it comes on a person THROUGH faith and is not administered through titles, such as "in the name of Jesus". When the disciples were spirit baptised at Pentecost they were simply praying and the Holy Spirit fell upon them.But when Peter gave his sermom about repenting and being baptised, he was refering to WATER baptism "in the name of Jesus".

I believe Ob is right in some areas.Paul wasn't big on water baptism.And water baptism is NOT part of the gospel message.It COMPLIMENTS it as SYMBOLICALLY picturuing the death and burial of Christ, but never is the heart of the gospel itself. But nevertheless Paul didn't abandon water baptism as some think.For if you read the account of where he dealt with the phillipian jailor and his famil in Acts 16 you will see that right AFTER he preached Jesus Christ to them he took them out to be baptised THAT VERY NIGHT.Yes, Paul considered baptism of spiritual importance.

 

[Kevin]

Baptism IS commanded and should be unconditionally OBEYED!

Baptism IS commanded and should be unconditionally OBEYED!

Freak,

You said:

Since you think baptism is part of the Gospel I stand by all my statements.

Have you read 1 Cor. 15 where paul clealry explained what the Gospel is? Hint: It has nothing to do with baptism.

I believe that the baptism of Jesus (which includes water) IS necessary for salvation. I marvel at your above statement. You don't think that baptism is part of the gospel message??? Please examine the following passage with me:

Matthew 28:19,20

19) "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

20) teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen.


Jesus is clearly commanding the disciples to go out into the world and baptize people. He then goes on to say that those people must be taught to obey ALL things that He commanded the disciples to do. ALL things. In verse 19, baptism was commanded. If Jesus says that we should "observe all things that I have commanded you", which includes baptism, who are you to say it's not necessary?!

If somebody goes out and supposedly preaches the gospel to somebody but leaves out baptism, is that observing all things that Jesus commanded to be observed? No. That would make that person disobedient to Jesus. And Hebrews 5:9 states:

9) And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.

So Jesus is the author of eternal salvation to who? All that obey Him. What do you think that says about people who don't obey Him? I'll let you figure that one out....

 

[HopeofGlory]

Please be aware my fellow believers that when o2bewise mentions Jesus , he is referring to another Jesus. The Biblical Jesus is eternal God, o2bewise dismisses this vital truth. So when he refers to baptism it is a baptism unto a different Jesus. So this baptism is not a legit baptism but a false one. Hence my statements and my concerns.

It seems to me that Freak's point is ....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 Cor. 12:13 (KJV)

If o2bwise believes that Christ is separate from the Father then who's Spirit are we baptized by? Is it the Spirit of God or the Spirit of Christ?

 

[HardCoreFundie]

Baptismal Regeneration is a false doctine. We are saved by Faith Alone in Christ Alone.

The Bible says righteosness is imputed by faith. (Romans Chapter 4)

I would like to see one Bible verse that says righteousness is imputed by Baptism, one verse will do fine.

 

[Kevin]

HardCoreFundie,

I would like to adress the things you said.

We are saved by Faith Alone in Christ Alone.

Compare that with....

James 2:17

17) Thus also faith by itself, if it does not have works, is dead.

I could not possibly put it any plainer than the Bible has. Faith ALONE does not save us.

Next you said:

I would like to see one Bible verse that says righteousness is imputed by Baptism, one verse will do fine.

Fine.

Mark 16:16

16) He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned.

I'm going to assume you've heard this arguement before and attempt to address your probable rebuttle. If this is not the case, I apologize.

I'm assuming that you are going to point out that the condition for condemnation only mentions belief, and nothing about baptism. The answer to this is quite simple: If somebody doesn't believe, then that person is already lost and won't reach the point of baptism. For why would one get baptized into something that he/she doesn't believe in? They wouldn't, and therefore there was no need to mention baptism, because that person is already lost.

Pay close attention to the requirements listed in the begining of that verse that is required for salvation. Belief AND baptism. The significance of the word "and" is essential to understanding this verse's meaning. Two, not one, two conditions HAVE to be met before one can be saved: Belief and baptism! The latter part of that verse doesn't make any difference to the clearly illustrated requirements for salvation.

