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

[Apollos]

God chose water baptsim...

God chose water baptsim...

Hey Jerry –

I wish you had taken the time to actually answer/address what I posted to you last time. You talked yourself right around my whole post without touching it. When such happens I can only assume you are avoiding that which you cannot answer.

Even John the Baptist spoke of the time when the Lord Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit…

Sure He did, and I agree – Acts 1:8. But this was a promise to the APOSTLES ONLY. Read Acts 1 – see Acts 2 to see that the Apostles only received this HS baptism. CONTEXT is a great teaching tool if you will use it !!

But you seem to be under the impression that someone is saved when they are baptized with water, but they are not saved when they are baptized with the Holy Spirit!

This is absolutely correct! As I mentioned in my last post and you avoided from my last post, HS baptism NEVER was for remission of sins or salvation, NEVER commanded for salvation or even commanded at all, and you must ASSUME such as not one passage can be found to support such assertions !!! You produced NO passage last time – you will not this time !!!

But water is the means chosen by God through which man appropriates the salvation that God offers to man by His grace !!! Acts 2:38, 22:16, 1 Pt. 3:21.

In other words,the baptism that man is able to perform,the rite of "water baptism",can save a man but the baptism that the Lord Jesus Himself performs cannot!

Jerry, this is great rationalization that helps you avoid answering my last post and helps you avoid providing passages to support your assertions.

But yes, it is water baptism, not HS baptism, as CHOSEN BY GOD for man to execute (Matthew 28:18f) upon ALL nations and it is that same water baptism as CHOSEN BY GOD to effect remission of sins !!! Your rationalization and calling it a “rite” cannot change the means that God chose to use.

When you get ready to rid yourself of YOUR thoughts and choose to understand GOD’s thoughts, then YOU will understand what WATER baptism is FOR and what it DOES !!!

(And when you work your courage up, why not attempt to deal with what I said about the ORDER of things in Acts 11 !!! The HS fell upon them BEFORE they received the “words by which they would be saved.” Find some courage Jerry to answer things !!)

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Apollos,

You are the one who does not undestand who the Lord Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit.You say that it was only for the Apostles.

But that is not accoding to Scipture,because Scripture reveals that every believer belonging to the nation of Israel was to receive it.On the day of Pentecost,Peter said:

"But this is that which was spoken through the prophet,Joel: And it shall come to pass in the last days,saith God,I will pour out My Spirit UPON ALL FLESH..."(Acts2:16,17).

From the context of Joel 2:28 we can see that the gift of the Holy Spirit was to come upon all the believers that belonged to the nation of Irael,and not to just the Apotles as you maintain.

And we can also see that Cornelius and his household also received the gift of the Holy Spirit as did the Apostls.Peter said that they had "received the Holy Spirit as well as we" have (Acts10:47).

Apollos,you have never been able to "rightly divide" the Holy Scriptues.If you were able to,you would see that the command of the Lord to submit to the rite of water bapism was for a past dispensation.Plase notice the words of the Lord:

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;but he that believeth not shall be damned.AND THESE SIGNS SHLL FOLLOW THOSE WHO BELIEVE:IN MY NAME THEY SHALL CAST OUT DEMONS;THEY SHALL SPEAK WITH NEW TONGUES;THEY SHALLTAKE UP SERPENTS;AND IF THEY DRINK ANY DEADLY THING;IT SHALL NOT HARM THEM..."(Mk.16:16-18).

Since you believe that these words are applicable for tody,then I am sure that you believ that you can drink some "deadly things" and it will not harm you.

But again,before you attempt to base your argument that "only the Apostles" received the Holy Sprit baptism,I would suggest that you leave your Commentary published by your denomination and go to the Holy Scriptues instead.

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[JustAChristian]

Re: Re: Re: Re: If Holy Spirit Is the Baptism Of Eph. 4:5...

Re: Re: Re: Re: If Holy Spirit Is the Baptism Of Eph. 4:5...

Originally posted by HopeofGlory


In Christ
Craig

quote:

Originally posted by JustAChristian
Where do you find water baptism commanded under the Law? John's baptism was not under the Law. It was during the despensation of the Law of Moses, but was never a part of the Law. Jesus' baptism was not under the Law as well. The Law did not contain any ordinances concerning baptism. This is what brought John under fire of the Pharisees.

Craig:
Maimonides (1135-1204), a Jewish codifier of the Torah :

"By three things did Israel enter into the Covenant: by circumcision, and baptism and sacrifice. Circumcision was in Egypt, as it is written: 'No uncircumcised person shall eat thereof' (Exodus 12:48). "Baptism" was in the wilderness, just before giving of the Law, as it is written: 'Sanctify them today and tomorrow, and let them wash their clothes' (Exodus 19:10).

Washing cloths and washing the soul is two different things. The ordinance of "divers washings" stood until the reformation or reforming of the Law by Christ (Hebrews 9:10). When the Law of Moses ceased then did the washing of clothes cease. We are to wash the soul now through baptism. Cleansing of sins was not a part of the washing ritual. Immersion for the remission of sins did not come before John's baptism. John's baptism prepared the people to meet the Messiah and was temporary (Act 19:1-6). We now have the baptism of the New Covenant ratified on Calvary's tree, immersion for the remission of sins.

quote:
There is a baptism to be obeyed unto salvation (Mark 16:16).

Craig: There "was" a baptism that had to be obeyed unto salvation.
We have a new message and it comfirms salvation is by the obedience of One (Rom. 5:19).



Craig, you make a statement and cite a reference, but your reference has nothing to do with a "new message." There is one faith (Eph 4:5 Jude 3). By the obedience of "one" who is Christ, [many] meaning everyone who hears and obeys the gospel will be saved. This began on Pentecost and continues today with the one gospel message "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:16;Gal. 1:6,10).

quote:
You can not put this under the Law for the Law of Moses had no ordinances for baptism.

Craig: Maimonides a Jewish codifier of the "law" disagrees. Ananias a devout man according to the "law" reflects the same belief (Acts 22:12, 16).

Is your 1200-years-removed-from-Christ Jewish conifer an inspired writer? Does he have first hand information? No! Matthew, Mark, Luke and John each wrote inspired epistles telling us how to be saved. I believe we aught to accept inspired writers over uninspired external evidence, don't you? I don't want to be concluded as saying external evidence is not often valid. It often is. I often accept it, but at this time you external evidence is inaccurate as to proper relationship and contrary to the inspired writers.

quote:
The Law of Christ began at Pentecost. Peter preached baptism for the remission of sins.

Craig: Peter preached a batism of repentance for remission (Mark 1:4) as did Peter (Acts 2:38).

Now look at yourself Craig, you're all flustered and didn't stop to see that you have used the name "Peter" twice. I believe you're under conviction of the Word.

quote:
The apostles were to teach this same gospel throughout all the world beginning at Jerusalem (Luke 24:47).

Craig: Yes, Jesus commanded the apostles to teach the world but Peter did not reflect that belief concerning Cornelius (Acts 10:28). How is it then that Peter understood the commission?

Peter was in a "first time" situation. He had once preached, on Pentecost, that the Gentiles would be blessed by the Gospel. At that time he was not fully understanding what he was preaching. The Jews had a mindset that the Gospel was only for the Jews. He was being guided by the Holy Spirit to say the message from Christ. (John 14:26). He was not comfortable being in the house of a Gentile telling him the Gospel. He had preached on Pentecost that the Gospel was to them that were afar off [the Gentiles](Acts 2:39) and Paul relates to the Ephesians that they were once "afar off but are made nigh by the Gospel of peace (Eph. 2:17). Peter was able to relate the Gospel of Pentecost as a message also for the Gentiles, with the coming of the baptism with the Holy Spirit, and under inspiration commanded Cornelius to be baptized like those on Pentecost.

quote:
It is the same thing that Paul is teaching here; the gospel is that which is to be preached. Philip preached unto the eunuch "Jesus". To preach Jesus is to preach the Gospel. The Gospel contains that which the believer must do in order to be saved (Matthew 28:18-20).

Craig: Salvation has always been possible in every dispensation of the gospel but with every dispensational change the message must also change.

Craig, you can't throw out statements with evidence. Where is it clearly taught there is more than one dispensation of the Gospel?

Craig: Circumcision began with Abraham and the law with Moses but neither are effectual today. Peter said...he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted... Acts 10:35. Paul said...Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Titus 3:5

So, you believe this is two different messages. You are trying to say that Peter told Cornelius to "work righteousness and save yourself by the righteous works" aren't you? And you are trying to say that Paul told Titus that "people are not saved by doing righteous works" aren't you? You are trying to make inspired apostles of God oppose each other? Aren't you? Well, don't you know that Paul, when he went to every city, he would FIRST preach to the Jews? Don't you see that in the Acts and in the epistles? If you don't, you're spiritually blind! Paul and Barnabas always spoke where there was a synagogue first(Acts 13:14-16). They preached the same message to both Jews and Gentiles who were at the synagogue : "Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent." (Acts 13:26 ). "The word of this salvation" is the one Gospel; to the "stock of Abraham [Jews] and "whesoever among you who fear God" [the Gentiles]. One message only; not a separate message for each group.

