The Heretics Message to the World:Be Baptized to be Saved! (HOF thread)
- Thread starter Freak
- Start date
agape
New member
MAINLY I gave ample Scripture proving water baptism doesn't save anyone. Only SPIRIT BAPTISM can save.
quote:
I answered your question concerning the "cloven tongues of fire."
Is it suppose to show?? Tell me why the cloven tongues of fire needs to be present?? Does it say in the scriptures that cloven tongues need to sit upon anyone who is baptized with the holy spirit??
quote:
It's about time that you prove to me HOW, WITH SCRIPTURE, baptism with water is NECESSARY for salvation
PROVE IT WAS WATER BAPTISM.
The words in Matthew 28:19 were spoken by Jesus shortly before he ascended into heaven. He told them to teach all nations. However, the phrase "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" is never carried out by the apostles or anyone else in the early Church. In Acts 2:38, the first record after the original outpouring on the day of Pentecost, Peter "baptized in the name of Jesus Christ," not "in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost."
In Acts 8:16, "they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." In Acts 10:48, "And he [Peter] commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord." and in Acts 19:5, "When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." The book of Acts NEVER ONCE mentions the apostle's or anyone else ever carrying out the command given in Matthew 28:19. From the evidence, it is highly unlikely that the words "baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" in Matthew 28:19 were included in the original Word of God, but were added sometime later.
According to Acts 1:5, Jesus Christ told the Apostles right before his ascension; "...BUT YE SHALL BE BAPTIZED WITH THE HOLY GHOST..."
Kevin, I'm still waiting for your answers to my questions on how?
c.moore
New member
Hello Agape
you said:c.moore, you seem to be contradicting yourself. You say we "should" get baptized, but it has nothing to do with salvation. If it has nothing to do with salvation, then please tell me why WE SHOULD get water baptized.
Quote c.moore
We should get baptised only for the purpose of an outward sign for ourselves , and other as a example of what is has happen in the real spiritual baptism,which count today for God.
It like taken communion,as a rememberance of what Christ did for us , and the LOrd supper.
I know the water has no effect whatsoever on our salvation but it`s not a sin, and I know God is not angry when we do the water baptism.
Do you have a bible verse that say water baptism is a sin, and we are in disobedience when we practise this ritual or type of baptism??
You said:
Where does it say that it pleases God and that it has anything to do with being obedient in our Christian walk. You seem to be sitting on both sides of the fence?
Quote c.moore
Sorry i think you busted me on this. I admit the bible doesn´t say this i just asumed it says this to be truthful, but i am not sitting on the both sides of the fence I stand on the bible side,which I believe the water baptism is for the John the baptist time , and John said jesus will come with a new baptism which is the Holy Ghost baptism which everybody that was a believer was waitning or tarrying for praise God.
I know sacrifice of animals is also passed away and we have the new spiritual new birth and spiritual blood of Jesus, and the spiritual faith, and spiritual Love of God in us, and God who is love can live in our temple not like the old testament just on somebody praise the Lord.
Thank you Agape for correction and advice Proverb:12:1: Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth reproof is brutish.
Proverb:12:2: A good man obtaineth favour of the LORD: but a man of wicked devices will he condemn.
God bless you
you said:c.moore, you seem to be contradicting yourself. You say we "should" get baptized, but it has nothing to do with salvation. If it has nothing to do with salvation, then please tell me why WE SHOULD get water baptized.
Quote c.moore
We should get baptised only for the purpose of an outward sign for ourselves , and other as a example of what is has happen in the real spiritual baptism,which count today for God.
It like taken communion,as a rememberance of what Christ did for us , and the LOrd supper.
I know the water has no effect whatsoever on our salvation but it`s not a sin, and I know God is not angry when we do the water baptism.
Do you have a bible verse that say water baptism is a sin, and we are in disobedience when we practise this ritual or type of baptism??
You said:
Where does it say that it pleases God and that it has anything to do with being obedient in our Christian walk. You seem to be sitting on both sides of the fence?
Quote c.moore
Sorry i think you busted me on this. I admit the bible doesn´t say this i just asumed it says this to be truthful, but i am not sitting on the both sides of the fence I stand on the bible side,which I believe the water baptism is for the John the baptist time , and John said jesus will come with a new baptism which is the Holy Ghost baptism which everybody that was a believer was waitning or tarrying for praise God.
