You are missing a Pentecostal hermeneutic in Acts. In some contexts, the filling of the Spirit was related to an experience subsequent to salvation (when one receives the Spirit/regenerated) evidenced by speaking in tongues. Believer's baptism had to be subsequent to repentant faith and should not be confused with salvation itself in any dispensation.
I am a dispensationalist of some sort, at least related to eschatology and covenants in the Bible.
John 3 is not talking about water baptism. It is definitely not talking about believer's or Christian baptism as practiced after His death and resurrection in Acts and the early church. The context and chronology precludes the possibility of Christian baptism.
Grace is an essential characteristic of the Living God. The OT God is not a stern judge while the NT God is meek and mild. There is one God who exhibits grace from the Garden of Eden to the End of time. Mercy is also not just a NT concept.
True faith includes obedience. Different displays of obedience to show that one has saving faith does not mean the outward ritual or law or work is what is salvific. There were 'thief on the cross' people in every age. If someone called on the Living God in the heat of battle, they could be eternally saved before imminent death, apart from any outward ceremony. This is the grace of God consistent with His justice.
Why is it the so-called 'Grace' believers seem to want to limit God's love and grace and reduce it to external legalisms. Jesus got at the heart of the law. He did not say the law saved anyone in itself. Relational trust in God has always been essential, not works of any kind. Just because works demonstrate saving faith, does not mean they are salvific.
The ungodly people I am talking about are the masses who get infant baptized or adult baptized in a church thinking this gives them fire insurance. They have no love for God or His people, they are selfish and unrepentant, they do not trust Christ and His finished work. They are merely religious, ritual-oriented, but have no clue about godliness or a relationship with Him. There are many dead, nominal denominations and believers who have rituals but no true gospel.
I am a dispensationalist of some sort, at least related to eschatology and covenants in the Bible.
John 3 is not talking about water baptism. It is definitely not talking about believer's or Christian baptism as practiced after His death and resurrection in Acts and the early church. The context and chronology precludes the possibility of Christian baptism.
Grace is an essential characteristic of the Living God. The OT God is not a stern judge while the NT God is meek and mild. There is one God who exhibits grace from the Garden of Eden to the End of time. Mercy is also not just a NT concept.
True faith includes obedience. Different displays of obedience to show that one has saving faith does not mean the outward ritual or law or work is what is salvific. There were 'thief on the cross' people in every age. If someone called on the Living God in the heat of battle, they could be eternally saved before imminent death, apart from any outward ceremony. This is the grace of God consistent with His justice.
Why is it the so-called 'Grace' believers seem to want to limit God's love and grace and reduce it to external legalisms. Jesus got at the heart of the law. He did not say the law saved anyone in itself. Relational trust in God has always been essential, not works of any kind. Just because works demonstrate saving faith, does not mean they are salvific.
The ungodly people I am talking about are the masses who get infant baptized or adult baptized in a church thinking this gives them fire insurance. They have no love for God or His people, they are selfish and unrepentant, they do not trust Christ and His finished work. They are merely religious, ritual-oriented, but have no clue about godliness or a relationship with Him. There are many dead, nominal denominations and believers who have rituals but no true gospel.