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

[drbrumley]

Kevin,

Are you suggesting that the falling of the HS in Acts 10:44 didn't appear as burning tongues?

I'm not suggesting, I'm telling you. Where in Scripture does it tell you Acts 10:44 manifestation of the Holy Spirit is Cloven Tongues of Fire? Your grasping for straws .

Do you have any evidence to support this?

Nope but neither do you to support that so we are even in that regard.

In Acts 2:3, when the HS fell upon the apostles, it was described as being as tongues of fire.

That's what it says.

It gave them the ability to do miraculous things.

This is true, but the Apostles were doing "supernatural" things even before this, so what's your point?

Why wouldn't it have happened in the same manner (burning tongues) to the Gentiles in Acts 10:44?

In my opinion, if this was the case, I'm pretty sure Scripture would have mentioned it.

As I pointed out earlier, in Numbers 11:25, the HS rested upon their heads, just like in Acts 2:3.

Yes, it seems to match. Still doesn't prove or provide any evidence of what your assuming.

If that's what it looks like in Acts 2:3, then what's to say it didn't happen when the same Spirit fell upon anybody?

This is where the problem is. Because of the flawed logic that you have saying:

I won't consider myself "saved" until Jesus judges me worthy of salvation at the judgement seat

You come up with highly flawed theology that says:

If spirit baptism saves us, then new converts would have the tongues of fire upon accpeting Christ.

Where is the Scripture for this? You can't provide it because IT ISN'T THERE. Just step back a minute and really think this over. Please Pray about it. Then you say:

The Spirit spoken of in Numbers 11:25 is the same Spirit spoken of in Acts 10:44.

Agreed.

In both cases, that same Spirit had the same effect upon the recipients - miraculous abilities.

True again, but it's pretty funny you seem to be backing away from Cloven Tongues of Fire.

If one is going to claim that the falling of the HS is what put those people in Acts 10:44 into Christ, then, to be consistent, one would have to hold the same thought for the people in Numbers, even though they were in a different dispensation; because it was the same Spirit with the same effect.

Agreed. Which leads me to this: from previous post, I said:

But all these men believed the message that God gave them and they were all saved on the basis of faith.

Again, you admitted that the baptism in the name of the Lord is what puts us into Christ.

Yep, I stand by that statement.

Well, the baptism in the name of the Lord, which is done with water, was done AFTER the HS fell upon the Gentiles in Acts 10:47-48.

Agreed for the most part. Only problem with that statement is you assume water is included now. It was then, but not now. In this DISPENSATION.

That is what puts us into Christ, not the falling of the HS, which is why Peter had them baptized in the name of the Lord after the HS fell on them.

See above answer.

Next post deals with "State of Salvation." Man how Satan has duped people.

 

[Apollos]

Jerry -

You definitely have an agenda to pursue. So instead of ignoring most of what I am posting, why not just pursue that agenda.

 

[Kevin]

Agape,

Btw, you "continue" to show a great lack of common sense and logic and disrespect when it comes to the scriptures.

Coming from a man who can't even admit that "with the mouth" means actually means using your mouth, your comment means very little.

As far as the active mouthy thing goes which you still got wrong...remember...got off the merry-go-round with you on that one. Ta Ta ...

Yet more evidence of blind pride at it's best! Go ask anybody with basic intelligence what it means to do something "with the mouth". Then, tell them that you think it means not actually using the mouth... and watch their reaction. LOL! You're not doing any favors for yourself. Pathetic... and you can't even admit it... even more pathetic!

 

[JustAChristian]

Great Job!!

Great Job!!

Kevin,

You are taking a lot of hit but you are standing up real well. I have started a new thread recently ; "Does The Scriptures Support Eternal Punishment" and have been real busy like you. Keep up the good work.

JustAChristian

 

[H'mong]

Hi Kevin,

You said,

Actually, Romans 6:1-11, which is speaking of baptism, does indeed support the idea that baptism makes us born again into Christ.

I have no quarell with Romans 6:1-11. Baptism is a pledge of a good conscience towards God. For believers, going under the water shows that our old self has been buried and of the eternal life we have in Christ and the promise of a future resurrection.