Craig: Peter preached washing with water but Paul said it is by the Holy Ghost.

Now, Craig, we'd like to know where Paul said that washing is with the Holy Spirit. It you intend to use 1 Cor 12:13 the Spirit there is the Agent [the one doing the action – cf 2 Cor 3:18] of Christ and not the element [such as water].

Craig: But contrariwise, when they saw that the gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the gospel of the circumcision was unto Peter; Gal. 2:7

Paul was primarily sent to the Gentile world and Peter was primarily sent to preach to the Jew, but they both preached to Gentiles. So what Paul is say is does not amount to two different messages for Paul tells us in this same letter that there is only one Gospel (Gal. 1:6,10).

To say that Paul was not sent to baptize is to discredit the Gospel, the Power of God unto salvation and cause souls to be lost who do not obey it. When Paul made this statement in Corinth, his intent was to place emphesis in the right order. Preaching comes before baptism. The Corinthians had it backwards.

Craig: Paul by the Spirit said "Christ sent me NOT to baptize" (1Cor 1:17) and in his next breath Paul said "the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God"(1 Cor. 1:18).


Paul realized his primary mission was preaching not baptizing. He is showing in the context of chapter one of first Corinthins that division is not right. They were following man and not all following Christ. Paul pointed this our to correct this practice not to discredit baptism. He later pointed out how they were discrediting the Lord's Supper in chapter elever, but he did not tell them to stop eating it, but rather to consider what you are doing and have your common meals other that at the time of the Lord's memorial feast. Paul was a great reformer as well as a preacher of the gospel.

Craig: You are right! You can't obey Holy Spirit baptism.

Exactly, baptism is not a righteous work of men but is an operation of God (Col 2:12).

quote:
But, there is one that can be obeyed. It is the one that washes away sins (Acts 22:16), and put one into Christ (Gal. 3:27). It is the one by which we are saved (1 Peter 3:19-21). It is the one commanded to the house of Cornelius (Acts 10:47). It is the one the eunuch answered to when he said "See here is water. What doth it hender me to be baptized?(Acts 8:37). It is immersion for the remission of sins.

Craig: By mixing dispensational messages you will never come to the knowledge of the truth

There are no dispensational massages to mix. There is one gospel; O-N-E gospel! To the Jew first and also to the Greek (Rom. 1:16). Paul does not say "to the Jew first with another gospel to the Gentiles." The Gospel (one) is to the Jews in the beginning of preaching from Pentecost forward, and also to the Greeks (beginning at the house of Cornelius) there is only one message. That message is that salvation has come to man through Christ and man can be cleansed of sins through believing and obey the gospel.

quote:
We are not saved by works done in righteousness (Titus 3:4,5). Everyone should know that. Then what saves?

Craig: Any act that a man can perform is a work and water baptism was a work of righteousness which is no longer effectual. Today the washing is by the Holy Ghost who is the power of God. The Holy Ghost reveals the word and when the word enters the heart of sinners it cleanes them on the inside. The new man (Eph 2:15) is created by the word of God as it was in the begining and the circumcision made without hands (Col 2:11) separates the new creature (2Cor 5:17) from the flesh. There is no "what" that saves, it is the power of God that saves.

Craig, you start off talking about one thing and switch to another. Works of righteousness do not include all works. There are commandments to be done. We are to pray, right? Yes ! (1 Thess 5:17). Will we be saved if we refuse to pray? No, because we will be in defiance of God. So, prayer is expected of us and we can be lost without it. Is it a righteous work? Yes! Because all of God's commandments are righteous (Ps 119:172). This will apply to every thing that is commanded. Baptism for the remission of sins is commanded and we will be lost without it. Doing what God tells us to do simply for the sake of doing them will not save. We must seek the spiral value of doing the work. Hearing the word, believing in Christ, repenting of sins, confessing Christ as Lord and being baptized are all commandments of Christ. Christ is righteous and his commandments are righteous. Following Christ is to be saved. Not by meritorious works by obedience of faith.

quote:
It is through the laver or washing of the new birth and the renewing of the Holy Spirit. We listen to the Spirit through the word. Then we go down into the laver where we are washed of sins by the blood of Christ, and then we are said to be saved by the mercy of God. It is of regeneration or new birth. One mentions "water" while the other mentions "washing." The Spirit is active in both. The truth is clear, we are born again in baptism as we heed the Holyh Spirit through the word of God.

Creg: We are born again by the word of God and washed by that word. The washing of the flesh is not needed.

The word does not wash us. The washing of regeneration is water baptism (Titus 3:5) wherein we are made a part of the body of Christ through the renewing (being born again) efforts of the Holy Spirit. The process is simple. God desires man to be reconciled to Him. He sent Christ to show the way of reconciliation. He died for the sins of the world. God is appeased with the sacrificial death of His Son for the sins of man. Christ is raised from the tomb. He commissions his apostles to universally preach that faith in Him through the gospel and obedience to His gospel commandments will cause man to be united to God and assured an eternal home in heaven. Hearing the gospel and believing Christ is the Son of God coupled with repentance of sins and washing away of sins in the spiritual bath of immersion will cleanse and make possible the union with God and eternal life. This is the essence of the New Testament, the new covenant built on better promises.

Craig: That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, Eph. 5:26
That he might present it to himself a glorious church, not having spot, or wrinkle, or any such thing; but that it should be holy and without blemish. Eph. 5:27

Craig: Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.1 Pet. 1:23
For all flesh is as grass, and all the glory of man as the flower of grass. The grass withereth, and the flower thereof falleth away: 1 Pet. 1:24


These are beautiful verses with a wonderful meaning. The church has been cleansed with the blood of Christ and set apart for good works. Each member has been reborn spiritually. Each has answered to the commands of Christ, and has been added to the kingdom (Col. 1:13). The incorruptible seed is the word of God (Luke 8:11). The word of God recorded in the New Testament is one covenant to the Jew first and also to the Gentile. O-N-E message. O-N-E gospel! "One Lord (Jesus Christ); one faith (delivered once for all time - Jude 3); one baptism ("arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins") How can you miss it?

JustAChristian

:angel:

 

[JustAChristian]

Just the Christian, you say that a person is born-again...

Just the Christian, you say that a person is born-again...

Originally posted by dan37
Just the Christian, you say that a person is born-again by water baptism. Well let us see what would happen if what you were saying is true. First of all, a person who is born of God does not commit sin and neither can he commit sin because the seed of God remains in him. If baptism, which is administered to the flesh by a human being, is a new birth as described in 1John 3: 9, then it must be true that no one who is baptized in water can commit sin. There is no way that an act committed in the flesh can in any way change the spirit from a position separated from God to a position in harmony with God.

I see so many flaw in your belief system that I truly believe that you are a Christian religionist and not a born-again believer. At least those who profess Derbyism (dispensationalist) have it right when it comes to the way of salvation. It is evident to me that you don’t even know how to be saved. So why you have chosen your name is beyond me.

When you can prove that you do not commit sin in the flesh then you will have convinced me that water baptism is the new birth. I will give you the benefit of a doubt and say that you’re not saved. Because you have not believed the gospel of the Lord Jesus Christ. Therefore, any opinion submitted by you on any subject concerning the life of a Christian is in great doubt and I’ll not respond further to you until you can explain to me how you were saved if indeed you are. I charge you therefore to come out from among the evil workers of darkness and embrace the Light which is Christ. This may not be easy for you since I see many religious hurdles in your life and thinking that have blinded you to the truth. It is my desire and the desire of my Father in heaven that you should be saved.

O, ye-who-knows-everything-and- nobody- knows-nothing-else! When you die will all wisdom die with you? I hope not. Why don't you sit back and take you one good deep breath! Do a search on the search page for JustAChristian, and when you have read enough of my postings then you can come back and criticize or compliment my salvation. This is going to take you a little while, but believe me you need to know more about me before you start condemning me. Besides, I've probably got more time having to go to the restroom at church building than you have in all your Christianity. So, do come telling me what I have and don't have. In the mean time, I suggest you get you a good book, maybe even the Bible, and enjoy yourself.

JustAChristian :angel:

 

[JustAChristian]

What Has Jesus Commanded?

What Has Jesus Commanded?

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
Apollos,

You are the one who does not undestand who the Lord Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit.You say that it was only for the Apostles.

But that is not accoding to Scipture,because Scripture reveals that every believer belonging to the nation of Israel was to receive it.On the day of Pentecost,Peter said:

"But this is that which was spoken through the prophet,Joel: And it shall come to pass in the last days,saith God,I will pour out My Spirit UPON ALL FLESH..."(Acts2:16,17).

From the context of Joel 2:28 we can see that the gift of the Holy Spirit was to come upon all the believers that belonged to the nation of Irael,and not to just the Apotles as you maintain.

And we can also see that Cornelius and his household also received the gift of the Holy Spirit as did the Apostls.Peter said that they had "received the Holy Spirit as well as we" have (Acts10:47).