 

[Freak]

o2bewise,

Before losing your cool reread my posts.

You will notice I denounce your false teaching that somehow baptism is a part of the Gospel, it is not. This is not a change from my purpose of this thread. You my friend have chosen to keep in theological darkness. This will only cost your eternal soul as you reject the Biblical Jesus.

You may be able to deceive some on this forum with your demonic lies but you have NOT deceived me. You promote a false salvation, a false baptism, and a false Jesus.

Kevin,

Have you read 1 Cor. 15? If you had you will admit that baptism is not part of the Gospel, it is merely a response to the message of the Gospel.

 

[PENIEL]

All American . . . Freak

All American . . . Freak

Freak is like Senator McCarthy during the Cold War who Labeled anyone who did not fit his personal definition of a good American as a Commi Pinko Traitor .

Freak is doing the same in the name of his own brand of Orthodox Religion.

URL=http://www.pbs.org/newshour/bb/entertainment/july-dec97/blacklist_10-24.html

 

[Kevin]

Freak,

Have you read 1 Cor. 15? If you had you will admit that baptism is not part of the Gospel, it is merely a response to the message of the Gospel.

Sorry Freak, but I will admit to no such thing. Let's look at the 1 Cor. 15, verses 1 and 2:

1) Moreover, brethren, I declare to you the gospel which I preached to you, which also you recieved and in which you stand,
2) by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you-unless you believed in vain.

Freak, the first thing I would like to point out is that this is a letter to the brethren of Corinth, not to a group of people who had not been converted/saved. The importance of this fact cannot be overstated. Notice that Paul says in verse 2 " by which also you are saved, if you hold fast that word which I preached to you". "Preached", being past-tense, means that the gospel message had already been preached to them. If somebody has already been converted (in which baptism is a part of that process), then of course there would be no mention of that. Baptism is a one time deal, and it allows us as sinful humans to put away our bodies of sin and be reborn in Christ Jesus (Romans 6:3-6).

What I'm getting at is that these brethren at Corinth had already been baptized. How do I know that? Because there is a clear example in the Bible of sinners being converted and becoming brethren, it's in Acts chapter 2, the first recorded gospel message (good news) to some jews. Let's examine it.

In Acts chapter 2, Peter is preaching to the Jews and going over a brief history with them, leading up to the point of letting them know that they were responsible for crucifying the Son of God. It says that the Jews were "cut to the heart" and asked Peter and the rest of the apostles what they had to do be saved. The very clear response is in verse 38:

Acts 2:38

38) Then Peter said to them, "Repent, and let every one of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit."

Two conditions had to be met before people could recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit, thus being saved:

1) Repentance
2) Baptism

This is a command that is given in the imperative mood and was to be obeyed at once. Both repentance and baptism carry equal authority, and must be obeyed in order for the result to happen; the recieving of the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Notice also verse 41:

41) Then those who gladly received his word were baptized; and that day about three thousand souls were added to them.

This shows that the Jews indeed obeyed the command to be baptized, and as a result, "about three thousand souls were added to them."

Notice that this verse does NOT say something like "Then those who glady recieved his word had their souls added to them, and then they were baptized". No, it was talking about people who heard the word and obeyed it, which included the command to be baptized. ONLY then were their souls added to them.

Just as the Jews obeyed the command to be baptized (verse 41), so should we. If we don't, then we are not obeying Christ (Matthew 28:19,20), and that WILL cost you your soul. We are only saved if we obey Christ (Hebrews 5:9).

Acts chapter 2 is a clear example of how a person who is dead in sin can become saved and join other brethren around the world, just like the brethren of Corinth. The Corinth brethren were baptized because Jesus Christ commanded it in the great commission, which you failed to address, so I'll post it again:

Matthew 28:19,20

19) "Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit,

20) teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen.

