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

[HopeofGlory]

As we review the actual account of Jesus speaking of the “things” of the kingdom we see water baptism being directly related to the promise of the kingdom. Water baptism was to "prepare" them to enter into the kingdom as kings and priests. John’s baptism in Acts 1: 5 is spoken of in contrast to..... “but” (on the contrary) ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost!

Now therefore, if ye will obey my voice indeed, and keep my covenant, then ye shall be a peculiar treasure unto me above all people: for all the earth is mine: Ex. 19:5 (KJV)
And ye shall be unto me a kingdom of priests, and an holy nation. These are the words which thou shalt speak unto the children of Israel. Ex. 19:6 (KJV)

The voice of one crying in the wilderness, "Prepare" ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight. Mark 1:3 (KJV)
John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins. Mark 1:4 (KJV)

To whom also he shewed himself alive after his passion by many infallible proofs, being seen of them forty days, and speaking of the things pertaining to the kingdom of God: Acts 1:3 (KJV)
And, being assembled together with [them], commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, [saith he], ye have heard of me. Acts 1:4 (KJV)
For John truly baptized with water; but (on the contrary) ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence. Acts 1:5 (KJV)
When they therefore were come together, they asked of him, saying, Lord, wilt thou at this time restore again the kingdom to Israel? Acts 1:6 (KJV)
And he said unto them, It is not for you to know the times or the seasons, which the Father hath put in his own power. Acts 1:7 (KJV)
But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. Acts 1:8 (KJV)

"Not many days hence" in verse 5 must be considered if we seek the truth of the Lord's words. The promise was not received as we see it mentioned again in 2 Pet 3:9 with Peter explaining that it was not received with these words: But, beloved, be not ignorant of this one thing, that one day is with the Lord as a thousand years, and a thousand years as one day. 2 Pet. 3:8 (KJV)
The Lord is not slack concerning his promise, as some men count slackness; but is longsuffering to us-ward, not willing that any should perish, but that all should come to repentance. 2 Pet. 3:9 (KJV)

Cast not away therefore your confidence, which hath great recompense of reward. Heb. 10:35 (KJV)
For ye have need of patience, that, after ye have done the will of God, ye might receive the promise. Heb. 10:36 (KJV)
For yet a little while, and he that shall come will come, and will not tarry. Heb. 10:37 (KJV)

And, being assembled together with [them], commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, [saith he], ye have heard of me. Acts 1:4 (KJV)

Jesus told them of the "things" of the kingdom then commanded go to Jerusalem "but"(on the contrary) "wait" for the promise of the father "ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost" not many days hence.

It was not for them to know the times or the seasons!
Peter quoting the Lord in Acts 11:16 does not mean he understood it! Peter believed they would receive the kingdom and the promise but as seen in 2 Pet 3:9 we know Peter was wrong!

But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. Acts 1:8 (KJV)

The above verse explains what they will received at Jerusalem “but ye shall receive power” and that is exactly what they received and is proved in the fact there is not one verse in which they were baptized with the Holy Ghost. What they received at Pentecost was not unique and it was not baptism with the Holy Ghost.

Baptism “of” the Holy Ghost is not a biblical term but John said Jesus would baptize with the Holy Ghost. Some believe the Holy Ghost baptized which is not true, like the "baptism of John" meaning John baptized. If you believe Jesus will baptize with the Holy Ghost then use the biblical term "baptize with the Holy Ghost“. If we believe the word is inspired by God then let's not destroy the terminology.

They truly did receive the gift of the Holy Ghost and it was promised that they would receive it at Pentecost. Jesus did not promise He would baptize with the Holy Ghost at Pentecost but said “not many days hence“.
Ye shall receive power is on the other side of "but"(on the contrary) "wait","not many days hence" of He will "baptized with the Holy Ghost."

Spirit filled was not unique at Pentecost and their baptism was one of water. Moses received like power and others were filled with the Holy Ghost before Pentecost.

Old testament examples:

For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s womb. Luke 1:15 (KJV)

And it came to pass that, when Elisabeth heard the salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost: Luke 1:41 (KJV)

In order to prophecy in the name of Jesus and perform miracles, etc one has to be filled with the Holy Ghost. The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. John 3:2 (KJV)

"Gifts" of the Holy Ghost are clearly taught and can only be done by God through them.

Many will say to me in that day, Lord, Lord, have we not prophesied in thy name? and in thy name have cast out devils? and in thy name done many wonderful works? Matt. 7:22 (KJV)
And then will I profess unto them, I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. Matt. 7:23 (KJV)

Those that received the filling of the Holy Ghost with power (children of the kingdom) will be told by the Lord that He never knew them!!!!!!!! Scripture testifies that we were chosen before the foundation of the world (Eph 1:4) and we must believe in the blood sacrifice of the gift giver for our sins and not the gifts.