Apollos,you have never been able to "rightly divide" the Holy Scriptues.If you were able to,you would see that the command of the Lord to submit to the rite of water bapism was for a past dispensation.Plase notice the words of the Lord:

"He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved;but he that believeth not shall be damned.AND THESE SIGNS SHLL FOLLOW THOSE WHO BELIEVE:IN MY NAME THEY SHALL CAST OUT DEMONS;THEY SHALL SPEAK WITH NEW TONGUES;THEY SHALLTAKE UP SERPENTS;AND IF THEY DRINK ANY DEADLY THING;IT SHALL NOT HARM THEM..."(Mk.16:16-18).

Since you believe that these words are applicable for tody,then I am sure that you believ that you can drink some "deadly things" and it will not harm you.

But again,before you attempt to base your argument that "only the Apostles" received the Holy Sprit baptism,I would suggest that you leave your Commentary published by your denomination and go to the Holy Scriptues instead.

In His grace,--Jerry

Remember, Jerry, Mark 16:16 says, "...he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved: but he that disbelieveth shall be condemned." It addressed those who can be saved and those who will not be saved. The "can be" need only to believe and be baptized for salvation. The "cannot be" need only to disbelieve. Suppose I say, "He that comes to my office and brings a can of food for the needy will receive a new Bible, but he that doesn't make it to my office won't get the Bible." How many of you would bring a can of food? Who want get a Bible? Well, if you didn't come to the office you couldn't very well give up a can of food could you? You want get a Bible either, and if you won't believe you wouldn't very much determine to be baptized would you? Nor, would you ever have your sins washed away (Acts 22:16). You will die in your sins and where Jesus has gone you can not go (John 12:26).

So Mark 16:16, as we have said before, just demonstrates that it takes two things to be saved – belief and baptism – and only on thing to be lost – unbelief.

JustAChristian :angel:

 

[JustAChristian]

More To Study On Mark 16:16

More To Study On Mark 16:16

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
JustAChristian,

Jerry Shugart says:

Earlier you provided several verses which you believe teaches that submitting to a rite of "water baptism" is necessary for salation.Over the next several days I will address every one of those verses and demonstrate that your conclusion is in error.I will begin with Mark 16:16.

Well, Jerry
Here is additional information on Mark 16:16 and baptism for you to study and consider. Enjoy! It was delightful to me to gather this information for you.

ANOTHER STUDY ON MARK 16:16 AND BAPTISM FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS.

We may be sure that the doctrine of faith is a reality, standing on the solid foundation of the gospel of Christ. The origin of faith is God, not man, and man is responsible for absolute obedience to all of its precepts. All doctrines and innovations of man are to be rejected.

We have a Bible example of this in John the fourth chapter, when the woman at the well discovered who she was talking to; without hearing another sermon, without a how-to-do-it personal work class, without an organized program, without a teacher, the first thing she did was run into town and tell what she had heard. "Come see a man that told me all that ever I did: is not this the Christ?" (John 4:29). Let's learn to glorify Jesus with what knowledge we have. Let the gospel be preached! Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved" (Mark 16:16).

there are some among religious teachers who believe and teach that baptism is not necessary for salvation. Again, we of the Lord's people, the church of Christ, believe and teach that one must obey the command of baptism as commanded by the Lord in order to be saved (Matt. 28:19; Heb. 5:8,9; Mark 16:16). So here is more controversy on the doctrine of baptism, isn't it?

Then there are those who contend for baptism by affusion, sprinkling or pouring water upon the candidate's head. Again, we of the church that can be read about in the Bible (the church of Christ), and many other religious groups also, are at controversy with those who teach and practice affusion for baptism. Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved ..." Jesus did not say he that believeth and is "sprinkled" or "poured" shall be saved (Mark 16:16).

Does the Bible clearly teach how a man should be baptized? What does the divine record say about the mode of the doctrine of baptism? Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved ..." (not he that believeth and is sprinkled, not he that believeth and is poured), but "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he ..." (Mark 16:16). Keep in mind now, the word baptize means to dip, immerse, bury, cover over out of sight. We read in the word of God these statements: "Buried with him by baptism," "Buried with him in baptism," "For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death ..." (Rom. 6:3,4; Col. 2:12; Rom. 6:5), Also, we have pointed out that when Philip was baptizing the eunuch there was a going down into the water and a coming up out of the water (Acts 8:36-39).

Next, as we consider the doctrine of baptism we learn that baptism has a scriptural design or purpose. One of the creed books quoted from, The Standard Manual For Baptist Churches, stated loud and clear that "baptism is not essential to salvation." But Jesus said, "He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned" (Mark 16:16). Now Jesus is the Savior, and I suppose he ought to know whom he will save. Who shall be saved, Christ? "He" shall be saved. What "he" is it that shall be saved? Just any old "he?" No! No! Well, what "he" is it that shall be saved? The "he" that believeth and is baptized is the "he" that shall be saved. This isn't "justification by faith only," nor does it sound as if baptism is non-essential to salvation. Friends, you can plainly see that baptism has a scriptural design. Baptism is for the purpose of salvation to the obedient believer, so says Jesus. Apostle Peter said, "... baptism doth also now save us ..." (1 Pet. 3:20,21). Just how important, or necessary, or essential is baptism? "Baptism doth also now save us ..." This is the scriptural design or purpose of baptism. At the point of one's obedience to the Lord's command to be baptized, God Almighty applies the blood of Jesus Christ to that person's soul and he is saved by the blood of Christ. Thus, "Baptism doth also now save us ..."

Again, the inspired apostle Peter stated, "... Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:36-38). What is baptism designed for? Baptism is for the remission of sins. Fellow travelers to eternity, don't allow anybody to make you believe that baptism is non-essential; or make you believe that you are saved before you are baptized and that you are to be baptized because you are already saved as an outward sign of your inward grace. This is the doctrine of men and it is vain and leads men from the truth (Matt. 15:7-14; Titus 1:14). Men teach that the preposition "for" in Acts 2:38 means "because of." So, man is to be baptized "for" -- because his sins are already forgiven. I want us to observe two prepositions from two different passages which come from the same Greek word and they both mean the same thing in both passages. "For this is my blood of the new testament, which was shed for many for "eis", [unto, in order to] the remission of sins ..." (Matt. 26:28). I believe that every student of the Bible recognizes the fact that Jesus shed his blood that we might have or obtain forgiveness of sins. He did not die because our sins were already remitted or forgiven, but he shed his blood "for" or "eis", [unto the remission of our sins]. He suffered an agonizing death on the cruel tree of the cross that we might be saved (Heb. 2:9; 2 Cor. 5:21; 1 John 2:1,2).

As will be noted later, God's eternal decree comprehended an elect group; not specified, named, unchangeably predetermined individuals. Salvation was to be offered to all men, according to God's plan, and to that end the gospel was to be preached to "all the nations" or "to the whole creation" and "all the world" (Matt. 28:19; Mark 16:15), When the gospel was thus preached, anyone who would believe it and be baptized would be saved (Mark 16:16); whoever wanted to was permitted to "take the water of life freely" (Rev. 22:17). God's eternal decree of election was to elect the church, spiritual Israel, to heavenly blessings eternally.

As regards which persons are included, God was willing to include all men. "God our Savior ... would have all men to be saved, and come to the knowledge of the truth" (1 Tim. 2:3-4). "The Lord is ... not wishing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance" (2 Pet. 3:9). God did place a provision on this, however: men must be willing to obey God's word and accept the Lordship of God's Son in practice as well as in theory (Matt. 7:21; Heb. 5:9; 1 Pet. 4:17; 2 Thess. 1:8).

The curse of God follows those who, like Balaam, draw back from the faith (Gal. 1:6-9). God's eternal blessing surely follows those who are faithful to his will (Rev. 2:10).

Faithful men are described in Heb. 10:39. Paul encourages the faithful to stand fast in the faith (1 Cor. 16:13) and to strive together for the faith of the gospel (Phil. 1:27). "Wherefore, seeing We also are compassed about with so great a cloud of witnesses, let us lay aside every weight, and the sin which doth so easily beset us, and let us run with patience the race that is set before us, looking to Jesus the author and finisher of our faith ..." (Heb. 12:1,2).We may be sure that the doctrine of faith is a reality, standing on the solid foundation of the gospel of Christ. The origin of faith is God, not man, and man is responsible for absolute obedience to all of its precepts. All doctrines and innovations of man are to be rejected.

JustAChristian :angel:

 

[Jerry Shugart]

JustAChristian,

The following is an examination of many of the verses in regard to "water baptism",and this study demonstates that it is "repentance" that brings about "forgiveness of sins":

Forgiveness of sins is accomplished by “repentance”,not by baptism.Take the words of John the Baptist in the following verse:

“I,indeed,baptize you with water unto repentance…”(Mt.3:11).

Here,the correct rendering of the verse is:

“I,indeed,baptize you with water ON ACCOUNT of repentance…”

The reason for baptism is BECAUSE the person repented and had his sins taken away.

In this verse the preposition “eis” should be translated “on account of” instead of “unto”.

“I,indeed,baptize you with water ON ACCOUNT OF (eis) repentance…”

Th following verse demonstrates that “on account of” is a valid option for “eis”:

“…because they repented ‘at’ (eis) the preaching of Jonah…”(Mt.12:41).