I know sacrifice of animals is also passed away and we have the new spiritual new birth and spiritual blood of Jesus, and the spiritual faith, and spiritual Love of God in us, and God who is love can live in our temple not like the old testament just on somebody praise the Lord.
Thank you Agape for correction and advice Proverb:12:1: Whoso loveth instruction loveth knowledge: but he that hateth reproof is brutish.
Proverb:12:2: A good man obtaineth favour of the LORD: but a man of wicked devices will he condemn.
God bless you
c.moore
New member
No,:nono:
How can you know about Love until the Love comes in you ?
Jesus has obeyed and He can obey all the laws , and only through Jesus are we righteous, and have instant salvation by the blood and repentance that is salvation in the Name of Jesus.
After we are saved then we learn how to obey God and learn to Love our neighbor, and all the reat comes after in our walk with Jesus.
Ro:10:10: For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.
God bless
c.moore
New member
As long as it?s a spiritual baptism that put us into Christ then you are on the right track.
To get into Christ kevin, is the spiritual or literally like the water baptismal being literally practise?????
Yes ,we must free accept with our hearts , and confess with our mouth, and believe ,if you want to call this conditional.
everybody I tell about this says this is too easy and simple , and really no works,and they say it to good to be true.
God bless
Kevin
New member
Agape,
No you didn't.
The falling of the HS and resting upon people's heads does not save anybody! You have not proven this at all. This very thing happened to people in the OT (Numbers 11:25), and it certainly didn't save them.
The purpose in showing you those scriptures was to show Biblical consistency that when the HS falls upon somebody, that it is indeed visible. And yes, it does rest upon their heads. Another place it rested upon the heads of people is in Numbers 11:25. More consistency.
I have provided scriptures that show this consistency. Where are your scriptures that show otherwise? Your assertions are nothing without scriptual backing.
Also, I noticed that you didn't comment on the scripture that I showed where people believed the gospel and were baptized, yet the HS did not fall upon them (Acts 8:5-16), which you claim happens to everybody upon belief of the gospel. Why didn't if fall upon them when they believed?
In Mark 16:16, Jesus is speaking of the same baptism that He commanded in the Great Commisson. After giving this commission, the apostles went out and baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, which had not, nor could have, been done before the death on the cross. Do you think it was mere coincidence that people were baptized in the name of Jesus beginning after the Great Commission?
The verses I listed (Acts 8:38, Acts 10:47-48, Acts: 2:38), show that this is water baptism. What was the eunuch baptized in after being preached Jesus? Water. After the HS fell upon the Gentiles, Peter commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord in verse Acts 10:48. The preceeding verse shows that it is done with water (can anyone forbid WATER that these should not be BAPTIZED). Most people can see this connection, you are the first I've come accross that cannot see this plain teaching. Then in Acts 2:38, people were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, which we know from Acts 10:47-48 that it uses water.
All of these show consistency that people were preached Jesus and were baptized in water in the name of the Lord for the remission of sins. There is ONE baptism, and this is what was practiced, and still is today. Since there is ONE baptism, it wouldn't make sense for the eunuch to be baptized with water and the Gentiles with another method, especially since Peter said "Can anyone forbid WATER that these should not be BAPTIZED...".
Um... Jesus told them more than that. Jesus started speaking to them about the Great Commission in verse 18 and finished what He said to them in verse 20. Everything commanded those verses were spoken to the apostles for them to carry out. Everything. In those verses, Jesus tells the apostels (man) to carry out the following commandments:
Every one of those commandmetns were give to man to carry out... everyone of them, including baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
That's just ridiculous! Why would Jesus tell His apostles to do something which they could not do?! The fact of the matter is, that they did. They did it by baptizing in the name of Jesus Christ. What, do you not know that the three are one (1 John5:7)? Jesus and the Father are one (John 10:30), and the HS is God's Spirit. So seeing how they are one, when you baptize in the name of Jesus, you are being baptized in the name of the Father and HS as well, for they are one.
Jesus commanded the apostles in the Great Commission. What was the result? A perfect example of that result in Acts 2, when the first gospel sermon was preached. It was preached, and as a result of that preaching, they were baptized in the name of the Lord.