Jesus commanded His disciples to go out into world and baptize people and for those people to observe ALL things that Jesus commanded the disciples to do, which INCLUDED baptism. What did Paul go out and preach? THE GOSPEL. And when Paul obeyed Jesus and went out to Corinth "making disciples and baptizing them", those people who believed were baptized (or your telling me that Paul disobeyed Jesus's DIRECT order to do that very thing), and they were saved... because they heard the gospel and they obeyed it!

So I ask you again, knowing that baptism is commanded by our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, how can you say that baptism isn't necessary?? If we don't obey Jesus, then He is NOT the author of eternal salvation to that person, because Heberws 5:9 states:

9) And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.

It clearly states that He is the author of salvation to who? All who obey Him. Where do you think that leaves the people that don't obey Him? I'll spell it out just so there's no confusion: HELL.

Is baptism necessary for salvation? You bet it is. Obey the word!!

 

[o2bwise]

Freak's Own Words Accuse Him

Freak's Own Words Accuse Him

Hope,

Please dispense with doctrine (I mean this in a certain sense) and just be HONEST. Know something by its words and actions. (I realize in this case, we only have words).

When Freak opened up this topic, he denounced my views of baptism as heretical on the following basis.

1. Baptism is not mentioned in 1 Corinthians 15 (neither is Christ's blood by the way).

THAT was his point. The original post had NOTHING to do with whether or not the baptism I believe in is unto "another" Christ.

Just LOOK at the start of Freak's topic to find even a HINT of that. It won't be found.

THEN I brought up Romans 6:4. He then SWITCHED (LIED, DECEIVED). He tried to put on the appearance of ALL THE WHILE attacking my belief that baptism is part of the gospel NOT by claiming 1 Cor 15 and its not mentioning baptism, BUT by saying my view is heretical because I believe in a baptism unto "another" Christ.

That is just plain dishonesty.

Now, one thing I see often in these kind of forums is the sinful practise of preferring a person's words BECAUSE of what that person believes.

Such as:
o2 has this weird non-Trinitarian belief. Thus, I will typically find him to be wrong - no matter what.

Freak is Trinitarian and is a zealous defender of the truth (hooray!). Thus, I will typically defend him - no matter what.

The truth is, the words we offer contain their own innate veracity. Regardless of what Freak believes and regardless of what I believe, the words often stand, just as they are.

In this case, Freak is being a dishonest, deceiving LIAR.

Also in this case, sadly, you appear to be in the category of defending Freak because you like how he believes and dislike how I believe.

Freak's behavior, sometimes, is beneath the typical behavior of the heathens that post in this forum.

Nice "ally," huh?

o2

 

[Freak]

o2bewise,

Attacking others is not the solution.

You embrace a false baptism and you believe that in order to be saved you have to be baptized, this is a false teaching. I'm not sure where you get all this other stuff from. You are in a make believe world and that my friend is dangerous. I urge to come back to Biblical Christianity.

I warn you with Scripture: If anybody is preaching to you a Gospel other than what you accepted, let him be eternally condemend (Galatians 1:9). O2bewsie, you are the one Paul is warning us of. You preach "another Gospel" and a false Jesus.

You deny that Jesus is eternal God. This alone places you in the kingdom of Satan. I would urge you to surrender your life to the right Jesus and the not the wrong Jesus before you die. There is but One Jesus (the one who is eternal God) who can forgive you of all your sins. Begin a relationship with Him right now.

Kevin,

Answer the question please. Did Paul mention baptism in 1 Cor. 15? Your answer will help those reading these posts. Paul did not believe that Baptism was part of the Gospel hence him saying "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel,..." (1 Cor. 1:17). He made a difference between baptism and the Gospel. Do you see it or are you blinded like O2bewise?

 

[tralon]

Baptism and the Christian?

Baptism and the Christian?

Is water baptism necessary FOR the Christian? If so why, if he is saved by faith alone? The answer lies in WHAT baptism symbolizes or pictures.According to Paul in Rom 6:3-4 it is a symbol of the believer being BURIED WITH CHRIST and being RAISED to a NEW LIFE.Also in Gal 3:27 Paul say that in baptism we PUT ON Christ.These verses are HIGHLY significant and not to be taken lightly.So what does this all mean?