“…because they repented ‘on account of’ the preaching of Jonah…”

So we can see that once the sinner “repented” (had a change of mind) he was baptized with water in order to testify to the forgiveness he received when he repented.Mark makes it plain that it was the “repentance” that was FOR “repentance”:

“John did baptize in the wilderness,and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins”(Mk.1:4).

It is “repentance” that produces forgiveness,as Peter makes abundantly clear:

“Him hath God exalted with His right hand to be a Prince and a Savior,to give REPENTANCE to Israel,and FORGIVENESS OF SINS(Acts5:31).

“To Him give all the prophets witness,that through His Name whosoever BELIEVTH in Him shall receive REMISSION OF SINS”(Acts10:43).

Likewise,Paul testifies to the fact that it is only “faith” by which a sinner receives the remission of sins.The Philippian jailer asked him,”What must I do to be saved?” In answer,Paul did NOT say,repent and be baptized,but said instead:

“BELIEVE on the Lord Jesus Christ,and thou shalt be saved…”(Acts16:30,31).

The Lord Jesus Himself said that it was by believing that the Gentiles would receive “forgiveness of sins”:

“To open their eyes,and to turn them from darkness to light,and from the power of Satan unto God,that they may receive FORGIVENESS OF SINS…”(Acts26:18).

So unless Peter,Paul and the Lord Jesus just FORGOT to mention “water baptism” as a requirement for salvation,then it becomes obvious that it is “repentance” that brings about the forgiveness of sins.And the following are more words of the Lord Jsus Himself that demonstrate that salvation comes as a result of “faith” alone:

“He that heareth My word,and BELIEVETH on Him that sent Me,hath everlasting life,and shall not come into judgment,but is passed from death unto life”(Jn.5:24).

“I am the Resurrection and the Life;he that BELIEVETH in Me,though he were dead,yet shall he live.And whosoever BELIEVETH in Me shall never die”(Jn.11:25,26).

So by all these Scriptul passages we can see that “forgiveness of sin” is a result of “repentance”,and it is NOT a result of submitting to a rite of water baptism.

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[JustAChristian]

Repentance For The Remission Of Sins and other info...

Repentance For The Remission Of Sins and other info...

Originally posted by Jerry Shugart
JustAChristian,

Jerry's quotes will be posted in quotes and my reply is posted in bold type...

JustAChristian,
The following is an examination of many of the verses in regard to "water baptism",and this study demonstates that it is "repentance" that brings about "forgiveness of sins":

Jesus said, "except you believe that I am he you shall die in your sins" (John 8:24), so faith in Jesus is essential before there can be salvation. Repentance is important and one will not be saved without it but it is not the only thing that brings an alian sinner into the salvation of the Lord.

Forgiveness of sins is accomplished by ""repentance"",not by baptism.Take the words of John the Baptist in the following verse:

Repentance and baptism brought a Jew into "preparedness" to receive Jesus (Mark 1:4). John's baptism is no longer valid for the Jew or the Gentile (Acts 19:1-6).

""I,indeed,baptize you with water unto repentance……""

Here,the correct rendering of the verse is:

““I,indeed,baptize you with water ON ACCOUNT of repentance……””(Mt.3:11).

No problem, except you should say that John's baptism is not the valid baptism for today. (Acts 19:1-6).

The reason for baptism is BECAUSE the person repented and had his sins taken away.

Thus he was prepared for the coming kingdom.

In this verse the preposition ""eis"" should be translated ""on account of"" instead of ""unto"".

““I,indeed,baptize you with water ON ACCOUNT OF (eis) repentance……””

Th following verse demonstrates that ““on account of”” is a valid option for ““eis””:

““……because they repented ‘‘at’’ (eis) the preaching of Jonah……””(Mt.12:41).

““……because they repented ‘‘on account of’’ the preaching of Jonah……””

Jerry, I don't know if you have had any studies in Greek. I have had three semesters. That is not a whole lot. I don't brag about it, but it is enough for me to be able to explain this one point. There are six cases in which Greek words are placed. One of these case is the "accusative case." This is often called the case of extension. It involves clauses such as Prepositional phrases. "For the remission of sins" is a prepositional phrase. "For" is a preposition, as you have said. When a prepositional phrase is in the sentence, the "for" preposition is in the accusative case. In the accusative case, any reputable Greek scholar will tell you that the "for" preposition means "in order to". Now, don't blow a fuse! I said any reputable (and unbiased) Greek scholar. One scholar tells us: "One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not." (Robertson's Word Pictures; "Eis" in Acts 2:38). You see! He says make up your own mind. Strong basically holds the same feeling. And, if you want to be a good Calvinist then make up your own mind that way. Now Thayer for Eis (Strong's number 1519) gives an unbiased definition which is correct. It is – NT:1519 eis– "into, unto, to, toward, for, among"

(from The Online Bible Thayer's Greek Lexicon, Copyright (c)1993, Woodside Bible Fellowship, Ontario, Canada. Licensed from the Institute for Creation Research.)
William D. Mounce in his book “kBasics of Biblical Greek,Zondervan Publishing House,© 1993, pg 62 says: “Eis - into, in. Eis always is followed by the accusative.
W.E. Vine in his Vine’s Complete Expository Dictionary of Old and Anew Testament Words says “Eis” means “into”.
So here we see five scholars with reputation. Two says to make up your own mind and does not discuss the Accusative Case for prepositions. While three say it is “into, unto, to, toward, for, among” or just “into” and explains the Accusative Case.
So, in view of this I believe we should go with the accusative case and say it means “into.’
Therefore, if you want to be arrogant and hold on to an inferior and biased conclusion you do so with no Greek grammatical authority.
There are others that could be researched, but these are the primary scholars that biblical studies look to for a Greek answer.
Since I got a right answer credit when I took my Greek Final and said “eis” in the accusative means “in order to” , I am going to stick with that understanding.

So we can see that once the sinner ""repented"" (had a change of mind) he was baptized with water in order to testify to the forgiveness he received when he repented.Mark makes it plain that it was the ""repentance"" that was FOR ""repentance"":

Do you understand "co-ordinating conjunctions? This is when two words are separated by a conjunction. In Acts 2:38 we have "repent" and "be baptized". The conjunction is "and". Each has equal value when separated by a conjunction. What applies to one applies to the other in the same way. While "repent" is necessary for salvation "be baptized" is also necessary since it has equal power by the conjunction "and". Do I need to explain this further?

""John did baptize in the wilderness,and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins""(Mk.1:4).

It is ““repentance”” that produces forgiveness,as Peter makes abundantly clear.

This is not the case for the Alain sinner. John called upon them to repent before they were baptized. It was a "baptism of repentance" or "Repentance baptism" Repentance determined their condition of the heart. The baptism determined their forgiveness of sins.

""Him hath God exalted with His right hand to be a Prince and a Savior,to give REPENTANCE to Israel,and FORGIVENESS OF SINS(Acts5:31).

Amen! How did he do this? Through the New Birth of water and Spirit! Baptism is a part of the New Birth (1 Peter 1:22-23) for baptism is a part of the Word of God.

""To Him give all the prophets witness,that through His Name whosoever BELIEVTH in Him shall receive REMISSION OF SINS""(Acts10:43).

Forgiveness is not excluded from anyone. "Whosoever will can come and partake of the Water of Life freely" (Rev. 22:17).

Likewise,Paul testifies to the fact that it is only ""faith"" by which a sinner receives the remission of sins.The Philippian jailer asked him,""What must I do to be saved?"" In answer,Paul did NOT say,repent and be baptized,but said instead. ""BELIEVE on the Lord Jesus Christ,and thou shalt be saved……""(Acts16:30,31).

"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shall be saved" indeed! (Acts 16:31). But let's not stop at verse 31, read on. When we continue to read the context through verse 34 we get to see the whole picture. We see where "he [the jailor] to them [Paul and Silas] the same hour of the night, and washed their stripes; and was baptized, he and all his immediately." ( Acts 16:33). Verse 34 says, "And he brought them up into his house, and set food before them, and rejoiced greatly, with all his house, having BELIEVED IN GOD. What had he done in his belief. (1)He had already demonstrated faith brough about by the actions of Paul and Silas from their prison cells. (2) He demonstrated repentance in caring for their stripes. (3) He was baptized for the remission of sins. (4) Rejoiced greatly with all his house. This is the way it is. There is no rejoicing before baptism (see Acts 8:39), because there is no salvation before baptism.

The Lord Jesus Himself said that it was by believing that the Gentiles would receive ""forgiveness of sins"":

Jerry, you're digging your own hole deeper and deeper. Earlier in your post you said that "Forgiveness of sins is accomplished by "repentance"." Now you say it comes by believing. What is it going to be next by?

""To open their eyes,and to turn them from darkness to light,and from the power of Satan unto God,that they may receive FORGIVENESS OF SINS……""(Acts26:18).

"Open their eyes" through preaching the Good News of Jesus Christ, and "turn them from darkness" by telling them the benefits of the Gospel of Good News. When their eyes are opened and they are turned from darkness the have received the saving message of the Gospel that says you are to Repent and Be Baptized For The Remission Of Sins. If they obey the Gospel they can have Forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38; 26:18).