Receiving gifts of the Holy Ghost should not be confused with being baptized by the Spirit into the body. Spirit baptism places “all” (1 Cor 12:13) who accept Christ’s death for their sins into the body of Christ and it does not give “all” power (Acts 1:8) to perform miracles as did the gift of the Holy Ghost.

In Christ
Craig

 

[agape]

Originally posted by c.moore
Keep up the truth, and facts,they might get it after 40 years going through the internet :up:

Thanks c.moore...hope they see the truth a lot sooner than 40 years! :up:

 

[c.moore]

Hello agape

Just keep praying for them that God opens thier eyes open like he did saul.

Be blessed

 

[Kevin]

Agape,

Acts 10:47-48
Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have recieved the Holy Spirit just as we have?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Oh please Kevin, I've been there, already gave my explanation explaining that Peter was talking about "spiritual water"...not water baptism. Please find and read.

This is NOT speaking of spiritual water. It is speaking of literal water. A perfect example is when Philip baptized the eunuch in water. Are you going to tell me that that was spirit water too? After being preached Jesus, he was baptized into Christ, and it used real WATER. The eunuch SAW the water and asked "See, here is water, what doth hinder me from being baptized?". He SAW water, you can't see spiritual water.

They were baptized with the holy spirit and began to speak with tongues.

Yup, the same thing (miraculous abilities) happened to the people in Numbers too. That didn't put them into Christ. The fact is, if the falling of the HS, which gave the Gentiles the ability to speak in tongues, is what put them into Christ, then there would be no need for Peter to command baptism in the name of the Lord after already being baptized by the Spirit, but he DID.

Are you ever going to answer my point about MAN not having the ability to baptize people with spirit baptism? MAN was commanded to preach and baptize, and the only baptism that MAN can perform is water baptism. It is GOD who baptizes with the HS at His choosing, not MAN, therefore HS baptism cannot be the baptism commanded in the Great Commission (the ONE baptism), because MAN was told to do it, not God.

The people in Numbers 11:25 also had the HS fall upon them, giving them the ability to prophecy! The same spirit did the same thing for both parties - it gave them power.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

So what is your point? In the OT the God allowed His spirit to be upon certain people so that God could give them the revelation they needed to know, which they could not know by their five senses. They prophesied what God told them. Numbers 11:25 has nothing to do with "baptism" at all...except in your new writing of the bible.

My point is that both parties (Numbers 11:25 and Acts 10:44) had the SAME Spirit rest upon them which had the SAME effect upon them (miraculous abilities). If you are going to argue that the falling of the HS is what put them into Christ in Acts 10:44, then, to be consistent, you must also say that it put the people in Numbers into Christ, which is impossible. The same thing happened by the same spirit to both parties.

What put them INTO Christ could only be accomplished by their being baptized with HOLY SPIRIT

Nope. The baptism which puts us into Christ is the one commanded at the Great Commission, which MAN is commanded to do, NOT God. Man cannot baptize people with the HS. Man can however, baptize people in water in the name of the Lord, and then God give the gift of the HS (Acts 2:38).

Acts 10:47-48 is proof that they were not water baptized but were baptized in the holy spirit...For JESUS SAID: "...BUT YE SHALL BE BAPTIZED WITH THE HOLY GHOST NOT MANY DAYS HENCE."

Oh PLEASE!!! He was speaking to the apostles when He said "ye will be baptized with the Holy Ghost". And it happened in Acts 2:3-4. They received miraculous powers, which is a far cry from being baptized into the death of Chist! As said earlier, this same thing happened to the people in Numbers!

John 3:6 THAT WHICH IS BORN OF THE FLESH IS FLESH;....

...and THAT WHICH IS BORN OF THE SPIRIT IS SPIRIT.

I agree with those verses. Jesus is simply saying that we need to be reborn in the Spirit in order to make into the kingdom of God. Jesus explains HOW on is born of the Spirit in verse 5, with WATER and the Spirit, which is what is practiced in the NT (eunuch baptism for example).

One who is born of the flesh, that is, somebody who hasn't been baptized into Christ (which does use water), will not enter the kingdom of heaven.

We are first born of our parents...the physical, fleshy birth...then we are "born AGAIN" with the HOLY SPIRIT.

The "water" spoken of in verse 5 is NOT speaking of water in the womb. Nicodemus is asking how one is born again, after already coming out of the womb with water. To answer a question on how to be born AGAIN has NOTHING to do with the first natural birth.

Hebrews 10:22 Let us draw near with a true heart in full assurance of faith, having our hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and our bodies washed with pure water [louo = to bathe, wash, of a dead person, washing to cleanse blood out of the wounds]

This has nothing to do with being "baptized in water." Having their bodies washed with pure water indicates ceremonial washing or cleansing. See Exodus 30:18-24.