I'm not disputing that. Jesus even told them what the purpose of being baptized with the HS was, that they would recieve power, and this is exactly what happened in Acts 2:3-4. This is not being baptized into His death, nor is the baptism commanded at the Great Commission, for man cannot baptize with the HS, but Jesus can. This is NOT the ONE baptism spoken of in Ephesians 4:5. The ONE baptism is the one commanded of the apostles, the one that was practiced, baptism in the name of the Lord.
How what?
No you didn't.
The falling of the HS and resting upon people's heads does not save anybody! You have not proven this at all. This very thing happened to people in the OT (Numbers 11:25), and it certainly didn't save them.
The purpose in showing you those scriptures was to show Biblical consistency that when the HS falls upon somebody, that it is indeed visible. And yes, it does rest upon their heads. Another place it rested upon the heads of people is in Numbers 11:25. More consistency.
I have provided scriptures that show this consistency. Where are your scriptures that show otherwise? Your assertions are nothing without scriptual backing.
Also, I noticed that you didn't comment on the scripture that I showed where people believed the gospel and were baptized, yet the HS did not fall upon them (Acts 8:5-16), which you claim happens to everybody upon belief of the gospel. Why didn't if fall upon them when they believed?
In Mark 16:16, Jesus is speaking of the same baptism that He commanded in the Great Commisson. After giving this commission, the apostles went out and baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, which had not, nor could have, been done before the death on the cross. Do you think it was mere coincidence that people were baptized in the name of Jesus beginning after the Great Commission?
The verses I listed (Acts 8:38, Acts 10:47-48, Acts: 2:38), show that this is water baptism. What was the eunuch baptized in after being preached Jesus? Water. After the HS fell upon the Gentiles, Peter commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord in verse Acts 10:48. The preceeding verse shows that it is done with water (can anyone forbid WATER that these should not be BAPTIZED). Most people can see this connection, you are the first I've come accross that cannot see this plain teaching. Then in Acts 2:38, people were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, which we know from Acts 10:47-48 that it uses water.
All of these show consistency that people were preached Jesus and were baptized in water in the name of the Lord for the remission of sins. There is ONE baptism, and this is what was practiced, and still is today. Since there is ONE baptism, it wouldn't make sense for the eunuch to be baptized with water and the Gentiles with another method, especially since Peter said "Can anyone forbid WATER that these should not be BAPTIZED...".
Um... Jesus told them more than that. Jesus started speaking to them about the Great Commission in verse 18 and finished what He said to them in verse 20. Everything commanded those verses were spoken to the apostles for them to carry out. Everything. In those verses, Jesus tells the apostels (man) to carry out the following commandments:
- Make disciples of all nations
- Baptize in the name of the Fahter, Son, and Holy Spirit
- Teach people to observe all things that Jesus had commanded them
Every one of those commandmetns were give to man to carry out... everyone of them, including baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
That's just ridiculous! Why would Jesus tell His apostles to do something which they could not do?! The fact of the matter is, that they did. They did it by baptizing in the name of Jesus Christ. What, do you not know that the three are one (1 John5:7)? Jesus and the Father are one (John 10:30), and the HS is God's Spirit. So seeing how they are one, when you baptize in the name of Jesus, you are being baptized in the name of the Father and HS as well, for they are one.
Jesus commanded the apostles in the Great Commission. What was the result? A perfect example of that result in Acts 2, when the first gospel sermon was preached. It was preached, and as a result of that preaching, they were baptized in the name of the Lord.
I'm not disputing that. Jesus even told them what the purpose of being baptized with the HS was, that they would recieve power, and this is exactly what happened in Acts 2:3-4. This is not being baptized into His death, nor is the baptism commanded at the Great Commission, for man cannot baptize with the HS, but Jesus can. This is NOT the ONE baptism spoken of in Ephesians 4:5. The ONE baptism is the one commanded of the apostles, the one that was practiced, baptism in the name of the Lord.
How what?
Last edited:
Kevin
New member
c.moore,
I can assure you that baptism in the name of the Lord is spiritual.