So unless Peter,Paul and the Lord Jesus just FORGOT to mention ""water baptism"" as a requirement for salvation,then it becomes obvious that it is ""repentance"" that brings about the forgiveness of sins.And the following are more words of the Lord Jsus Himself that demonstrate that salvation comes as a result of ""faith"" alone:

Water baptism has not been forgotten at all. You see Jerry, the whole of anything is the sum of its parts. None of the verses you cite mention anything about confessing Christ. Yet, the Ethiopian eunuch need to express his belief and confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of God before Philip would baptize him. Where have you mentioned this fact. Nowhere! So, the plan for salvation is not found in one single verse. You have to search out from the writings all that has to been done. Isaiah earlier said about finding things in the Law: "For precept must be upon precept, precept upon precept; line upon line, line upon line; here a little, and there a little" (Isaiah 28:10 AV). It is a narrative message about the Lord that must be fully searched out. Hear the word (John 5:24-25), Believe that Jesus is God's Son (John 8:24), Repent of sins (Luke 13:3) Confess Christ publically (Matthew 10:32-33) and be baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38). Line upon line; precept upon precept; here a little and there a little...

""He that heareth My word,and BELIEVETH on Him that sent Me,hath everlasting life,and shall not come into judgment,but is passed from death unto life""(Jn.5:24).

Remember, this is only a part of the whole.

""I am the Resurrection and the Life;he that BELIEVETH in Me,though he were dead,yet shall he live.And whosoever BELIEVETH in Me shall never die""(Jn.11:25,26).

Add the balance of God's plan as you find it in the New Testament. I have already shown it to you above.

So by all these Scriptul passages we can see that ""forgiveness of sin"" is a result of ""repentance"",and it is NOT a result of submitting to a rite of water baptism.

Based on what I have shown you Jerry, can you continue to hold that false doctrine?

JustAChristian :thumb:

 

[Apollos]

Water baptism is still God's means...

Water baptism is still God's means...

Hi Jerry –

There is no need to get testy on me just because I pointed out that you did not/could not answer my questions. Keep studying and perhaps you will see the truth. Who knows, you may actually attempt to answer some of my arguments one of these days instead of just talking around them as you have the past two posts of mine!!

Who got HS baptism?? In Matthew 3:11 John in non-specific as to who will receive it, but I know it was not the off-spring of vipers (Jews) he referred to.

In Acts 1:8 that I referred to in my last post Jesus is clearly speaking to the APOSTLES. Please check this with the reference of Luke 24 to see whom Jesus was speaking to Jerry. You may want to jam some others into this promise here, but you had better have some passage to back you up. (Yes, Cornelius and household received HS baptism as I have stated in earlier posts in this thread! But Jesus wasn’t speaking to them in Acts 1:8 ! These –2- occasions –Acts 2 & 10 - are the ONLY occurrences of HS baptism in NT scripture. )

Further, we can look at the entirety of Acts 1 to see that it is the Apostles that HS baptism will be in reference to. Acts 2 shows that the Apostles only received HS baptism, as they were the ones speaking in tongues, and from the point in time Luke’s references indicate that only the Apostles had received HS baptism through as far as chapter 5.

…Scripture reveals that every believer belonging to the nation of Israel was to receive it.On the day of Pentecost…

Acts 2:16 (Joel 2:28) says no such thing. You read this into the passage. Peter said,
"But this is that which was spoken through the prophet Joel: And it shall come to pass in the last days, saith God, I will pour out My Spirit UPON ALL FLESH...".
-There is nothing here to indicate that His Spirit would be poured out on ALL believing Jews. This is conjecture!

-Did ALL Jews then receive HS baptism. No, we know not all Jews did, for not all Jews were saved that day. In fact, Acts 2:41 shows about 3,000 souls were saved that day (using water baptism – Acts 2:38), hardly the number of people/Jews that would have been in Jerusalem at that time.

-So what does “upon all flesh” mean ?? It does not mean ALL Jews or just believing Jews. It means “all” flesh – Jew and Gentile flesh. The Apostles (Jews) got HS baptism in Acts 2. The Gentiles (the other flesh) got it in Acts 10 !!

Do I need to drag you over to Acts 11 AGAIN, and this time point out that Peter tells us that the second occurrence of HS baptism, upon the Gentiles, made him remember how it first occurred in Acts 2 ??? I am sure I do, so please read Acts 11:16 and see how 10 years later Peter remembers the words of Jesus in reference to HS baptism – “…as in the beginning…”. The event of HS baptism was an exception, not the rule !!
<<<*>>>

And while we are in Acts 11 Jerry, do you finally want to acknowledge that the HS fell upon Cornelius & household “as [Peter] began to speak” (11:15) and thus, before they received the “words whereby they would be saved” (11:14) ??

-This means Cornelius and household received HS baptism BEFORE they were saved.
-This means HS baptism was not the means of salvation for Cornelius & house !!<<<*>>>

SO when Peter (under the direct supervision of the HS) had concluded his “words” to Cornelius, he COMMANDED with “words” for Cornelius and household to be (water) baptized “in the name of Jesus Christ” – it was at this point, and not before, after receiving all the “words” whereby they would be saved, that they had received SALVATION !!!

This is because the baptism authorized by Christ (in His name) is in WATER (Acts 10:47) and it is for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38). Baptism “in His name” is not HS baptism (Acts 8:15-18).

HS baptism was the result of promise and prophesy, and was never commanded and never for salvation !!! (You are yet to produce a passage to show this Jerry!!)

(I hate to allow you to obfuscate matters with your remarks about supernatural gifts from Mark 16, but I will say a word or two. Spiritual gifts (SGs) had a purpose to serve – to reveal & confirm God’s word. Once SGs served the purpose for which they were given, they passed away as God intended – cf. 1 Cor 13:10f.

This in no way alters the fact that water baptism – “…he that believes and is baptized shall be saved…” is the means, and has been since Acts 2, chosen by God through which man appropriates the salvation that God offers man by His grace !! WATER baptism is in God’s plan to stay!!)

I would suggest that you leave your Commentary published by your denomination and go to the Holy Scriptues instead.

LOL !! I don’t have such Jerry. Perhaps though you should take your OWN advice though !! And denominations are wrong and divisive and I would not be part of one !!

 

[Jerry Shugart]

JustAChristian,

"...because they repented AT (eis) the preaching of Jonah..."(Mt.12:41).

According to you,we can only conclude that the word translated here,"at"(eis--Strong´s # 1519) can only mean "into,unto,to toward,for,among".

But that makes no sense whatsoever.They did not repent "into" the preaching of Jonah,nor did they repent "unto,to toward,for or among" the preaching of Jonah.

Instead,they repented BECAUSE of the preaching of Jonah.

And that is exactly the meaning of the word in the following verse:

"I,indeed baptize you with water BECAUSE OF (eis) repentance..."

If the word can be used in that way at Matthew 12:41,then it an also be translated that way at Matthew 3:11.

Now to the word "repentance".It means "a change of mind"("Thayer´s Greek English Lexicon").Before they did not believe that that the man Jesus was the promised Messiah,but once they repented (changed their mind) they then believed that He was indeed the promised Messiah.So as soon as they repented they believed that He was the promsed Messih.

In fact,this repentance is spoken of in the Scriptures as a change of mind which depends on believing the gospel.For instance,we read:

"To the Gentiles hath God granted repentance unto life"(Acts11:18).

It is the "repentanc" that brings life,and not submitting to the rite of water baptism.

Referring to the same event,we see that Paul announced that "God...had opened the door of faith unto the Gentiles"(Acts14:27) and elsewhere we read concering the same event as "the conversion" of the Gentiles (Acts15:3).

So we can see that "repentance" leads to "belief" and "conversion".

And again,the following verses demonstrate that the forgiveness of sins are a result of "repentance" and the "believing" which is the result of repentanc, and NOT,as you say,as a result of repentance and submitting to the rite of water baptism:

"...that through His Name whosoever BELIEVETH in Him shall receive remission of sins"(Acts10:43).

Also,it is clear that when asked hat one must do to be saved,Paul did NOT say to believe and be baptized,but instead said,"BELIEVE on the Lord Jesus Christ,and thou shalt be saved..."(Acts16:31).

And why do you suppose that Paul did NOT tell them that it was necessary for them to "believe" and submit to the rite of water baptism in order to receive salvation.Did he think that they could read his mind?Do you think that he just forgot to add the words about water bapism?

No,the fact is that in order to receive forgiveness of sins it is necssary for the sinner to repent and believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and nothing more.

I know that it is very convenient to add words to Scripture,but in order to understand the truth it is necessary to take the words AS THEY ARE WRITTEN without editing them.And if we do not edit the words of Paul,we can believe that in order to be saved it is only necessary to BELIEVE:

"BELIEVE on the Lord Jesus Christ,and thou shalt be saved,and thy house"(Acts16:31).

And that matches exactly the words of John concerning the purpose of His gospel:

"But these are written,that ye might BELIEVE that Jesus is the Christ,the Son of God,and that by BELIEVING ye might have life through His Name"(Jn.20:31).