It is like you sign up for the army.You raise your right hand to take the oath to serve your country and the army.That pictures your faith.Now you go and get your uniform.You PUT it on.That shows the world and those around you that you wear the uniform of the US Army and CHOSE to do so.This is what baptism represents.When you are immersed in the waters of baptism you are IDENTIFYING yourself with Jesus Christ, but at the same time you are PUBLICALLY showing everyone seeing you that you have chosen to be identified with Jesus.Baptism doesn't offer any salvation, but it confrms the reality of of you genuineness to become a Christian and wanting to be identified with Christ.

 

[Freak]

dr.Racism,

Thank you for your comments however you are you wrong.

The fact is heretics of our day desire to promote a belief that baptism will somehow save you. This is a lie from the pit of hell. The Apostle Paul made it clear "justification is by faith" (Romans 5:1).

 

[Freak]

dr.Racism,

I will not be responding to you anymore because you lack any theological knowledge which makes it hard for anyone to discuss these issues with you. Good Luck with your life.

 

[Kevin]

Freak,

Answer the question please. Did Paul mention baptism in 1 Cor. 15? Your answer will help those reading these posts. Paul did not believe that Baptism was part of the Gospel hence him saying "For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the Gospel,..." (1 Cor. 1:17). He made a difference between baptism and the Gospel. Do you see it or are you blinded like O2bewise?

NOW I see what you are asking. When you asked me if I've read 1 Cor. 15, I took that as chapter 15, not 1 Cor. 1:15. Could you be more precise in the future so I don't spend time answering the wrong passage? Thanks.

Now, I will address your question concerning 1 Cor. 1:15. When Paul says that "Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel" (verse 17), he was not in any way shape or form implying that baptism isn't necessary. Not at all. If you look at the context of chapter 1 in it's entirety, the reason behind verse 17 is quite clear.

Starting at verse 10 it says:

10) Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions amoung you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment.

Paul is pleading with the brethren at Corinth not to become divided. Divided over what? Verses 12-13 hold this answer:

12) Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," or "I am of Apollos," or "I am of Cephas," or "I am of Christ."
13) Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?

The Corinthian brethren were being divided over who actually baptized them. They were placing spiritual importance on the person that baptized them, as if the people who where baptized by Paul had a better baptism than somebody who was baptized by Apollos.

We as Christians are commanded to be baptized into Jesus Christ, and not into anybody else. That's why Paul asked them "Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul?", because these people were missing the whole point of baptism. We are all baptized into Christ regardless of who does the actual baptizing. But the Corinthian brethren didn't see it that way, and were being divided, based on the person that baptized them, which is why Paul is rebuking them.

Paul's displeasure with them is evident in verses 14 and 15:

14) I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius,
15) lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name.

Paul said this because if he had baptized more people than he already did, the problem would be even bigger, having more people saying "I am of Paul".

So finally, that leads us to verse 17:

17) For Christ did not send me to baptize but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.

Paul is simply saying that baptism is not his main focus, not that baptism isn't necessary. Paul's main focus was to preach the word of God. Notice, however, that everybody spoken about in these verses were indeed baptized. It's just too bad that these people were making a big deal about who baptized them, or else Paul would have no need to rebuke them about this. Why would Paul preach that baptism isn't necessary when it was commanded by Jesus in Matthew 28:19,20?

A perfect example of what I'm talking about can be found in John 4:1-2:

1) Therefore, when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John
2) (though Jesus Himself did not baptize, but His disciples)

See the similarity? Based on verse 2, because Jesus didn't baptize people Himself (just like Paul's main focus was not to baptize people himself), would you make the assertion that baptism isn't necessary, just because He (Jesus) didn't do the act? If so then explain to me why Jesus Himself went on to say in Mark 16:16 that "he who believes AND is baptized will be saved". Also explain to me why He commanded it in the great commission (Matt. 28:19,20).