Wrong (again). If you read just a few verses back (verse 19), you would see that the verse I quoted is relevant to OUR dispensation, not the one in Exodus. It speaks having boldness to enter the Holiest by the blood of Jesus, which was not possible in Exodus. Nice try. It then goes on to say how are bodies are washed with pure water, which is exactly what happened when Phillip baptized the eunuch.

 

[HopeofGlory]

Kevin,

My replies are bold.

I can't speak for agape but your false interpretations are a product of a false spirit.

Acts 10:47-48
Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have recieved the Holy Spirit just as we have?


This is NOT speaking of spiritual water. It is speaking of literal water. A perfect example is when Philip baptized the eunuch in water. Are you going to tell me that that was spirit water too? After being preached Jesus, he was baptized into Christ, and it used real WATER. The eunuch SAW the water and asked "See, here is water, what doth hinder me from being baptized?". He SAW water, you can't see spiritual water.

The eunuch was not baptized into Christ! He was baptized in water. Your logic > water=Christ. Show me in context where the eunuch or Cornelius was baptized into Christ.
You mangle scripture through your ineptitude, totally destroying it's clear meaning.

They were baptized with the holy spirit and began to speak with tongues.

Yup, the same thing (miraculous abilities) happened to the people in Numbers too. That didn't put them into Christ. The fact is, if the falling of the HS, which gave the Gentiles the ability to speak in tongues, is what put them into Christ, then there would be no need for Peter to command baptism in the name of the Lord after already being baptized by the Spirit, be he DID.

They were not baptized by the Spirit into the body at Pentecost but they did receive "power".....But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. Acts 1:8 (KJV)

Again, give me one scripture where "water" baptism placed placed anybody into Christ.


Are you ever going to answer my point about MAN not having the ability to baptize people with spirit baptism?

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Matt. 28:19 (KJV)

It is clear the apostles are being instructed to teach and the teaching of the word will baptize them. The word is spirit and it is by this word we are baptized...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 (KJV). The quickening of the spirit (baptism) is immediate when the words of the new testament are believed. The new testament is a new testimony with a greater witness (John 5:33-36) for remission of sins (Matt. 26:28) as opposed to the old testimony for remission (Mark 1:4).



MAN was commanded to preach and baptize,

More perversion, Christ never commanded the apostles to "water" baptize.

and the only baptism that MAN can perform is water baptism.

Good point.

It is GOD who baptizes with the HS at His choosing, not MAN,

Spirit baptism is for "all" and it is an operation of God not man!

For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. 1 Cor. 12:13 (KJV)

Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the ""operation of God"", who hath raised him from the dead. Col. 2:12 (KJV)


therefore HS baptism cannot the baptism commanded in the Great Commission (the ONE baptism), because MAN was told to do it, not God.

No one tells God what to do! Your twisted reasoning would conclude such because you believe that man has the power to baptize into Christ even though it is an operation of God and the Baptist said.. but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
Mark 1:8 (KJV)

In Christ
Craig

 

[itsjustdave1988]

From the very 1st Century, the Fathers of the Church have taught that through Baptism, God gives us grace. The sacred writers tell us that it is in baptism that we are saved, buried with Christ, incorporated into his body, washed of our sins, regenerated, cleansed, and so on (see Acts 2:38, 22:16; Rom. 6:1–4; 1 Cor. 6:11, 12:13; Gal. 3:26–27; Eph. 5:25-27; Col. 2:11–12; Titus 3:5; 1 Pet. 3:18–22). They are unanimous in speaking of baptism as really bringing about a spiritual effect.

After hearing the gospel proclaimed by Peter, the crowd asked Peter, "What are we to do, brothers?" Peter answered, "You must reform and be baptized, each one of you in the name of Jesus Christ, that your sins may be forgiven; then you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Act 3:37-38)

Then what did the first Christian's do? "The devoted themselves to the apostles' instruction and the communal life, to the breaking of bread and the prayers." (cf. Acts 3:42) This is the essence of a Christian life. Christians devoted themselves to apostolic teaching, and Baptism was a prominent part of that teaching.

Protestant early Church historian J. N. D. Kelly writes, "From the beginning baptism was the universally accepted rite of admission to the Church. . . . As regards its significance, it was always held to convey the remission of sins . . . we descend into the water ‘dead’ and come out again ‘alive’; we receive a white robe which symbolizes the Spirit . . .the Spirit is God himself dwelling in the believer, and the resulting life is a re-creation. Prior to baptism . . . our heart was the abode of demons . . . [but] baptism supplies us with the weapons for our spiritual warfare" (Early Christian Doctrines, 193–4).

Quotations from Early Church Fathers on Baptism...