However, this is not the same as Spirit baptism (when the HS falls upon people and rests on their head), such as in Acts 10:44. This is not being baptized into His death, nor is the baptism commanded at the Great Commission, for man cannot baptize with the HS, but Jesus can. And the great commission was given for MAN to carry out, not Jesus. This is NOT the ONE baptism spoken of in Ephesians 4:5. The ONE baptism is the one commanded OF THE APOSTLES, the one that was practiced, baptism in the name of the Lord.
I can assure you that baptism in the name of the Lord is spiritual.
However, this is not the same as Spirit baptism (when the HS falls upon people and rests on their head), such as in Acts 10:44. This is not being baptized into His death, nor is the baptism commanded at the Great Commission, for man cannot baptize with the HS, but Jesus can. And the great commission was given for MAN to carry out, not Jesus. This is NOT the ONE baptism spoken of in Ephesians 4:5. The ONE baptism is the one commanded OF THE APOSTLES, the one that was practiced, baptism in the name of the Lord.c.moore, thanks for the response.
God Bless,
Francisco
After we are justified by the grace of God through faith in Jesus Christ, do we have to love our neighbor?
Can you give me that 'instant salvation' verse please?
After we're saved, do we have to obey God and love our neighbor? If we choose to disobey God and hate our neighbor AFTER we are saved, does that affect our salvation?
God Bless,
Francisco
Last edited:
c.moore:
What is this about?
Read the end of the discourse between me and Freak:
What is this about?
In case you didn't notice, Freak agreed with the statement about jsutification that I cut and pasted from the Catechism of the Catholic Church. He and I both agreed as to the statement I cut and pasted from the Baptist Faith and Message page of the SBC site. We are in total agreement, we are justified by the grace of God through our faith in Christ Jesus.
Read the end of the discourse between me and Freak:
Do you agree with me and Freak about justification?
Kevin
New member
agape,
I don't find that funny at all. I am not a liar. You have not proven that baptism (with water) does not play a role in our salvation. You have no evidence that I'm a liar. Change your name, you do no justice to it. :down: I'm not the only one who's noticed your poor attitude.
How do you know that the cloves were not there? Because it's omitted from that particular passage? All you have is an arguement of omission. I, however have two passages that show that when the HS falls upon somebody and rests on their heads, which is exactly what is happening in Numbers 11:25, that it is a visible phenomenon. You have NO passages that would show that it's not visible. Omission does not mean it wasn't visible.
Let's say I have one vehicle, and it is a red Toyota truck. The sentence "Kevin pulled up in his red Toyota." describes that I have a truck that is red and it's a Toyota. Now, if you see a sentence that refers to that same vehicle, and it says "Kevin pulled up in his truck.", does that mean that it's no longer red, or that it's a Toyota, just because it's not mention in that sentence? NO!
Well the same applies to the HS. It is the one Sprit of God. There are biblical accounts of it falling upon people. There are consistent verses that indicate that it is a visible phenomenon and that it rests upon people's heads. In Numbers 11:25, it rested upon their heads, just as it did in the two accounts were it was defined as being visible. Your arguement of omission means nothing light of the evidence that I have that shows that it's a visible phenominon. You have no biblical evidence to show that the falling of the HS in Numbers 11:25 would be any different than cases that I've mentioned. None.
There's that typical answer from you that I spoke about. Keep it coming, it only discredits your position. :up:
Why didn't it manifest? According to you, a believer, upon hearing the gospel, is baptized with the HS, just as it happened with the Gentiles. What went wrong?
Those people were NOT baptized, as the Gentiles were in verse 44, with the Holy Spirit in the first place, which is what I've been trying to tell you:
15) Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
16) For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
If they were baptized by the HS, just as the Gentiles were in verse Acts 10:44, then there would be no need for the apostles to come up and lay their hands upon them so they could recieve it, for it had not yet fallen upon them!
Yes, after the apostles laid their hands upon them. The HS had not fallen upon them before that point. Again, why didn't it fall upon them as it did the Gentiles, since this supposedly happens to EVERYBODY (according to you) when the believe the gospel?
Yup, this is the baptism that the apostles practiced, which only makes sense because it's the one that Jesus commanded in the great commission. Acts 10:47-48 proves that it is done with water. The eunuch baptism further proves this.
Being baptized in the name of the Lord does impart the gift of the HS (Acts 2:38), but it's not the same as having the HS fall upon you giving you the ability to do miraculous, which is Spirit baptism (Acts 2:3-4, Acts 10:44).