Nowhere in scripture will you find baptism defined in this manner. This is the common teaching of man, not of God. Romans 6 speaks of what baptism does for us... that it allows us to put away our old man of sin and be born again into Christ. This is what baptism does for us. It's not a declaration, and nor is it an outward show of faith for other Christians.

Actually it is espoused in 1 Peter 3:21. Peter does say "Baptism now saves you" - but also adds "Not the removal of dirt from the flesh,the pledge of a good conscience toward God - through the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Peter is stating that Baptism is the symbolic expression us being born again. It is one's public confession of the work God has done in them. The other ordinance, the Lord's Supper also expresses this each time we paratake it when we comune with His Body and Blood in remembering His death and testifying of the work God has done in us also. Both Baptism and the Lord's Supper are ouward declarations of an inward change that has occured in our lives.

Grace to you

 

[Evangelion]

JAC -

Kevin,

You are taking a lot of hit but you are standing up real well.

The hits are nothing but powder puffs. Kevin's good for it. :up:

 

[agape]

Originally posted by Evangelion
JAC -
The hits are nothing but powder puffs. Kevin's good for it. :up:

Standing up well with those who believe the same lies maybe...but standing up well with God and the truth of His Word is an entirely different story of which none of you are accomplishing. It's your private interpretations that are nothing but "powder puff" :down:

 

[c.moore]

It's your private interpretations that are nothing but "powder puff"

That is so true Agape:up:

God bless

 

[Apollos]

"Believing" on the Lord Jesus...

"Believing" on the Lord Jesus...

The Jailor at Philippi –

Acts 16:30 – Sirs, what must I do to be saved?

Even awakening out of sleep the jailor asked if there was something he must do to be saved.

Paul and Silas said – Believe on the Lord Jesus. Ah yes, there is something for man to do to be saved. (But exactly what was he to believe? What did they mean by “believe on the Lord”?)

And they spake the word of the Lord unto [the jailor]. (What did they say? How much of the word did the jailor receive/need to know before he could be saved? At what point was the jailor saved?)

The same hour of the night, the jailor was baptized – immediately! (What is the rush? Why the urgency?)
<<<<*>>>>

There was something for man TO DO to be saved. This was to “believe on the Lord”.

To believe “on the Lord” means to accept and do what He said. In Acts 2:21 and 22:16 it is referred to as “calling on the name of the Lord”. In a fuller sense, this means to appeal to the authority of the Lord Jesus. (And Jesus now has ALL authority – Matthew 28:18.)

If you “call” on the Lord Jesus, be prepared to accept what He says and do what He requires. To not accept and not do what the Lord requires of you is but an abject failure to “call” upon His name.

It was after hearing the “word of the Lord”, that same hour, immediately, the jailor was (water) baptized! Having returned home, the jailor rejoiced greatly!

Was the Jailor some type of rare exception to water baptism and “calling upon the name of the Lord”? No.

Philip “preached Jesus” to the Eunuch – Acts 8:35. “Preaching Jesus” caused the Eunuch to ask Philip what was “hindering” him from being baptized in water. “Preaching Jesus” included teaching on water baptism and the need for it!

Cornelius sent for Peter “to hear words” by which he would be saved –Acts 10:22,33,44, 11:14. The culmination of the words was Acts 10:47 – “Can any man forbid water that these should not be baptized…” Peter then, with words, commanded Cornelius to be baptized in water. The words Peter preached included water baptism and the command for it! Peter’s words led Cornelius to be saved.

Jesus said, “He that believes and is baptized shall be saved.” – Mark 16:16

It looks as if the eunuch and Cornelius, as well as the jailor “believed” on the Lord Jesus!

 

[drbrumley]

"State of Salvation."

"State of Salvation."

Kevin,

Assurance of Salvation can come only from accepting the scriptural teaching that salvation is the free gift of God's grace to undeserving sinners entirely apart from any and all human works. This fact is plainly stated in a number of passages in which I will share with you now. Many you have probably heard from others.