The Letter of Barnabas

"Regarding [baptism], we have the evidence of Scripture that Israel would refuse to accept the washing which confers the remission of sins and would set up a substitution of their own instead [Ps. 1:3–6]. Observe there how he describes both the water and the cross in the same figure. His meaning is, ‘Blessed are those who go down into the water with their hopes set on the cross.’ Here he is saying that after we have stepped down into the water, burdened with sin and defilement, we come up out of it bearing fruit, with reverence in our hearts and the hope of Jesus in our souls" (Letter of Barnabas 11:1–10 [A.D. 74]).

Hermas

"‘I have heard, sir,’ said I, ‘from some teacher, that there is no other repentance except that which took place when we went down into the water and obtained the remission of our former sins.’ He said to me, ‘You have heard rightly, for so it is’" (The Shepherd 4:3:1–2 [A.D. 80]).

Ignatius of Antioch

"Let none of you turn deserter. Let your baptism be your armor; your faith, your helmet; your love, your spear; your patient endurance, your panoply" (Letter to Polycarp 6 [A.D. 110]).

Second Clement

"For, if we do the will of Christ, we shall find rest; but if otherwise, then nothing shall deliver us from eternal punishment, if we should disobey his commandments. . . . [W]ith what confidence shall we, if we keep not our baptism pure and undefiled, enter into the kingdom of God? Or who shall be our advocate, unless we be found having holy and righteous works?’ (Second Clement 6:7–9 [A.D. 150]).

Justin Martyr

"Whoever are convinced and believe that what they are taught and told by us is the truth, and professes to be able to live accordingly, are instructed to pray and to beseech God in fasting for the remission of their former sins, while we pray and fast with them. Then they are led by us to a place where there is water, and they are reborn in the same kind of rebirth in which we ourselves were reborn: ‘In the name of God, the Lord and Father of all, and of our Savior Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit,’ they receive the washing of water. For Christ said, ‘Unless you be reborn, you shall not enter the kingdom of heaven’" (First Apology 61:14–17 [A.D. 151]).

Theophilus of Antioch

"Moreover, those things which were created from the waters were blessed by God, so that this might also be a sign that men would at a future time receive repentance and remission of sins through water and the bath of regeneration—all who proceed to the truth and are born again and receive a blessing from God" (To Autolycus 12:16 [A.D. 181]).

Clement of Alexandria

"When we are baptized, we are enlightened. Being enlightened, we are adopted as sons. Adopted as sons, we are made perfect. Made perfect, we become immortal . . . ‘and sons of the Most High’ [Ps. 82:6]. This work is variously called grace, illumination, perfection, and washing. It is a washing by which we are cleansed of sins, a gift of grace by which the punishments due our sins are remitted, an illumination by which we behold that holy light of salvation" (The Instructor of Children 1:6:26:1 [A.D. 191]).

itsjustdave1988

 

[Kevin]

HopeofGlory,

I can't speak for agape but your false interpretations are a product of a false spirit.

Coming from you, and your position on the word of God, that's a compliment. I'm glad I don't share your beliefs.

The eunuch was not baptized into Christ!

Proof? He was preached Jesus and then was baptized. Just what do you think he was baptized into?

He was baptized in water.

Agreed.

Your logic > water=Christ.

Wrong. You just don't understand.

Show me in context where the eunuch or Cornelius was baptized into Christ.

Both parties were baptized after being preached the gospel. Why would they be baptized into anything other than Christ, when He is the point of the gospel message?

They were not baptized by the Spirit into the body at Pentecost but they did receive "power".....But ye shall receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall be witnesses unto me both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth. Acts 1:8 (KJV)

Again, give me one scripture where "water" baptism placed placed anybody into Christ.

The eunuch. You're just too blinded by your dispy garbage to realize that. Pity.

It is clear the apostles are being instructed to teach and the teaching of the word will baptize them.

Wrong. You are trying to make the Great Commission say something that it does not say. Jesus gave the Great Commission for MAN, yes MAN, to carry out. Everything mentioned in there was for MAN to do. Did he address the great commission to the Spirit (the word)? NO!! Therefore the word does not automatically baptize people when they hear and believe it,because the Spirit was not commanded to do so. That is your inserted baloney.

The word is spirit and it is by this word we are baptized

Yes, it is by the word of God (the Spirit) which compells us to be baptized into Christ. This is what happened to the eunuch and the Jews in Acts 2:38. Since one is supposedly automatically baptized upon hearing the gospel, why did Peter have to tell them to be baptized (Acts 2:38)? He wouldn't have to tell them if it automatically happens. Go ahead, tell me it's because Peter didn't preach the blood of Christ...

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

Yes, those words are life. Part of those words that lead to life are "Repent, and let everyone of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins; and you shall recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit." (Acts 2:38)

The quickening of the spirit (baptism) is immediate when the words of the new testament are believed.

Oh really? Then why didn't the HS fall upon me and rest on my head? Why didn't I see the burning tongues of fire when I believed?