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[Jerry Shugart]

Apollos,

Who was to receive the HS baptism,you ask?

Well,the Lord Jesus referred to that baptism as "the promise of the Father"(Acts1:4).And that promise can be found in regard to the New Covenant that was promised to "the house of Israel and with the house of Judah"(Jer.31:31):

"And I will put MY SPIRIT WITHIN YOU,and cause you to walk in My statutes,and ye shall keep My ordinances,and do them"(Ez.36:27).

That promise was not only to the Apostles,but to all of Israel.

Just because all of them did not have the outward manifestation of the Holy Spirit does not mean that they were not baptized with the Holy Spirit.There are gifts of the Holy Spirit that are not outward signs.You can see that they all were empowered by the Holy Spirit,as we read that they "continued daily with one accord in the temple,and breaking bread from house to house,did eat their food with gladness and singleness of heart"(Acts2:46).

They were so much of "singleness of heart" that they "sold their possessions and goods,and parted them to all men,as every man had need"(v.45).

They had received the promise of the new heart also:

"And a new heart also will I give you;and a new Spirit will I put within you"(Ez.36:26).

And it is very interesting that the very next chapter of Ezekiel describes the "regeneration" of the nation of Israel.And that "regeneration" is a TYPE that represents the "regeneration" of the sinner.

There we see a valley full of bones,and "those bones are the whole house of Israel"(Ez.37:11).We see that once the bones "hear the word of the Lord" then "the breath (ruah--spirit) came into them,and they lived..."(Ez.37:10).

And that is exactly the way that the sinner is regenerated when He is "born of the Spirit":

"Being born again,not of corruptible seed,but of incorruptible,BY THE WORD OF GOD"(1Pet.1:23).

When the sinner hears and believes the word of God that comes in the power of the Holy Spirit (1Pet.1:12;1Thess.1:5) he is born again,born of God,and born of the Spirit.That is how the sinner receives salvation.

No need for even a drop of water!

In His grace,--Jerry

 

[HopeofGlory]

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If Holy Spirit Is the Baptism Of Eph. 4:5...

Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: If Holy Spirit Is the Baptism Of Eph. 4:5...

Originally posted by JustAChristian

Washing cloths and washing the soul is two different things.

I agree but you have failed to see that washing of the flesh was commanded (Lev 16:24).

The ordinance of "divers washings" stood until the reformation or reforming of the Law by Christ (Hebrews 9:10).

Again you have failed to see that washing of the flesh was included in the divers washings.

When the Law of Moses ceased then did the washing of clothes cease. We are to wash the soul now through baptism.

Divers washings ceased and it included washing of the flesh.

Cleansing of sins was not a part of the washing ritual.

The washing prepared the priest to receive the sacrifice then the blood was applied for forgiveness of sins. This is the biblical order of remission of which you are confused. This is exemplified by the baptism that John preached preparing Israel as priest to receive the Sacrifice for remission. Peter preaching the same water baptism for remission at pentecost to prepare the nation of Israel has confused you. You are not to receive this gospel and it is as Jesus said...Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: Matt. 10:5
But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Matt. 10:6


Immersion for the remission of sins did not come before John's baptism.

Washing temporarily cleansed the priest in order to receive the sacrifice. Today this preparatory work is accomplised by the word of God.

That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word, Eph. 5:26

compare to:

And the LORD said unto Moses, Go unto the people, and sanctify them to day and to morrow, and let them wash their clothes, Ex. 19:10
And be ready against the third day: for the third day the LORD will come down in the sight of all the people upon mount Sinai. Ex. 19:11

John's baptism prepared the people to meet the Messiah and was temporary (Act 19:1-6).

I agree and there is no difference between John's baptism and Peter's. Both were for the remission of sins.

We now have the baptism of the New Covenant ratified on Calvary's tree, immersion for the remission of sins.

The new testament is His shed blood for remission (Matt 26:28) not a new water baptism.

Craig, you make a statement and cite a reference, but your reference (Roms 5:9) has nothing to do with a "new message."

Roms. 5:19 is a reference to the obedience of Christ at the cross where He shed His blood of the new testament for remission. This new testament message for remission is a free gift
to all that will receive it freely. The power of the cross is the display of the grace of God and it is not by works of righteousness. You void the power of the cross when you say a person that has faith in the shed blood of Christ is not saved if he doesn't obey water baptism.

There is one faith (Eph 4:5 Jude 3). By the obedience of "one" who is Christ, [many] meaning everyone who hears and obeys the gospel will be saved. This began on Pentecost and continues today with the one gospel message "He that believes and is baptized shall be saved" (Mark 16:16;Gal. 1:6,10).[/B]

"One baptism" is the message that Paul reveals and it is by the Spirit not water. The pentecost gift of the Holy Ghost is not baptism by the Spirit. Not once is this gift refered to as baptism.The Peterine doctrine (Acts 2:38) is that of the Baptist (Mark 1:4) for remission before the cross and it is not the new testament of Christ (Matt 26:28) for remission. Peter was confused about the comission and it is reflected in his words concerning Cornelius (Acts 10:28). Peter did not reveal the new testament for remission to Cornelius but commanded water baptism for remission yet God showed him by the Spirit falling that He accepted the Gentile without water baptism (Acts 10:47).
This alone negates your idea that one must obey water baptism before God will accept them.

Is your 1200-years-removed-from-Christ Jewish conifer an inspired writer? Does he have first hand information? No! Matthew, Mark, Luke and John each wrote inspired epistles telling us how to be saved. I believe we aught to accept inspired writers over uninspired external evidence, don't you? I don't want to be concluded as saying external evidence is not often valid. It often is. I often accept it, but at this time you external evidence is inaccurate as to proper relationship and contrary to the inspired writers.

Maimonides was a JEWISH codifier of the law and I believe it is safe to say he understood the customs as they were hand down by the traditions of their fathers. You're right to say his writings may not be inspired but they accurately dispaly Judaic tradition concerning the rite of water baptism. The evidence is only inaccurate according to your understanding not theirs.

Now look at yourself Craig, you're all flustered and didn't stop to see that you have used the name "Peter" twice. I believe you're under conviction of the Word.

Sorry, I don't have time to throughly edit my post. LOL


Peter was in a "first time" situation. He had once preached, on Pentecost, that the Gentiles would be blessed by the Gospel. At that time he was not fully understanding what he was preaching.

Well, you're right.

The Jews had a mindset that the Gospel was only for the Jews. He was being guided by the Holy Spirit to say the message from Christ. (John 14:26).

John 14:26 was not fulfilled at Pentecost because it is a fact Peter was commanded to preach to every creature yet it was the law he was steep in that refused Cornelius. Peter had not yet realized that the law was no longer in effect.

He was not comfortable being in the house of a Gentile telling him the Gospel. He had preached on Pentecost that the Gospel was to them that were afar off [the Gentiles](Acts 2:39) and Paul relates to the Ephesians that they were once "afar off but are made nigh by the Gospel of peace (Eph. 2:17).

Peter's reference in Acts is not to Gentiles but the tribes of Israel. It is ridiculas to say Peter ment Gentiles when he refused to go to Cornelius!

Peter was able to relate the Gospel of Pentecost as a message also for the Gentiles, with the coming of the baptism with the Holy Spirit, and under inspiration commanded Cornelius to be baptized like those on Pentecost.

God interrupted Peter before he commanded Cornelius to be water baptized so there is no way Peter was inspired to deliver his message to Gentiles. His message was the gospel of the kingdom and it began with the Baptist. Again the words of Jesus...

These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them, saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the Samaritans enter ye not: Matt. 10:5
But go rather to the lost sheep of the house of Israel. Matt. 10:6

This was a message under the law as Peter said it is "unlawful" for a Jew to come unto one of another nation. It was the new testament message for remission (Matt 26:28) that Jesus commanded to be preached to every creature and Peter did not reveal it to Cornelius.

It is the same thing that Paul is teaching here; the gospel is that which is to be preached. Philip preached unto the eunuch "Jesus". To preach Jesus is to preach the Gospel. The Gospel contains that which the believer must do in order to be saved (Matthew 28:18-20).

Phillip did not reveal the new testament for remission to the eunuch. Paul was the first man to reveal it.

Craig, you can't throw out statements with evidence. Where is it clearly taught there is more than one dispensation of the Gospel?

Yes I can.

Whereof I am made a minister, according to the dispensation of God which is given to me for you, to fulfil the word of God; Col. 1:25
Even the mystery which hath been hid from ages and from generations, but "NOW" is made manifest to his saints: Col. 1:26



So, you believe this is two different messages. You are trying to say that Peter told Cornelius to "work righteousness and save yourself by the righteous works" aren't you? And you are trying to say that Paul told Titus that "people are not saved by doing righteous works" aren't you? You are trying to make inspired apostles of God oppose each other? Aren't you? Well, don't you know that Paul, when he went to every city, he would FIRST preach to the Jews? Don't you see that in the Acts and in the epistles? If you don't, you're spiritually blind! Paul and Barnabas always spoke where there was a synagogue first(Acts 13:14-16). They preached the same message to both Jews and Gentiles who were at the synagogue : "Men and brethren, children of the stock of Abraham, and whosoever among you feareth God, to you is the word of this salvation sent." (Acts 13:26 ). "The word of this salvation" is the one Gospel; to the "stock of Abraham [Jews] and "whesoever among you who fear God" [the Gentiles]. One message only; not a separate message for each group.