1 Romans 3:19-28 Now we know that whatever the law says, it says to those who are under the law, that every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God. 20Therefore by the deeds of the law no flesh will be justified in His sight, for by the law is the knowledge of sin. 21 But now the righteousness of God apart from the law is revealed, being witnessed by the Law and the Prophets, 22even the righteousness of God, through faith in Jesus Christ, to all and on all who believe. For there is no difference; 23for all have sinned and fall short of the glory of God, 24being justified freely by His grace through the redemption that is in Christ Jesus , 25whom God set forth as a propitiation by His blood, through faith, to demonstrate His righteousness, because in His forbearance God had passed over the sins that were previously committed, 26to demonstrate at the present time His righteousness, that He might be just and the justifier of the one who has faith in Jesus. 27 Where is boasting then? It is excluded. By what law? Of works? No, but by the law of faith. 28Therefore we conclude that a man is justified by faith apart from the deeds of the law.

2. Romans 8 33Who shall bring a charge against God's elect? It is God who justifies. 34Who is he who condemns? It is Christ who died, and furthermore is also risen, who is even at the right hand of God, who also makes intercession for us. 35Who shall separate us from the love of Christ? Shall tribulation, or distress, or persecution, or famine, or nakedness, or peril, or sword? 36As it is written: "For Your sake we are killed all day long; We are accounted as sheep for the slaughter."[37Yet in all these things we are more than conquerors through Him who loved us. 38For I am persuaded that neither death nor life, nor angels nor principalities nor powers, nor things present nor things to come, 39nor height nor depth, nor any other created thing, shall be able to separate us from the love of God which is in Christ Jesus our Lord.

3. Romans 4:1 What then shall we say that Abraham our father has found according to the flesh? 2For if Abraham was justified by works, he has something to boast about, but not before God. 3For what does the Scripture say? "Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness." 4Now to him who works, the wages are not counted as grace but as debt. 5 But to him who does not work but believes on Him who justifies the ungodly, his faith is accounted for righteousness,

4. Eph. 2:8For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, 9not of works, lest anyone should boast

5. Titus 3:5not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to His mercy He saved us, through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit,

The Bible plainly teaches Assurance. God wants you to know that you are saved.

All you really need to do is just look at the following verses:

1. 1 Thessalonians 1:5

2. Colossians 2:2

3. Hebrews 10:22

4. Hebrews 6:17-18

5. 1 John 5:13

Assurance comes only from a commitment of self to Christ Jesus as Savior. This means that there must be a genuine spiritual experience of accepting Jesus Christ as Savior. It is not sufficient merely to give mental assent to the facts of the Bible, or to join a religious organization, or to be baptized. You must recognize himself as a lost and condemned sinner, without God and without hope, and voluntarily entrust self to Jesus Christ on the basis of His redeeming death. When you do this, God does His work of regeneration, imparting His Spirit to you or me.

 

[Apollos]

"Apart from ANY and all human works..." ???

"Apart from ANY and all human works..." ???

Hey Dr.B -

I visited your "confession of faith".

Article IV - Salvation:

Salvation involves the redemption of the whole man, and is offered freely to all who accept Jesus Christ as Lord and Saviour...

What does it mean for man to ACCEPT Jesus Christ???
WHAT does this involve??? Hmmm???

Later under subsection A - it mentions repentance. Does this repentance come BEFORE or AFTER the sinner receives salvation?

Please let us know. Thankx!!

 

[Kevin]

c.moore,

What makes you think that one doesn't recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit when baptized in the name of the Lord? You do recieve it in that baptism (Acts 2:38).

Quote c.moore

Sorry, I don`t believe this to be A water baptism scripture, it A spiritual baptism acts 2:38
Is there mentioned any where in Acts 2 about water ,or A pool, or A river,or ocean,sea, ?????

As I've pointed out several times, baptism "in the name of the Lord" uses water, which is proven in Acts 10:47-48. Now, the people in Acts 2:38 were batpized "in the name of Jesus Christ". Compare the two:

• Baptism in the "name of the Lord"
• Baptism in the "name of Jesus Christ"

Is not Jesus Christ our Lord? YES HE IS. Both baptisms are in the name of the same person: Jesus Christ, our Lord. And since Acts 10:47-48 shows that baptism in the name of the Lord is done with water, then the baptism spoken of in Acts 2:38 uses water also, for they are the same baptism in the same name of the same person!!! There's ONE baptism, and it's done the SAME way.

Now in Acts 8:38 I can see and undersstand A water baptism is taken place in this situation.

you can`t just add water onto every where you see A word baptism, that why I started befroe a thread asking what scripture are spiritual baptism and what scripture are water baptism

Again, baptism in the name of the Lord is what puts us into Christ, and is what the apostles practiced when converting people.