MAN was commanded to preach and baptize,

More perversion,

You're blindness is pathetic. Here, answer this simple question for me: To whom was Jesus speaking when He instituted the Great Commission?

If you answer with anything other than the apostles, which are MEN, then you need some serious help in your Bible studies. Serious help.

Christ never commanded the apostles to "water" baptize.

Yes He did, because that's what was practiced!

and the only baptism that MAN can perform is water baptism.

Good point.

Indeed it is. Thank you.

therefore HS baptism cannot the baptism commanded in the Great Commission (the ONE baptism), because MAN was told to do it, not God.

No one tells God what to do!

I would never dream of telling God what to do. You are one confused individual.

and the Baptist said.. but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.
Mark 1:8 (KJV)

I agree with that. One such example is Acts 2:38 - "and you shall recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit".

 

[Kevin]

Good teaching!

Good teaching!

itsjustdave1988,

Amen and amen!

 

[Kevin]

Another question for Agape...

Another question for Agape...

So tell me, Agape, when you chew food with your mouth, are you actually using your mouth, or are you doing that inwardly with actually using your mouth?

 

[agape]

Re: Another question for Agape...

Re: Another question for Agape...

Originally posted by Kevin
So tell me, Agape, when you chew food with your mouth, are you actually using your mouth, or are you doing that inwardly with actually using your mouth?

Give it a rest Kevin, you are just making yourself look more and more ridiculous every time.

I guess it's just too spiritual for you to understand so it just keeps going over your head.

 

[agape]

itsjustdave,

What you presented concerning water baptism is totally off God's Word. You just gave "man"s" opinion or this is what so and so said of which the Word of God does not agree with at all.

John's water baptism went out when Christ's spirit baptism was made available for all who believe in him.

I'll take God's Word over anyone else's word and I don't care who they are or who they are claimed to be.

Acts 1:5:
For John truly baptised with water, BUT YE SHALL BE BAPTIZED WITH THE HOLY GHOST NOT MANY DAYS HENCE."

Jesus Christ himself contrasted the baptism in the spirit with John the Baptist’s baptism with water.

Even John understood this:

Mark 1:2-8
As it is written in the prophets, Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee.

The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight.

John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

And there went out unto him all the land of Judaea, and they of Jerusalem, and were all baptized of him in the river of Jordan, confessing their sins.

And John was clothed with camel's hair, and with a girdle of a skin about his loins; and he did eat locusts and wild honey;

And preached, saying, There cometh one mightier than I after me, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to stoop down and unloose.

I indeed have baptized you with water: b]BUT he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.[/b]

John knew his baptism was only temporary and preparatory in nature. John was sent before Christ, to prepare the way before Christ and he taught of the one that would come who would be mightier than he and would baptize them with a greater baptism than water.

John 1:19-34:
And this is the record of John, when the Jews sent priests and Levites from Jerusalem to ask him, Who art thou? (20) And he confessed, and denied not; but confessed, I am not the Christ. (21) And they asked him, What then? Art thou Elias? And he saith, I am not. Art thou that prophet? And he answered, No. (22) Then said they unto him, Who art thou? that we may give an answer to them that sent us. What sayest thou of thyself? (23) He said, I [am] the voice of one crying in the wilderness, Make straight the way of the Lord, as said the prophet Esaias. (24) And they which were sent were of the Pharisees. (25) And they asked him, and said unto him, Why baptizest thou then, if thou be not that Christ, nor Elias, neither that prophet? (26) John answered them, saying, I baptize with water: BUT there standeth one among you, whom ye know not; (27) He it is, who coming after me is preferred before me, whose shoe's latchet I am not worthy to unloose. (28) These things were done in Bethabara beyond Jordan, where John was baptizing. (29) The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world. (30) This is he of whom I said, After me cometh a man which is preferred before me: for he was before me. (31) And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water. (32) And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him. (33) And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, UPON WHOM THOU SHALT SEE THE SPIRIT DESCENDING AND REMAINING ON HIM, THE SAME IS HE WHICH BAPTIZEDTH WITH THE HOLY GHOST. (34) And I saw, and bare record that this is the Son of God.

John prepared men’s hearts for the coming of the redeemer, Jesus Christ. By preaching and baptizing a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins, he prepared and pointed the way towards the one, Jesus Christ, who would truly, completely and fully accomplish salvation from sin.

John’s baptism with water was not the perfect and final baptism. People were not saved by John's water baptism during the gospel period. If that were possible, there would have been no need for Jesus Christ to have shed his blood and died on the cross and no need for any other baptism. Both Jesus Christ and John spoke of a greater baptism to come which would be the baptism in the spirit; therefore, the temporary and preparatory baptism of water became unnecessary and obsolete.

The "so-called" religious, man-made quotations from the early church fathers which others say they said, and of which of course there are contradictions among them, means nothing to me, especially when they contradict the truth of God's Word altogether. I choose to believe what Jesus taught, which is stated above over what "man" says he taught.