The gift of the HS spoken of in Acts 2:38 is literally the gift of God's Spirit being within you (Romans 8:9-11), which, if it is in you, which is through baptism (Acts 2:38), God will give our mortal bodies life through His Spirit which dwells in you (Romans 8:9-11). Again, this is different than being baptized by the HS as in Acts 10:44, for if it the same, then there wouldn't have been a need for the apostles to come up and lay their hands upon the Samaritans after they had already been baptized in the name of the Lord. Again, the HS hadn't fallen upon them until the apostles showed up.
"Correct" the situation? Did Jesus mess up or something? After all, it is He who baptizes with the HS! Obviously He didn't mess up... there was nothing to correct! The Samaritans simply had not had the HS fall upon them until the apostles showed up, which is proof that EVERYBODY does NOT have the HS fall upon them at the moment of believing the gospel! If that was true, it would have happened, but IT DIDN'T.
Yes, I'm talking about Matt. 28, 19, and no, I'm not mistaken. A commission is defined as the authority to carry out a particular task or duty. In Matt. 28: 19,20, Jesus gave them some tasks:
Jesus gave them a commission! Was it "great"? You bet it was, for gave this commission for them to carry out into ALL NATIONS. It was Great, and it was a Commission; hence The Great Commission!
Since you merely copy and pasted from you previous post and ignored my already given response to this, I will do the same:
Um... Jesus told them more than that. Jesus started speaking to them about the Great Commission in verse 18 and finished what He said to them in verse 20. Everything commanded those verses were spoken to the apostles for them to carry out. Everything. In those verses, Jesus tells the apostels (man) to carry out the following commandments:
Every one of those commandmetns were give to man to carry out... everyone of them, including baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
That's just ridiculous! Why would Jesus tell His apostles to do something which they could not do?! The fact of the matter is, that they did. They did it by baptizing in the name of Jesus Christ. What, do you not know that the three are one (1 John5:7)? Jesus and the Father are one (John 10:30), and the HS is God's Spirit. So seeing how they are one, when you baptize in the name of Jesus, you are being baptized in the name of the Father and HS as well, for they are one.
Jesus commanded the apostles in the Great Commission. What was the result? A perfect example of that result in Acts 2, when the first gospel sermon was preached. It was preached, and as a result of that preaching, they were baptized in the name of the Lord.
I'm not disputing that. Jesus even told them what the purpose of being baptized with the HS was, that they would recieve power, and this is exactly what happened in Acts 2:3-4. This is not being baptized into His death, nor is the baptism commanded at the Great Commission, for man cannot baptize with the HS, but Jesus can. This is NOT the ONE baptism spoken of in Ephesians 4:5. The ONE baptism is the one commanded of the apostles, the one that was practiced, baptism in the name of the Lord.
I've already answered why it's necessary for salvation. See my comments on Mark 16:16, where Jesus includes baptism in the requirements for salvation, and also my response when you asked me to prove this is speaking of water baptism.
I've also answered how spirit baptism does not save, because it was not commanded of us. The baptism that Jesus instituted was commanded for MAN to do. MAN cannot baptize with the HS.
YOU ARE A LIAR AND "YOU" KNOW IT.
I don't find that funny at all. I am not a liar. You have not proven that baptism (with water) does not play a role in our salvation. You have no evidence that I'm a liar. Change your name, you do no justice to it. :down: I'm not the only one who's noticed your poor attitude.
How do you know that the cloves were not there? Because it's omitted from that particular passage? All you have is an arguement of omission. I, however have two passages that show that when the HS falls upon somebody and rests on their heads, which is exactly what is happening in Numbers 11:25, that it is a visible phenomenon. You have NO passages that would show that it's not visible. Omission does not mean it wasn't visible.
Let's say I have one vehicle, and it is a red Toyota truck. The sentence "Kevin pulled up in his red Toyota." describes that I have a truck that is red and it's a Toyota. Now, if you see a sentence that refers to that same vehicle, and it says "Kevin pulled up in his truck.", does that mean that it's no longer red, or that it's a Toyota, just because it's not mention in that sentence? NO!
