Right Divider
Body part
Agreed, and that is what most cultist groups teach.
And that is a major reason why so many Christians are very confused on the issue. Since that makes no sense.
Mid-Acts water baptism
- Thread starter Clete
- Start date
Derf
Well-known member
It's a little ironic that you use the passage about "one baptism" to divide the body of Christ. Of course it would help with unity if everybody agreed with you, but that's only good if you are correct. And since you use the passage about "one baptism" as a wedge between those who received water baptisms of the apostles and those supposed spirit baptisms of Paul, it is exactly opposite the intent of the passage, which is trying to unify the body of Christ that includes the 12 apostles.
Ephesians 4:11-12 KJV — And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; For the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ:
Which wasn't Paul's point, since he speaks of the other apostles, who were known to have baptized by water.
Yes, agreed.
Not if Paul practiced and spoke of water baptisms favorably, as @Clete pointed out. That makes Paul guilty of the thing he spoke so vociferously against regarding Peter, that is hypocrisy.
So denying ANY use of water baptism in the church today is as much of a problem as Peter only following Jewish rules about not hanging out with Gentiles when the more law-oriented folks came to visit. And perhaps that's why Bob didn't make much ado about when asked.
Right Divider
Body part
That is a lie and you knew it when you wrote it.
I'm unifying the body of Christ around the doctrine for the body of Christ. Paul quite clearly and unequivocally says that there is ONE baptism for the body of Christ.
Eph 4:5 (AKJV/PCE)
(4:5) One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
Not two or more baptisms.And I am... thanks.
More lies and ignorance from our resident idiot.
The body of Christ most definitely does NOT include the 12 apostles or any of the faithful Israelites prior to Paul, since Paul is the first member of the body of Christ. And God does NOT change a persons calling.
Rom 11:29 (AKJV/PCE)
(11:29) For the gifts and calling of God [are] without repentance.
Or as the NKJV says:
Romans 11:29
New King James Version
29 For the gifts and the calling of God are irrevocable.
Welcome back to my ignore list, you retarded moron.
Derf
Well-known member
Hahahahahahaha. You are without a doubt the most divisive member of the body of Christ I know of.
Right. So if the water baptism the other groups of Christians were doing means they are not part of the body of Christ (because that would mean there are 2 baptisms, according to you), then there must also be 2 Lords, and 2 faiths, which seems to be what you teach. Rather, Paul was pointing out that Jewish believers in Jerusalem were worshiping the same Lord and had the same faith as those Paul was writing to. And because there were not 2 faiths, and 2 Lords, then the baptism Paul was speaking of was shared between the two groups, Jews and Gentiles.
Or the first "Christian"? Do you think the 12 apostles were christians?
Calling? Do you mean a person can't be a Jew then become a member of the body of Christ? Maybe you should tell me what you mean. Paul (a Jew who became a member of the bidy of Christ) was talking about Jews in that verse.
Retarded moron means one who is slow to be moronic. I think you've just complimented me. Twice, since you put me back on your ignore list.
Well, of course it makes perfect sense. That's the reason it was the very first thing Paul did once having been filled with the Spirit and received his sight (Acts 9:17-18).
By what gospel were the gentiles saved in Acts 10:44-48?
Also, Paul in Acts 16, after the Jerusalem council, baptized Lydia and her whole household. She was a gentile who headed "the things spoken by Paul", several years into his ministry and the first thing she does is get water baptized BY Paul.
Acts 16:14 Now a certain woman named Lydia heard us. She was a seller of purple from the city of Thyatira, who worshiped God. The Lord opened her heart to heed the things spoken by Paul. 15 And when she and her household were baptized, she begged us, saying, “If you have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come to my house and stay.” So she persuaded us.
That story is immediately followed by the story of the Philippian jailer. Definitely a gentile who believed and then "immediately baptized". Not in order to get
Acts 16:29 Then he called for a light, ran in, and fell down trembling before Paul and Silas. 30 And he brought them out and said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
31 So they said, “Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household.” 32 Then they spoke the word of the Lord to him and to all who were in his house. 33 And he took them the same hour of the night and washed their stripes. And immediately he and all his family were baptized. 34 Now when he had brought them into his house, he set food before them; and he rejoiced, having believed in God with all his household.
Then later in Acts 18 Cripus, a Jew and his entire household and several others "hearing, believed and were baptized."
Acts 18: 8 Then Crispus, the ruler of the synagogue, believed on the Lord with all his household. And many of the Corinthians, hearing, believed and were baptized.
For as Paul teaches, there is neither Jew nor Greek (Galatians 3:28 & Colossians 3:11) and in Romans...
Romans 10:17 So then faith comes by hearing, and hearing by the word of God.
Now, that's my best impression of your typical Baptist defending his practice of the rite of baptism. Right or wrong, there is no way anyone can say with a straight face that the argument is unreasonable. Further, there's not a syllable in that presentation from anything written by Peter, James or John. Not one letter is quoted from the gospels or any kingdom epistle. It's all Paul, wall to wall.
Right Divider
Body part
- Nobody knew about Eph 4:5 at that time, neither Paul nor especially Ananias. Ananias only knew the Jewish water ceremony.
- The text also does not explicitly say that it was water baptism (though I will agree that most will assume that it was). But perhaps that was the exact moment that Paul was "baptized by one Spirit into one body" per 1 Cor 12:13. That would line up well with what came immediately before, "And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales" and then immediately comes that baptism.
- Paul received new instructions throughout his ministry. Later information included the fact that the body of Christ has ONE baptism. It's always correct to follow God's latest instructions, especially when the new instructions contradict the old.
Not Paul's gospel... none of those there, including Peter, knew anything about it.
Are you assuming that the Holy Ghost "falling on them" is a 1 Cor 12:13 thing?