Jesus Christ taught: "For John truly baptized with water, BUT YE SHALL BE BAPTIZED WITH THE HOLY GHOST..." .

 

[c.moore]

Quote Agape
Give it a rest Kevin, you are just making yourself look more and more ridiculous every time.

I guess it's just too spiritual for you to understand so it just keeps going over your head.


Quote c.moore

Your right Agape.
1Co:2:14: But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God: for they are foolishness unto him: neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned.

Gopd bless you

 

[Evangelion]

HopeOfGlory -

More perversion, Christ never commanded the apostles to "water" baptize.

Really? Kevin has already mentioned the Great Commission. What do you believe Christ meant by it?

Here's B. W. Johnson (The People's New Testament), on the passage in question:

• 
  Baptizing them.
  The rite by which those who believe upon him should be formally enlisted and enrolled in the school of Christ is baptism. It is not a baptism of the Spirit that he means, because it is one that those whom he addresses are commanded to administer. He alone baptized with the Spirit; his apostles and disciples baptized in water, and it is to this rite that he refers. Hence, when we turn to the preaching of the apostles under this commission, we find that all converts were at once baptized (Act_2:38-41; Act_8:12-18). 5.
  
  The end or result of baptism is also given. Converts were to be baptized into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit. It is a positive affirmation of the Old Testament that where the name of the Lord is recorded there will he meet his disciples, or there will be his presence. See Exo_20:24. The Lord declares that the three names, that of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, are recorded in baptism. In this rite, then, Father, Son, and Holy Spirit meet the believer; the Father to receive him as a child, the Son to welcome him as a brother, and to cover him with the mantle of his own purity; the Holy Spirit to endow him with that Spirit by which he can say, "Abba, Father." "Into the name of" is equivalent to "into the presence of," or "into the Father, and into the Son, and into the Holy Spirit."

 

[agape]

Originally posted by Kevin
Agape,
Yup, the same thing (miraculous abilities) happened to the people in Numbers too.

Big difference from OT to NT. To receive the spirit upon them temporarily can't be compared to the receiving God's Spirit permanently, to be saved, born again and have eternal life.

That didn't put them into Christ. The fact is, if the falling of the HS, which gave the Gentiles the ability to speak in tongues, is what put them into Christ, then there would be no need for Peter to command baptism in the name of the Lord after already being baptized by the Spirit, but he DID.

No he DID NOT. They never touched water. They were born again as Peter was teaching them the Christ, the Messiah, their Lord and Savior. When Peter heard them speak in tongues, he remembered what Christ taught: Acts 1:5, "For John truly baptized with water, BUT YE SHALL BE BAPTIZED WITH THE HOLY GHOST...." There was absolutely no need for them to be baptized in water and Peter knew this.

Acts 10:47-48
Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have recieved the Holy Spirit just as we have?

It is not speaking of water baptism. The subject never even came up. Peter replied to those Judean believers who were with him who were amazed that the Gentiles should receive the gift of holy spirit and spoke with tongues. Peter said can any man forbid water. Where's water baptism even mentioned. In Acts 11, Peter relates the incident to those in Jerusalem and states the following:

Acts 11:15-17:
And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.

Then remembered I the word of the Lord, how that he said, John indeed baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost.

Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as [he did] unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

There is not even a hint of water baptism mentioned in Paul's relating the events that took place with the Gentiles in any of the verses. Paul stated who was I to withstand God's will and purpose for the Gentiles. He had commanded or arranged for them to be baptized in the holy spirit, the baptism God had shown him they were to be baptized with..."BUT YE SHALL BE BAPTIZED WITH THE HOLY GHOST..."

Are you ever going to answer my point about MAN not having the ability to baptize people with spirit baptism? MAN was commanded to preach and baptize, and the only baptism that MAN can perform is water baptism. It is GOD who baptizes with the HS at His choosing, not MAN, therefore HS baptism cannot be the baptism commanded in the Great Commission (the ONE baptism), because MAN was told to do it, not God.

Peter preached the Word to Cornelius and his household and while he preached, they were baptized with the holy spirit and spoke with tongues. When are you going to get over the fact that "in the name of the Lord" DOES NOT MEAN WATER!

Jesus' last words to the Apostles before he ascended to His Father were: "For John truly baptized with water, BUT YE SHALL BE BAPTIZED WITH THE HOLY GHOST NOT MANY DAYS HENCE." He did not tell them to baptize with John's baptism. SPIRIT BAPTISM is the ONE BAPTISM...the only TRUE BAPTISM. The only great commission is to preached the gospel of the good news of SALVATION and in doing so, those who believe, are baptized with the HOLY SPIRIT....are saved, born again and have eternal life which water baptism CAN NOT do for mankind. Water is water and spirit is spirit. For anyone to enter into the Kingdom of God he MUST BE BORN OF THE SPIRIT. HE MUST BE BORN AGAIN...HE MUST BE BAPTIZED WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT.