Freak, I have asked you two times and you haven't answered, so I will ask again:

Knowing that baptism is commanded by our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ (Matt. 28:19,20), who are you say that baptism isn't necessary?? If we don't obey Jesus's commandments, then He is NOT the author of eternal salvation to that person, because Heberws 5:9 states:

9) And having been perfected, He became the author of eternal salvation to all who obey Him.

It clearly states that He is the author of salvation to who? All who obey Him. Where do you think that leaves the people that don't obey Him? I'll spell it out just so there's no confusion: HELL.

So again, who are you to say that baptism is not necessary, when the Lord has commanded it? Answer that question please.

 

[PENIEL]

Freakout

Freakout

As usual Freak is the Opposite of Graciousness to his fellow Christian.


Too bad that he has not developed any Fruits of the Holy Spirit.

Freak does not know that a person

has to have Faith before he is Baptized.

But it is not easy to change the mind of a Stiff necked person.

 

[EricU]

You guys, this isn't that difficult. Baptism by the Holy Spirit is what saves since the Holy Spirit washes away our sins. Anyone can be dunked under water but it's the Holy Spirit that saves. Baptism is a cerimony and is symbolic as it is used today. Baptism of the Holy Spirit, I believe, comes on someone the moment they are saved.

There are 2 different types of baptism being used on this board. One physical, the other spiritual. One symbolic, the other is the is when one becomes saved.

 

[Kevin]

EricU,

You guys, this isn't that difficult.

I agree, it's crystal clear to me.

Baptism by the Holy Spirit is what saves since the Holy Spirit washes away our sins. Anyone can be dunked under water but it's the Holy Spirit that saves.

The gift of the Holy Spirit saves us, but water is a crucial part of the baptism of Jesus, not just of John. I am aware that John said "I baptize with water, but He who comes after baptizes with the Holy Spirit", but John isn't saying that water won't be necessary. The only reason John said that is because John, or any other human, was incapable of baptizing with the Holy Spirit since it hadn't come yet. After all, who could be the perfect lamb of God but Jesus? All John could do was the water part. The gift of the Holy Spirit (salvation) had not yet come.

John 3:5 states:

5) Jesus answered, "Most assuredly, I say to you, unless on is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."

As you said earlier, this isn't that difficult. That verse is clearly speaking about the requirements for being reborn, and it includes water, as well as the Holy Spirit. Anybody who teaches that water isn't necessary goes against this verse, and thus Jesus.

That's why the Bible has examples like Phillip baptizing the Ethiopian. Look for yourself in Acts 8:35-36:

35) Then Philip opened his mouth, and beginning at this Scripture, preached Jesus to him.
36) Now as they went down the road, they came to some water. And the eunuch said, "See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?"

This isn't the baptism of John... no siree, this is the baptism of Jesus Christ mentioned here (verse 35). The fact that the eunuch asked "See, here is water. What hinders me from being baptized?" proves that Phillip instructed baptism with water, or why would the enuch mention water at all? Phillip was instructing the eunuch about baptism, which is what Jesus commanded in the great commission (Matt. 28:19-20), and it inlcudes water. This passage and the "unless you are born of water and Spirit" passage proves that water is involved.

Another example of Jesus's baptism requiring water is in Acts 10:47-48:

47) Can anyone forbid water that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?"
48) And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.

I couldn't say it any plainer. Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized?

If you think that they were saved in verse 44 when the Holy Spirit fell on them in the miraculous measure, then explain to me Numbers 11:25. It states:

25) Then the Lord came down in the cloud, and spoke to him, and took of the Spirit that was upon him, and placed the same upon the seventy elders; and it happened, when the Spirit rested upon them, that they prophesied, although they never did so again.

In both Acts 10:44 and Numbers 11:25 the Holy Spirit fell upon people and the result was the same: the people were given miraculous spiritual gifts. The people in Numbers prophecied, while the people in Acts spoke with tongues. My point is this: If the falling of the Holy Spirit is what saved those people in Acts 10:44 then the people in Numbers 11:25 were saved also, becuase the same thing happened to both parties. And if the people in Numbers were saved, then that means there was salvation before Christ, and that just isn't possible.