Well the same applies to the HS. It is the one Sprit of God. There are biblical accounts of it falling upon people. There are consistent verses that indicate that it is a visible phenomenon and that it rests upon people's heads. In Numbers 11:25, it rested upon their heads, just as it did in the two accounts were it was defined as being visible. Your arguement of omission means nothing light of the evidence that I have that shows that it's a visible phenominon. You have no biblical evidence to show that the falling of the HS in Numbers 11:25 would be any different than cases that I've mentioned. None.
There's that typical answer from you that I spoke about. Keep it coming, it only discredits your position. :up:
Why didn't it manifest? According to you, a believer, upon hearing the gospel, is baptized with the HS, just as it happened with the Gentiles. What went wrong?
Those people were NOT baptized, as the Gentiles were in verse 44, with the Holy Spirit in the first place, which is what I've been trying to tell you:
15) Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
16) For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
If they were baptized by the HS, just as the Gentiles were in verse Acts 10:44, then there would be no need for the apostles to come up and lay their hands upon them so they could recieve it, for it had not yet fallen upon them!
Yes, after the apostles laid their hands upon them. The HS had not fallen upon them before that point. Again, why didn't it fall upon them as it did the Gentiles, since this supposedly happens to EVERYBODY (according to you) when the believe the gospel?
Yup, this is the baptism that the apostles practiced, which only makes sense because it's the one that Jesus commanded in the great commission. Acts 10:47-48 proves that it is done with water. The eunuch baptism further proves this.
Being baptized in the name of the Lord does impart the gift of the HS (Acts 2:38), but it's not the same as having the HS fall upon you giving you the ability to do miraculous, which is Spirit baptism (Acts 2:3-4, Acts 10:44).
The gift of the HS spoken of in Acts 2:38 is literally the gift of God's Spirit being within you (Romans 8:9-11), which, if it is in you, which is through baptism (Acts 2:38), God will give our mortal bodies life through His Spirit which dwells in you (Romans 8:9-11). Again, this is different than being baptized by the HS as in Acts 10:44, for if it the same, then there wouldn't have been a need for the apostles to come up and lay their hands upon the Samaritans after they had already been baptized in the name of the Lord. Again, the HS hadn't fallen upon them until the apostles showed up.
"Correct" the situation? Did Jesus mess up or something? After all, it is He who baptizes with the HS! Obviously He didn't mess up... there was nothing to correct! The Samaritans simply had not had the HS fall upon them until the apostles showed up, which is proof that EVERYBODY does NOT have the HS fall upon them at the moment of believing the gospel! If that was true, it would have happened, but IT DIDN'T.
Yes, I'm talking about Matt. 28, 19, and no, I'm not mistaken. A commission is defined as the authority to carry out a particular task or duty. In Matt. 28: 19,20, Jesus gave them some tasks:
- Make disciples of all nations
- Baptize in the name of the Fahter, Son, and Holy Spirit
- Teach people to observe all things that Jesus had commanded them
Jesus gave them a commission! Was it "great"? You bet it was, for gave this commission for them to carry out into ALL NATIONS. It was Great, and it was a Commission; hence The Great Commission!
Since you merely copy and pasted from you previous post and ignored my already given response to this, I will do the same:
Um... Jesus told them more than that. Jesus started speaking to them about the Great Commission in verse 18 and finished what He said to them in verse 20. Everything commanded those verses were spoken to the apostles for them to carry out. Everything. In those verses, Jesus tells the apostels (man) to carry out the following commandments:
- Make disciples of all nations
- Baptize in the name of the Fahter, Son, and Holy Spirit
- Teach people to observe all things that Jesus had commanded them
Every one of those commandmetns were give to man to carry out... everyone of them, including baptism in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.
That's just ridiculous! Why would Jesus tell His apostles to do something which they could not do?! The fact of the matter is, that they did. They did it by baptizing in the name of Jesus Christ. What, do you not know that the three are one (1 John5:7)? Jesus and the Father are one (John 10:30), and the HS is God's Spirit. So seeing how they are one, when you baptize in the name of Jesus, you are being baptized in the name of the Father and HS as well, for they are one.
Jesus commanded the apostles in the Great Commission. What was the result? A perfect example of that result in Acts 2, when the first gospel sermon was preached. It was preached, and as a result of that preaching, they were baptized in the name of the Lord.