If you are going to argue that the falling of the HS is what put them into Christ in Acts 10:44, then, to be consistent, you must also say that it put the people in Numbers into Christ, which is impossible.

Exactly my point...impossible because in Numbers, they were not born again...they were NOT BAPTIZED IN THE HOLY SPIRIT AT ALL. And since when is the NT suppose to be consistent with the OT?? There is no comparison to be made with what occurred in Numbers with what occurred in Acts. Keep Numbers where it belongs...in the OT.

The same thing happened by the same spirit to both parties.

Only in the false "written word by Kevin." What occured in Numbers is not the same thing that occurred with Cornelius and his household...so again, leave Numbers, OT, out altogether because it does not tie in with the new birth at all.

The baptism which puts us into Christ is the one commanded at the Great Commission

To be found only in Kevin's newly written bible.

Man can however, baptize people in water in the name of the Lord, and then God give the gift of the HS (Acts 2:38).

Quoted from Kevin's newly written bible which is made up to fit his erroneous beliefs. The true Word of God never states that water baptism is the great commission and nor does it state that man baptizes with water and then God gives the gift. They are all lies.

Jesus is simply saying that we need to be reborn in the Spirit in order to make into the kingdom of God.

Jesus is simply saying that one must be born again of the Spirit in order to enter into the kingdom of God. He DID NOT SAY one must be water baptized. The water is referring to first natural birth...the physical human birth. Born again means to be born from above, a spiritual birth. Jesus Christ is not talking about being born of water baptism...how ridiculous. No one can be "born" of water baptism...only born of water from the mother's womb.

Jesus explains HOW on is born of the Spirit in verse 5, with WATER and the Spirit, which is what is practiced in the NT (eunuch baptism for example).

LOL...I can't help but laugh when one can obviously see how you make things up as you go along. That which is born of the flesh is flesh..born the first birth from the mother's womb...and that which is born of the spirit is spirit...born of the Spirit. Born AGAIN...means to be born a second time with a new spiritual nature.

Regarding the eunuch:

God sent Philip to the eunuch. Philip, a born again Christian preached Christ to the eunuch. The eunuch believed and therefore baptized with the holy spirit. I don't think God is one to waste His time and the time of those who work for Him. He knew the eunuch would believe and therefore sent Philip to him. It was the eunuch's idea alone to be water baptized as they came across water. It does not say they were looking for water and nor does it say Philip told the eunuch he must be water baptized. It was not the water that saved him because he had already believed on Christ and was already save, born again and had eternal life. It's faith in Christ that gets one born again. The new birth occurs without one doing any works on his own such as it is with water baptism. We are saved by grace...not of works lest any man should boast. It's a free gift. The new birth automatically and instantaneously occurs when one truly believes that Christ died for the remission of their sins, was raised from the dead and brought unto them eternal life.

Kevin, water baptism remains with John the baptist of the OC who is now dead. Spirit baptism by Christ is an always present and living reality because through the new birth of the Spirit, Christ lives in us...it is Christ in us the hope of glory!

 

[Evangelion]

This last post of Agape's was very interesting. It gives us a special insight into the mind of the "Spirit baptism" believer. Watch closely...

First Agape cites the follow passage of Scripture:

• 
  Acts 10:47-48.
  Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?

Then Agape writes this:

It is not speaking of water baptism. The subject never even came up.

So when Peter wrote this...

• 
  Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized

...he didn't mean "water baptism"? The subject never came up?

Riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight.

 

[itsjustdave1988]

Unfortunately, I am not an eyewitness to Christ's ministry. Therefore, I must rely upon apostolic teaching to know what Christ taught and what being Christian means. These apostles were men. So, relying upon what men said is a necessity.

What these apostles said about Christ was passed on by word of mouth, then finally came to be written down. There were many various gospels and epistles used by the Christian Church in the first four centuries. Some, but not all of these were canonized.

Here's a web site showing a table of what was understood as "scripture" by theologians of the first four centuries:

http://www.ntcanon.org/table.shtml

As you can see, the canon of scripture was less than a unanimous agreement. The point being, the canon of scripture was not decided upon authoritatively until the Catholic Church declared the canon at the end of the fourth century. It is these and only these canonized books which are believed to be inspired by God.

However, that does not discount the other writings of the first three centuries as an authentic & faithful record of what our early Church Fathers actually believed. Think of it as an ancient Bible Commentary. Certainly you've read a Bible Commentary or two. Except these Bible Commentaries are written by men who more fully understood the ancient language in which the Bible was written, as well as the historical context.