Peter said...he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted... Acts 10:35. Paul said...Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost; Titus 3:5

You're missing the point. Paul was going to every creature as Jesus command and not once does he preach a baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

Will respond to the balance of your post when I have time.

In Christ
Craig

 

[JustAChristian]

Baptized For The Remission of Sins

Baptized For The Remission of Sins

Jerry,

"Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins." Surely this is too plain to be misunderstood. Surely those who heard these words from the lips of the apostles knew the purpose of their being baptized. Do you think anyone would have had any trouble telling you why he had been baptized? Many were baptized on that day (Acts 2:41). Why were they baptized? Why did Peter tell them to go back to his words "for the remission of sins"? Look at that phrase in another place. "For this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Matt. 26:28). What does "for the remission of sins" mean here? It does not mean he shed his blood because they already had their sins remitted. All would agree to that, wouldn't they? If we can see it in this passage, why not in others?

A lot of problems come from improper understanding of the translation of a word. Yes, eis in Matthew 12:41 is translated “at”, but what information is the translators trying to convey. That is what is important. Remember, I taught you that “eis” is in the accusative case and as such will always mean in, into, unto, toward, for, among or some such derivative of that preposition. “At” is a derivative of the Greek word “eis” but a very weak and minor derivative. In fact we only see it translated “at the” in 111 times of 1753 uses of the term. We see it in the KJV in Matthew 15:17 translated “at”, but in the American Standard it is translated “into”, so a lot has to do with what translation you are reading. The translator wants us to understand that when Jonah preached to the Ninevites, during that preaching they repented. Jonah never told them to repent. He merely told that “Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown!” As he preached they repented of sins and turned to God. Simply, they repented at (for, in, into, unto) the preaching of Jonah.

As I have mentioned before, when we see a parallel verse of “for the remission of sins”, it would help to understand that verse translation. Such a verse in found in Matthew 26:28. “For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” Now, did Jesus shed his blood “because of” the forgiveness of sins or “in order to” the forgiveness of sins? Was man’s sins forgiven prior to Christ shedding his blood or after he shed his blood? The correct answer will help understand the translation. No sins were forgiven before Christ shed his blood. Again, the inspired apostle Peter stated, "... Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:36-38). What is baptism designed for? Baptism is for (“in order to” have) the remission of sins.

In the gospel of Mark, chapter 16 and verse 16 the Bible says, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved, but he that believeth not shall be condemned" First we note that before someone is to be baptized, he or she must be a believer. That belief must be in the gospel of Jesus Christ which tell us He is God's Son, so one must believe that Christ is God's son. Second, we note that baptism is essential for salvation. "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved" The apostle Peter tell us, ""The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us, (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience towards God), by the resurrection of Jesus Christ" (1 Peter 3:21). Peter plainly says that baptism saves. I have fullest confidence in what Peter has taught in other subjects, so I shouldn't doubt what he is teaching here, should I? Of course not! He preached baptism in Acts 2, and said that it us unto the forgiveness of sins (Acts 2:38). Then, when one is baptized in order to have their sins forgiven, then its the same as being saved. The "for" mentioned in Acts 2:38 is a preposition and in the Greek in which the New Testament was written, it is EIS and always looks forward--going into, etc. It never looks back to past events, so one is not baptized because his sins have been forgiven. Never be fooled on this subject.

Paul the apostle relates how Ananias, the preacher, told him as he was praying at Damascus (Acts.22:16) "And now why tarriest thou? arise and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord" Paul must have done just that, and not argued one moment, for he went out preaching to and baptizing many who believed in Jesus Christ (Rom.6:1-4; Gal 3:27; Acts 19:1-7).

The church at Rome was taught the after being baptized, they were expected to walk in newness of life (Rom 6:4) Why couldn't they walk in newness of life after just believing? Its because that newness of life comes after being immersed into Christ.

Jesus taught that in order to be born again, one must be baptized saying "Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God" Jesus is merely saying that passing through the water, following the message of the Spirit through the word of God places us on the other side into salvation in the Kingdom of God. Like the Israelites, who had to cross the Red Sea and the Jordan river which are both "types of water baptism" we too must be baptized in order to enter into the kingdom of Christ Jesus.

Many try to say that depending on water baptism for salvation is "works salvation." I contend that it is obeying Christ (Heb.5:8-9) The preacher of the gospel, Titus said, "Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost" (Titus 3:5) When one is baptized for the remission of sins, Christ give him the Holy Ghost (Acts 2:38). We cannot be justified by His grace without having our sins forgiven , and we cannot be forgiven until we have been baptized.

The act of believing and being baptized places us into the spiritual body of Christ (Rom. 6:3). We put on Christ, figuratively, as we would put on a garment, but its in the process of being water baptized (Gal 3:27) There is no other way to understand this passage.

In conclusion, let us see this final point for today. Being water baptized is necessary in order to obey God (Matthew 28:19; Acts 10:48) This is what Bible teaches on the subject. You make the decision, for its so vital for salvation.

JustAChristian :angel:

 

[JustAChristian]

"At" the preaching of Jonah...

"At" the preaching of Jonah...

Jerry,

"Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins."(Acts 2:38). Surely this is too plain to be misunderstood. Surely those who heard these words from the lips of the apostles knew the purpose of their being baptized. Do you think anyone would have had any trouble telling you why he had been baptized? Many were baptized on that day (Acts 2:41). Why were they baptized? Why did Peter tell them to go back to his words "for the remission of sins"? Look at that phrase in another place. "For this is my blood of the New Testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins" (Matt. 26:28). What does "for the remission of sins" mean here? It does not mean he shed his blood because they already had their sins remitted. All would agree to that, wouldn't they? If we can see it in this passage, why not in others?

A lot of problems come from improper understanding of the translation of a word. Yes, eis in Matthew 12:41 is translated “at”, but what information is the translators trying to convey. It should not be construed that “eis” here means “because of.” That is what is important. Remember, I taught you that “eis” is in the accusative case and as such will always mean in, into, unto, toward, for, among or some such derivative of that preposition. “At” is a derivative of the Greek word “eis” but a very weak and minor derivative. In fact we only see it translated “at the” in 111 times of 1753 uses of the term. We see it in the KJV in Matthew 15:17 translated “at”, but in the American Standard it is translated “into”, so a lot has to do with what translation you are reading. The translator wants us to understand that when Jonah preached to the Ninevites, during that preaching they repented. Jonah never told them to repent. He merely told that “Yet forty days and Nineveh shall be overthrown!” As he preached they repented of sins and turned to God. Simply, they repented at (for, in, into, unto) the preaching of Jonah.

As I have mentioned before, when we see a parallel verse of “for the remission of sins”, it would help to understand that verse translation. Such a verse in found in Matthew 26:28. “For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.” Now, did Jesus shed his blood “because of” the forgiveness of sins or “in order to” the forgiveness of sins? Was man’s sins forgiven prior to Christ shedding his blood or after he shed his blood? The correct answer will help understand the translation. No sins were forgiven before Christ shed his blood. Again, the inspired apostle Peter stated, "... Repent, and be baptized everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost" (Acts 2:36-38). What is baptism designed for? Baptism is for (“in order to” have) the remission of sins.

JustAChristian :angel:

 

[elected4ever]

Acts 2:37 now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

EIS - Strong’s 1519, For, to, unto and other various meanings according to it’s use in a particular praise. We have been discussing the use of that word in its relation to the praise “ Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins”. The question is asked, by others, and me does this statement “repent and be baptized for the remission of sin” require that a person repent and be baptized in order to be saved? Is there another alternative usage for this Greek word, Eis? Is the word, because, an appropriate and understandable usage of the word, Eis, translated for in verse 38.

Look at verse 39. Do you understand that verse as (in order to) or (because). Eis is used in both instances and translated, for. We will read the text of verse 39 using both usages of the Greek, Eis.

First- …..Because the promise is unto you …….
Second…. In order that the promise is unto you……..

The verb, is, makes it impossible for, in order to, to be an appropriate application. Because becomes an appropriate usage of the Greek, Eis. Now we will repeat the text using the word because in place of the word, for.

Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ because of the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 Because the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. (Italics mine)

The remission of sins was accomplished at the cross. Receive the remission of sins and you can also receive the gift Holy Spirit. I have to admit one error. The receiving of the Holy Spirit is not the same as the new birth. The new birth, being born again, is a birth into the Kingdome. The receiving of the Holy Spirit is the empowerment of the Holy Spirit for service. It took both, repentance and baptism to be empowered. Just like the Israel, without circumcision, they could not participate in the national life of Israel neither can a born again believer participate in the empowered work of the Kingdom. That is a topic of another thread and should not be discussed here. The 120 were saved before they were empowered at Pentecost.