I'm not disputing that. Jesus even told them what the purpose of being baptized with the HS was, that they would recieve power, and this is exactly what happened in Acts 2:3-4. This is not being baptized into His death, nor is the baptism commanded at the Great Commission, for man cannot baptize with the HS, but Jesus can. This is NOT the ONE baptism spoken of in Ephesians 4:5. The ONE baptism is the one commanded of the apostles, the one that was practiced, baptism in the name of the Lord.
I've already answered why it's necessary for salvation. See my comments on Mark 16:16, where Jesus includes baptism in the requirements for salvation, and also my response when you asked me to prove this is speaking of water baptism.
I've also answered how spirit baptism does not save, because it was not commanded of us. The baptism that Jesus instituted was commanded for MAN to do. MAN cannot baptize with the HS.
Last edited:
c.moore
New member
Originally posted by Kevin
c.moore,
I can assure you that baptism in the name of the Lord is spiritual.
I am glad you admit it was for the apostles of that time but for this time and day the baptism is what John said, in John 1:33.
The old water baptism ritual for that day before jesus died was effective. After Acts the spiritual baptism was the new baptism that God gave us praise God.
Kevin you are free to do as you want but if you are teaching to others this water baptism is a part of salvation you will be judged for this before God very strong when this is false teaching.
I could say we must kill animals to be forgiven of our sins as a ritual foer Christ or teach people must be circumcized but I will be charged for this false teaching, and you and myself know this is also past away, and the same is with water baptism having any effect on our salvation, and no matter how many lambs you slaughter, it will have no effect on our sins, only faith, and the spiritual belief and trust in Jesus Christ.
Be blessed
c.moore,
Thanks for the response:
I'm glad to see you are also in agreement with these two statements from the Catholic and Baptist faiths. It usually amazes my Protestant friends any time I show them that Catholics believe the same thing they do, particularly after they have been taught repeatedly that Catholics think they can 'justify themselves' through works. That's one of those anti-Catholic fallacies that has been propagated for so long in this country that nearly all Protestants take it as truth without even asking.
But we are in disagreement about water baptism. There are some exceptions to the necessity of water baptism for salvation, but generally we see water baptism as inseparable from baptism by the Spirit and see it as something Jesus told us we had to do. The early church also saw water baptism this way as evidenced by the writings of the early fathers, and even prior to that, scripture also shows the early churched believed water baptism saves:
18 'For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21 There is also an antitype WHICH NOW SAVES US--baptism, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,' 1 Peter 3:18-21
c.moore, I'm not trying to change your mind on this issue, but out of curiosity, how do you explain this verse if water baptism does not save?
Your Brother in Christ,
Francisco
PS - I know it is off topic, but what are the answers to the questions I asked you regarding how obeying god and loving your neighbor affects salvation. You can send me a PM if you don't want to post here, or start a new thread. Thanks!
Thanks for the response:
I'm glad to see you are also in agreement with these two statements from the Catholic and Baptist faiths. It usually amazes my Protestant friends any time I show them that Catholics believe the same thing they do, particularly after they have been taught repeatedly that Catholics think they can 'justify themselves' through works. That's one of those anti-Catholic fallacies that has been propagated for so long in this country that nearly all Protestants take it as truth without even asking.
But we are in disagreement about water baptism. There are some exceptions to the necessity of water baptism for salvation, but generally we see water baptism as inseparable from baptism by the Spirit and see it as something Jesus told us we had to do. The early church also saw water baptism this way as evidenced by the writings of the early fathers, and even prior to that, scripture also shows the early churched believed water baptism saves:
18 'For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21 There is also an antitype WHICH NOW SAVES US--baptism, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,' 1 Peter 3:18-21
c.moore, I'm not trying to change your mind on this issue, but out of curiosity, how do you explain this verse if water baptism does not save?
Your Brother in Christ,
Francisco
PS - I know it is off topic, but what are the answers to the questions I asked you regarding how obeying god and loving your neighbor affects salvation. You can send me a PM if you don't want to post here, or start a new thread. Thanks!
Last edited:
agape
New member
Originally posted by Kevin
agape,
The Word of God alone proves you have lied over and over again, just as you lie when you say I have not provided ample scripture to prove that water baptism does not save. You just don't believe the Truth of God's Word...period. As far as having a poor attitude, oh holier than thou like the rest of the hypocrites, I suggest you study on the word "AGAPE" and work on your own life. You lie about God's Word, always twisting and turning the Truth around to make it say what it does not say. Say what you like, it will NEVER change spirit baptism into water.