After all, many of these men were given the fullness of gospel truth directly from eyewitnesses to Christ's ministry. So, can I easily disregard the teachings of the apostolic fathers? These men are the successors to the apostles. They too wrote about Christian doctrine in the 1st century, 2nd century, 3rd century ... the canon of scripture was not even decided until the end of the 4th century.

The Bible is our sacred and first source of apostolic teaching. However, I admittedly do not find the Bible to be self-interpreting. It is an ancient collection of documents written in many ancient languages. The fact that there are thousands of Protestant denominations, each teaching its own interpretation of the Bible is an indication that there can be many interpretations. Also, quite obviously, we believe differently about baptism based upon the same scripture. So, what can good Christians use as a tie breaker when it comes to rightly interpreting the Word of God? Can we close our eyes to the preponderance of ancient documents of the early Church? What then is Gospel Truth? It certainly can't be based upon who makes the better argument or majority vote. Truth is afterall truth, no matter how well it is understood or framed in an argument, and Truth, especially Divinely Revealed Truth is certainly not subject to majority vote.

So which authority do you adhere to? I, like many others need help ... teachers... people having some authority...the early Father's of the Church for example. I cannot easily disregard their interpretation of the Bible in favor of Protestant reformers whose commentaries appeared over a thousand years later, or any so-called scholar which may appear on this forum.

After all, Ignatius was a disciple of the apostle John. He knew him personally. He did not merely need to interpret John's gospel like you and I. He learned Christian doctrine from an eyewitness to Christ's ministry. His teaching should carry much weight. What did he write about the early Church and it's beliefs. He was a first century Bishop of Antioch, chosen to lead one of the most honored Christian communities of the first century. He was appointed Bishop after Evodius, who was himself appointed by the apostle Peter. Ignatius was martyred for his belief in Christ. Are you so confident that your interpretation is more authoritative than the teachings of Ignatius? How about Clement? Justin Martyr? You don't truly believe that your argument is the only unique perspective which is valid interpretation? Perhaps, in our own vain glory, we forget that these theological issues have been thoroughly addressed in the span of the last 2000 years.

Here's a site which lists many Father's of the Church and their writings:

http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/

Now to the original question ... Do I believe I should be baptised in water? Yes. Why? Scripture ... Acts 10:47-48. "Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" This was apostolic teaching from the very first century. And if I choose to be Christian, I choose, like the earliest Christians, to "devote myself to the apostles' instruction" (Acts 3,42) I am not, however, free to re-interpret scripture into an apostolic teaching that never was.

Now the real kicker ... how do I know what apostolic teaching is? My prayerful understanding of scripture, in context with other ancient Christian documents of the first 3 centuries, and because I'm Catholic, I am always disposed to the teaching authority of the Catholic Church. Might I be wrong? Certainly. Many theologians more learned than I have grappled with this and many doctrinal matters. However, on this matter of baptism, the early Father's of the Church are unanimous. Furthermore, the doctrine on this teaching appears to be unchallenged until the Protestant Reformers in the middle ages.

Surely, if my personal understanding of baptism was a novel interpretation having no linkage to true apostolic teaching, there would be many ancient documents which prove my interpretation incorrect in the context of apostolic teaching. I've looked. I find none. If you look. You will find many.

Here's just one ... The Didache. The Didache was a first century document (c. 100 AD) which was likely used to teach Christian doctrine to new converts to Christianity. Clement of Alexandria (150-215) second known leader of the catechetical school of Alexandria; and Didymus (313-398), head of the catechetical school at Alexandria included the Didache in their list of sacred scripture. It was not, ultimately canonized, however at least two heads of the catechetical school in Alexandria believed it to be authentic Christian teaching.

Here is what the Didache says about baptism: (http://www.newadvent.org/fathers/0714.htm)

"And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, in living water. But if you have no living water, baptize into other water; and if you cannot do so in cold water, do so in warm. But if you have neither, pour out water three times upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit."

Dave
http://www.geocities.com/dave_n_heidi/

 

[Evangelion]

Dave -

The point being, the canon of scripture was not decided upon authoritatively until the Catholic Church declared the canon at the end of the fourth century.

If this is true (and I don't believe it for a minute), then why did the Catholic Church "decide the canon authoritatively" all over again, in 1545?

 

[itsjustdave1988]

1 Pet 3:20-21 ... in the days of Noah during the building of the ark, in which a few persons, eight in all, were saved through water. This prefigured baptism, which saves you now. It is not a removal of dirt from the body but an appeal to God for a clear conscience, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ"

Why would Peter need to explain that baptism does not remove dirt from the body? This would make no sense if it was understood to mean baptism without water!

Dave

 

[OldShepherd]

Originally posted by Evangelion
Dave -

If this is true (and I don't believe it for a minute), then why did the Catholic Church "decide the canon authoritatively" all over again, in 1545?

Source? Context?

 

[Evangelion]

Council of Trent, 1545.