To teach water baptism in the body of Christ is just wrong because there is ONE baptism in the body of Christ.
Last edited:
My post didn't stop with Acts 9. Paul was baptizing whole families at once clear into Acts 18.
If your argument is valid then Paul should have stopped baptizing people, but he didn't. There can be no argument that Paul didn't have his gospel fully realized by Acts 18. Indeed, Paul didn't even stop in Acts 18! Recall the ministry of Apollos...
Acts 18:24 Now a certain Jew named Apollos, born at Alexandria, an eloquent man and mighty in the Scriptures, came to Ephesus. 25 This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord; and being fervent in spirit, he spoke and taught accurately the things of the Lord, though he knew only the baptism of John. 26 So he began to speak boldly in the synagogue. When Aquila and Priscilla heard him, they took him aside and explained to him the way of God more accurately. 27 And when he desired to cross to Achaia, the brethren wrote, exhorting the disciples to receive him; and when he arrived, he greatly helped those who had believed through grace; 28 for he vigorously refuted the Jews publicly, showing from the Scriptures that Jesus is the Christ.
Note the mention of John's baptism. Luke goes on in chapter 19 to discuss this further...
Acts 19:1 And it happened, while Apollos was at Corinth, that Paul, having passed through the upper regions, came to Ephesus. And finding some disciples 2 he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?”
So they said to him, “We have not so much as heard whether there is a Holy Spirit.”
3 And he said to them, “Into what then were you baptized?”
So they said, “Into John’s baptism.”
4 Then Paul said, “John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.”
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6 And when Paul had laid hands on them, the Holy Spirit came upon them, and they spoke with tongues and prophesied. 7 Now the men were about twelve in all.
Notice in verse five that it was AFTER they were water baptized that Paul laid hands on them and they received the Holy Spirit.Now, to be clear here. I agree with you that water baptism is not a practice that really applies to the Body of Christ. I am only making the arguments that I've heard others make about why they practice the ritual. Such people would insist that you are placing too much emphasis on Paul's statement in I Corinthians and that a symbolic ritual does not negate the fact there is one and only one real baptism which it represents. Such arguments are not weak. They are anything but frivolous and I personally cannot refute them in any decisive manner.
Right Divider
Body part
I know what you wrote. It does not matter, Paul received NEW information. We need to follow the LATEST instructions.
I'm sure that you can see that it's very confused to believe that there is "one real baptism" plus more "other" baptism(s). Paul does not tell us that there is "one real baptism" and other optional ones. Paul says that there is ONE baptism.
The negative effects of water baptism in the body of Christ are quite evident.
I'm pretty sure that most people that get water baptized think that they are doing something important and significant (or even required). They think that they are "obeying God" or "following the Lord in baptism" or one of many other confused things that negatively impact their walk with Christ in one way or another (small though many may be).
I advocate for what is best over what is permissible.
Last edited:
How much later can it be than Acts 19? Just how much past the period of time covered by Acts are you thinking these latest instructions came?
Derf
Well-known member
And where are these instructions not to water baptize? They don't exist. If they did, there would be no argument.
Derf
Well-known member
There were negative effects in Corinth about communion, but that wasn't a reason to ignore Christ's teaching about it. So Paul didn't. He corrected practices when needed.
Right Divider
Body part
It seems that you are stuck in details and are missing the forest for the trees.
The real question is:
What should we be doing today?
What are God's current (i.e., latest) instructions?
The bottom line is:
There is ONE baptism for the body of Christ (Eph 4:5).
That baptism is clearly and unequivocally, the Spirit baptism INTO the body of Christ (1 Cor 12:13).
It just cannot be any clearer than that.
Eph 4:5 (AKJV/PCE)
(4:5) One Lord, one faith, one baptism,
1Cor 12:13 (AKJV/PCE)
(12:13) 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.
No other baptism has real significance for a member of the body of Christ.Any other baptism is a distraction that diverts attention away from the one and creates confusion among the body.
Have those scriptures been rescinded or superseded? No, they are in effect today and we should respect and follow them.
Last edited:
Repeating your position does not count as a response to the argument.
If "Any other baptism is a distraction that diverts attention away from the one of real significance for a member of the body of Christ and creates confusion among the body." then why did Paul repeatedly do it well into the later part of the Acts period?
Right Divider
Body part
What should we be doing and teaching today? (Hint: one baptism)
Why won't you answer my question?
Right Divider
Body part
Because it's irrelevant to what I'm trying to tell you.
It is directly relevant! It's relevancy is explicitly stated in the question itself. I specifically quoted YOUR OWN WORDS to give the question is explicit context.
If "Any other baptism is a distraction that diverts attention away from the one of real significance for a member of the body of Christ and creates confusion among the body." then why did Paul repeatedly do it well into the later part of the Acts period?
Right Divider
Body part
Are you suggesting Paul says "one baptism", but then consistently ignores his own scriptural writings on the subject?
The reason that I say that it's irrelevant is because TODAY we should be following the ONE baptism doctrine. Do Paul's own actions nullify Eph 4:5? Is the baptism by the Spirit into the body not THE ONE baptism for today?
I am quoting scripture. Do you deny that Paul baptized people as late as Acts 18 and 19?
That is your doctrinal position. You don't get to declare arguments that appose your doctrine "irrelevant" on the basis of that very doctrine.
That is NOT the question! That question is question begging! You only get to that question by presupposing the validity of your own position. Answer the question as asked or admit that you do not have an answer.
Take a feel for what it's like when people ignore your questions.
Right Divider
Body part
Ephesians was written after Acts 18 (i.e., it's God's more recent instruction).
Paul baptized nobody in Acts 19 (even if he had, it would be irrelevant because Ephesians was written after Acts 19).
The timeline matters.