I know the cloves were not there because the one and only time phrase "cloven tongues like as of fire" did not occur till the day of Pentecost and it has NEVER been mentioned again any place in the bible. So, for you to put it everywhere else is your private interpretation and speculation. It was a "phenomenon" originated by God for that special occasion. The holy spirit "falling on" people is NOT the same thing as the "cloven tongues like as of fire" SAT UPON each of them in Acts 2:3. Your truck thing is really a very ridiculous analogy to use to try to prove that "cloven tongues like as of fire" sat on the people in Numbers, when the initial outpouring of the gift of holy spirit didn't ever occur till the day of Pentecost. Those people in Numbers were not born again and did not speak with tongues. Two entirely different situations. How can you take what is written in the NT and apply it to the OT, when Jesus Christ had not even come, died and was resurrected, which, BTW, made what occurred on the day of Pentecost possible. This is the end of the conversation on this subject matter as far as I am concerned.
I am very tired and disgusted with your PRIVATE INTERPRETATIONS They are nothing but a waste of time since you only give YOUR PI and nothing more.
CASE CLOSED: YOU HAVE NOT, IN ANY WAY, SHAPE OR FORM PROVEN THAT WATER BAPTISM IS NECESSARY FOR SALVATION AND THAT IT WAS PRACTICED AFTER THE DAY OF PENTECOST AS RIGHT AND COMMON DOCTINE ACCORDING TO THE SCRIPTURES! AND THAT'S FINAL.
JESUS CHRIST LEAVES YOU WITH: JOHN TRULY BAPTIZED WITH WATER BUT...BUT...BUT....CONTRAST...CONTRAST...CONTRAST...YE SHALL BE BAPTIZED "WITH THE HOLY GHOST...."
I hope one day you will finally become meek to the Word and see the TRUTH of the Scriptures; know and experience the greatness of the gift of holy spirit, which Jesus made available to us through his death and resurrection.
agape,
You should stop resorting to ad hominem attacks on everyone you disagree with and spend more time reading and praying on scripture. You are the one that directly contradicts scripture, and twists scripture's meaning with your convoluted reasoning. For example:
'18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us[5] to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited[6] in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21 There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,' 1 Peter 3:18-21
Scripture is abundantly clear on this. The water through which the eight members of Noah's family were saved is the antitype of water baptism, which Peter says NOW SAVES US.
OK agape, it's your turn. Give us your convoluted reason why 'WHICH NOW SAVES US' doesn't really mean what it says.
Francisco
You should stop resorting to ad hominem attacks on everyone you disagree with and spend more time reading and praying on scripture. You are the one that directly contradicts scripture, and twists scripture's meaning with your convoluted reasoning. For example:
'18 For Christ also suffered once for sins, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us[5] to God, being put to death in the flesh but made alive by the Spirit, 19 by whom also He went and preached to the spirits in prison, 20 who formerly were disobedient, when once the Divine longsuffering waited[6] in the days of Noah, while the ark was being prepared, in which a few, that is, eight souls, were saved through water. 21 There is also an antitype which now saves us--baptism, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,' 1 Peter 3:18-21
Scripture is abundantly clear on this. The water through which the eight members of Noah's family were saved is the antitype of water baptism, which Peter says NOW SAVES US.
OK agape, it's your turn. Give us your convoluted reason why 'WHICH NOW SAVES US' doesn't really mean what it says.
Francisco
agape
New member
Anastasis, YOU should stop resorting to ad hominem attacks on everyone you disagree with and spend more time reading and praying on scripture, for example, I Peter 3:18-21--what happened in Noah's day was not a "literal baptism in water"
as we later see as being administered by John the baptist.
Peter is not relating "water baptism" to our "spiritual baptism" as such ... he is speaking of SALVATION, and he compares the great salvation which those in the days of Noah experienced as they were saved in the arch through the waters of the flood to believers now being saved on the grounds of Christ's accomplishments which are affirmed by his resurrection and thus our baptism into his name is effective and provides salvation for us leading to an everlasting life.