The people in Acts 10:44 had the Holy Spirit poured upon them so that the Jews would know that salvation was available to the Gentiles as well as the Jews. That's why the Jews were amazed (verse 45). Once it was proven to the Jews by miraculous measure that the Gentiles also found favor in God's eyes, the Gentiles were baptized into Christ Jesus with water. And the baptism of Jesus is the difference between spiritual life and death (Romans 6:3-6).

 

[Freak]

Kevin,

Do I believe baptism is commanded of course I do just as loving one another is commanded.

But loving people will not get you to heaven. Neither will baptism. Baptism is just that baptism. The blood of Christ however will save you (Hebrews 1:7).

Instead of putting your trust in a act put your trust in a living Person-The Lord Jesus Christ.

The main difference between me and you is this: I tell others it is Jesus that saves. You tell others it Jesus (as if He is not enough) AND baptism.

 

[Ian Day]

ANY COMMENTS????????

ANY COMMENTS????????

I posted this a while ago, but no-one commented:

Salvation is the work of the Holy Spirit in the heart of the sinner, whereby he is given new spiritual life. Certainly baptism is commanded, but it is for the believer, already saved, already with new life from the dead, already quickened. It is the cleansing of the conscience, the application of the blood of the sacrifice, the blood of the covenant, (Heb. 9 & 13) as the Lord's Supper is the partaking of the sacrifice.

Baptism is understood by evangelical Christians in various ways.
1. "Covenant baptism" equivalent to circ-umcision, therefore applied to babies within the church.

2. "Believers' baptism" administered to new believers as a sign of various spiritual blessings (see above.) Baptism is normally required for church membership. It is not considered essential for salvation, because it is for believers. THe mode of baptism is not important. (My position.)

3. Baptism by immersion required for remission of sins and therefore salvation. A person is considered unsaved until he is so baptised. Immersion is inferred from several texts, but not in fact specified. I reject this understanding.

While I do not hold with infant baptism, I cannot reject it as invalid, because that would mean rejecting as unbelievers many godly Christians alive & dead. Most of those responsible for our translations, commentaries, and the proclaiming of the Gospel down the ages have held this position against the baptist position. Most also accept baptism by sprinkling.

Sprinkling can be understood from Hebrews 9:10 where "various baptisms" refers to Old Covenant sprinklings with water & ashes, water & blood, etc. THe Passover lamb blood was sprinkled on the door posts. With this understanding, Peter's reference to "sprinkled blood" becomes a reference to baptism. (1 Peter 1:2)

When we refer to the LXX we find Naaman baptising himself in the Jordan. (2 Kings 5:14) THe LXX word translated dipped is "ebaptisato" from the Heb. "tabal". Tabal is used a number times to dip, as in dip (LXX "bapsei") & sprinkle, e.g.
Num 19:18 And a clean person shall take hyssop, and dip [it] in the water, and sprinkle [it] upon the tent, and upon all the vessels, and upon the persons that were there, and upon him that touched a bone, or one slain, or one dead, or a grave:
THis is part of the "red heifer" ritual referred to in Hebrew 9. Thanks, http://www.BlueletterBible.org/ for easy access to Hebrew & Greek.

From this I understand a dip and pour/sprinkle method to be valid baptism. John could quite easily have stood in the Jordan and baptised by scooping water by dipping cupped hands or a vessel to apply to the head of the penitent sinner. It would have made it possible for 3000 people to be baptised on the day of Pentecost without taking over the public water supply. (Courtesy of the Roman & Jewish authorities who had just crucified the one in whose name the baptisms were taking place!) Sprinkling with a sprig of hyssop would have been possible also.

I don't believe a believer who was not baptised as a baby who learnt about believers' baptism would refuse it. He has the Holy Spirit guiding him. Nor do I think one baptised in infancy & who refused believers' baptism is being disobedient to Christ's command, if he understands "covenant baptism."