The question that was asked was, and I shall state it as I understand it, “How can we have what we are witnessing here? To get from where they were to where the 120 were it took both repentance and baptism.

The question is asked, “ How were 3000 soles added to the church in one day. Not all Israel crucified Christ. Only the religious elite and those who had not repented and received John’s baptism or were baptized at the hands of the Apostles before Christ’ crucifixion. Most Israelites that were there had already repented and had submitted to John’s baptism but had no knowledge of the resurrection of Christ. When they received the word, they received the “gift of the Holy Spirit”. No more repentance and no more baptism needed. They just received as the 120 did. This is not to say that there were not many, many conversions that day also.

One more word about the new birth and the Holy Spirit. The spirit that is involved in the born again experience is your spirit. It must under go a change from not knowing God to one that is of God and is in fellowship with Him. You must pass from death to life in your Spirit. The gift of the Holy Spirit is an empowering and enabling of the born again believer for service in the Kingdom of God. There is no one particular gift that must be possessed as proof of this enabling. If you are serving the kingdom of God the Holy Spirit has gifted you according to His will and not yours or the expectations of anyone else. There are no second rate gifts. All are needed for the administering of the Kingdom.

 

[Pilgrimagain]

still going

 

[JustAChristian]

Answering dan37

Answering dan37

Originally posted by dan37

My answers are in bold text.
JustAChristian

Acts 2:37 now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?

Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.

39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.

EIS - Strong’’s 1519, For, to, unto and other various meanings according to it’’s use in a particular praise. We have been discussing the use of that word in its relation to the praise ““ Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins””. The question is asked, by others, and me does this statement ““repent and be baptized for the remission of sin”” require that a person repent and be baptized in order to be saved? Is there another alternative usage for this Greek word, Eis?

Eis is a preposition in the Greek Accusative case. As such, it to the coming of an event and can only mean " For to unto, into, in order to". It can never [let me be more specific] in-on- way, nada, not any way can it be translated otherwise and be correct and consistent with the Greek . In times when it is translated looking back to an event that has passed, it violates the Accusative case. Research any Greek grammar for prepositions. This should then become apparent

Is the word, because, an appropriate and understandable usage of the word, Eis, translated for in verse 38.

Because looks backwards and therefore violates the accusative case.

Look at verse 39. Do you understand that verse as (in order to) or (because). Eis is used in both instances and translated, for. We will read the text of verse 39 using both usages of the Greek, Eis.

First- ……..Because the promise is unto you ………….
Second……. In order that the promise is unto you…………..

"For" and not "because" at the beginning of the sentence is the translation for the Greek word "gar"and is a conjunction. The word "unto" is the interpretation of "eis" in the accusative case.

The verb, is, makes it impossible for, in order to, to be an appropriate application. Because becomes an appropriate usage of the Greek, Eis. Now we will repeat the text using the word because in place of the word, for.

"In order to" would be an awkward translation so unto is used.

Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
Acts 2:38 Then Peter said unto them, repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ because of the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.


"Because of" is a preposition of the Greek work "dia" (Strong's #1223) and would not be the proper word to use here. The true preposition is eis.

39 Because the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call. (Italics mine)

The remission of sins was accomplished at the cross. Receive the remission of sins and you can also receive the gift Holy Spirit. I have to admit one error. The receiving of the Holy Spirit is not the same as the new birth.

It is essential to have the new birth before the indwelling of the Holy Spirit will happen.

The new birth, being born again, is a birth into the Kingdome. The receiving of the Holy Spirit is the empowerment of the Holy Spirit for service.

This was the purpose to the apostles at the beginning to guide them into all truth (Luke 24:49; John 16:13). The Christian is empowered by the word of God (2 Tim. 2:2; 3:15-17).

It took both, repentance and baptism to be empowered. Just like the Israel, without circumcision, they could not participate in the national life of Israel neither can a born again believer participate in the empowered work of the Kingdom.

Check you statement again dan37. You might need to make an adjustment.


That is a topic of another thread and should not be discussed here. The 120 were saved before they were empowered at Pentecost.

The 120 were not a part of the empowerment. This was exclusively for the apostles (Luke 24:49). Also, the context of Acts 2 shows that only the apostles are involved. There is about a ten day break between chapter one and chapter two of Acts. Jesus assembled with the apostles on the 40th day at his ascension. They assembled with the 120 that day in Jerusalem. Pentecost was on the 50th day. So you should see the 10 day split.


The question that was asked was, and I shall state it as I understand it, ““How can we have what we are witnessing here? To get from where they were to where the 120 were it took both repentance and baptism.

The 120 were under John's baptism or was baptized by Jesus' disciples during his ministry. They were not a part of Holy Spirit baptism of Pentecost. There baptism was a baptism of repentance for the remission of sin looking forward to the coming kingdom.


The question is asked, ““ How were 3000 soles added to the church in one day.

The 3000 or so heard the gospel preached on Pentecost. They asked Peter and the other apostles, "Men and brethren, what shall we do." They were convicted that they were sinners and had killed the Messiah. Peter told them to Repent [of sins in their lives] and be baptized for the remission of sins [to wash away sins -Acts 22:16] and that that gladly received the word [obeyed that which the apostles told them] were baptized and the Lord added them to the church [the apostles and the 120 disciples earlier mentioned] Acts 2:47.

Not all Israel crucified Christ. Only the religious elite and those who had not repented and received John’’s baptism or were baptized at the hands of the Apostles before Christ’’ crucifixion. Most Israelites that were there had already repented and had submitted to John’’s baptism but had no knowledge of the resurrection of Christ. When they received the word, they received the ““gift of the Holy Spirit””.

Your situation is found in Acts 19:1-6. Here we see that the disciples of John were rebaptized by Paul and then received the Holy Spirit indwelling.

No more repentance and no more baptism needed. They just received as the 120 did. This is not to say that there were not many, many conversions that day also.

You need to study this again. You are opening yourself to a lot of rebuttal.

One more word about the new birth and the Holy Spirit. The spirit that is involved in the born again experience is your spirit. It must under go a change from not knowing God to one that is of God and is in fellowship with Him. You must pass from death to life in your Spirit. The gift of the Holy Spirit is an empowering and enabling of the born again believer for service in the Kingdom of God. There is no one particular gift that must be possessed as proof of this enabling. If you are serving the kingdom of God the Holy Spirit has gifted you according to His will and not yours or the expectations of anyone else. There are no second rate gifts. All are needed for the administering of the Kingdom.

Peter tell us that we have purified our soul in obeying the truth (1 Peter 1:21-22). That obeying involves hearing the gospel (Rom. 10:17) believing in Jesus (John 8:24), Repenting of sins (Luke 13:3,5; Acts 2:38), being baptized for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38) and sowing to the Spirit (Gal. 6:8). Remission of sins is immediate in obeying the gospel. There is no eternal salvation without endurance in Christ for salvation comes at the end of service (Rom. 2:7; 1 Tim. 6:19; Rev. 2:10).

JustAChristian

:angel:

 

[elected4ever]

Just a christian,don't look now but your ignorance is showing

 

[HopeofGlory]

Just,

You said:
Now, Craig, we'd like to know where Paul said that washing is with the Holy Spirit. It you intend to use 1 Cor 12:13 the Spirit there is the Agent [the one doing the action – cf 2 Cor 3:18] of Christ and not the element [such as water].

My reply:
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
For the body is not one member, but many. 1 Cor. 12:14

The Lord is that Spirit (2 Cor 3:17) and the Spirit is Christ (Roms 8:9). Christ Jesus is the agent and the word (Eph 5:26) He spoke of His shed blood (Matt 26:28) is the element.

This baptism by the Spirit cleanes man on the inside and has nothing to do with the flesh (John 6:63). This baptism is also accomplised without water. The element of this cleansing must be received inwardly by believing the words of the new testament and thus we "drink" into the Spirit. We receive this spiritually (the breath of God enters into us), we do not drink His blood. This message was veiled by the flesh of Jesus and the apostles did not comprehend it. Spirit baptism by the power of God accomplished what water baptism could not do in that it eternally cleansed the heart of sinners.

Compare to:

But Jesus answered and said, Ye know not what ye ask. Are ye able to drink of the cup that I shall drink of, and to be baptized with the baptism that I am baptized with?


Jesus answered and said unto her, If thou knewest the gift of God, and who it is that saith to thee, Give me to drink; thou wouldest have asked of him, and he would have given thee living water. John 4:10

Here Jesus is the agent and He is speaking in reference to the "gift" (Roms 5:18) and it is to receive by "drinking" the living "water" (Eph 5:26) that is the word of God. The word is the element God uses to wash us white as snow (Eph 5:27).

Christ is the Word (John 1:14) and the Spirit (2 Cor 3:17) thus he is both the agent and the element that baptizes us. What this leaves us with is that it is all Christ or it is nothing at all.

It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life. John 6:63

In Christ
Craig

 

[JustAChristian]

Perhaps, perhaps not!

Perhaps, perhaps not!

Originally posted by dan37
Just a christian,don't look now but your ignorance is showing

If my ignorance is showing, maybe you'd like to use some scripture and show me where!

JustAChristian