Mid-Acts water baptism

[Right Divider]

There is a problem there if the person getting baptized believes that they are being cleansed BECAUSE they are performing this religious ritual.

Agreed, and that is what most cultist groups teach.

If, on the other hand, they are performing the ritual BECAUSE they have been cleansed by the blood of Christ, (as well as buried with Christ and raised to new life) then I see no problem.

The later is what the vast majority of protestant Christians teach, by the way.

And that is a major reason why so many Christians are very confused on the issue. Since that makes no sense.

 

[Derf]

Agreed.

Agreed.

Yes, I said just that in an earlier post.

As I mentioned before, it's typically because they include doctrines from other dispensations to come to that conclusion.

If everyone actually took the ONE baptism seriously, that would at least help with unity.

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:

I'm not trying to force anyone's hand. Just sticking to the ONE baptism per Paul.

Which wasn't Paul's point, since he speaks of the other apostles, who were known to have baptized by water.

The symbolism of "water baptism" is about cleansing the person of their sins.

Yes, agreed.

But a member of the body of Christ is already 100% cleansed by the blood of Christ. Do you see the problem there?

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]

It's a little ironic that you use the passage about "one baptism" to divide the body of Christ.

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.

Of course it would help with unity if everybody agreed with you, but that's only good if you are correct.

And I am... thanks.

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.

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]

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.

Hahahahahahaha. You are without a doubt the most divisive member of the body of Christ I know of.

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.

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.

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.

Or the first "Christian"? Do you think the 12 apostles were christians?

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.​

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.

Welcome back to my ignore list, you retarded moron.

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.

 

[Clete]

And that is a major reason why so many Christians are very confused on the issue. Since that makes no sense.

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]

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).

• 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.

By what gospel were the gentiles saved in Acts 10:44-48?

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 12:23 thing?

To teach water baptism in the body of Christ is just wrong because there is ONE baptism in the body of Christ.