Quote kevin
The falling of the Holy Sprit didn't save them or put them "into Christ" any more than it did when it happened in the New Testament.


Quote c.moore
The Holy spirit in the OT fel on people , but that`s why in the NT they waited so the Spirit could come IN them ,and live IN them, so we can be Baptised in the Holy Spirit,when the Spirit is in us,praise God.

Don't you see the connection? In both senarios, the HS fell on people and gave them miraculous abilities. This does not put us in Christ. If it does, then you have to say the people in Numbers were in Christ, because the same Spirit rested upon them and the the same thing.

Quote Kevin
Speaking of Pentacost, what was the baptism used at the conversion of new believers? What was it, c.moore?


Quote c.moore

Being baptized in the blood of Jesus was the conversion of new believers M't:26:28:

I don't know what translation you use, but mine shows that they were baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, which is done with water. Tell me what tanslation you are using so I can see where it says in Acts 2:38 that they were baptized in the blood of Jesus.

The Spiritual baptism in the Blood of Jesus is taken place as soon as they believe the Word and accept Jesus blood for remission of thier sin.

Show me in scripture where it says that when one believes that they are baptized for the remission of sins as soon as they believe the word. In the Great Commission, Jesus told MAN to baptize, therefore, the baptism spoken of in the Great Commission can't possibly be the falling of the HS, for man doesn't do that! By the way, there is no baptism in the blood of Jesus.

so Eunuch was Spiritual baptised when he believed

Scripture?

Ac:8:37: And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. AMEN

Yup, and he acted upon his belief and obeyed the gospel by being baptized into Christ! Faith only didn't cut it for him!

why did these same apostles baptize new converts in the name of Jesus rather than administering spirit baptism? Why?


Quote c.moore
They did admistrate spiritual baptism when they preached the word with power, and boldness[/qoute]

There's record of the apostles praying that people may recieve the HS, but this only gave them miraculous abilities, this does not forgive sins. Again, this same Spirit fell upon the people in Numbers, and it certainly didn't forgive their sins. And if you're suggesting that this is the baptism that saves, I guess we are all screwed, for only the apostles had the ability to lay on hands for one to recieve the HS. This is not the baptism that is spoken of when new converts give their lives to Christ. It is the baptism in the name of the Lord, which is spoken of in relation to new converts throughout the book of Acts. That is the baptism that was practiced by the apostles when converting people.

Ti:3:5: Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost;
Eph:5:26: That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the washing of water by the word

You're trying to make this say something it's not. We have clear example in the New Testament were converted with baptism in the name of the Lord, which most certainly uses water.

Like I said before anybody can take scripture out of context and make up thier own doctrine to be true ,and even form thier own religion out of it biblically.

Amen.

or when the bible say thier is christian that drink milk is not meaning these christians are real babies that are 3 month years old and they are still drinking milk bottle as christians, or when the bible says some christians eat meat are all grown christains only eat steaks, and hamburgers all thier live get my point Kevin?

I get your point, c.moore. This isn't the first time I've seen you say this. You have every right to believe that, but that doesn't make you right.

 

[Kevin]

drbrumley,

Are you suggesting that the falling of the HS in Acts 10:44 didn't appear as burning tongues?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



I'm not suggesting, I'm telling you. Where in Scripture does it tell you Acts 10:44 manifestation of the Holy Spirit is Cloven Tongues of Fire? Your grasping for straws .

Yes, well your declaration is empty. You have no evidence to support that the falling of the Holy Spirit, which is visually described in Acts 2:3, is any different when the SAME Spirit fell upon those people in Acts 10:44. It is you who is grasping at straws.

Do you have any evidence to support this?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Nope but neither do you to support that so we are even in that regard.

Wrong. I have Biblical evidence to show that falling of the HS can be visibly seen (Acts 2:3). The burden of proof is on you to explain why it would be seen in one place, yet not seen in another.

By the way, the HS fell upon Jesus in Matt. 3:16. It is described as "alighting" upon Him. So we have yet another place where it speaks of the falling of the HS, and it being seen. What, do you think it's mere coincidence? It is I who has the evidence, not you.

It gave them the ability to do miraculous things.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



This is true, but the Apostles were doing "supernatural" things even before this, so what's your point?

My point is that the purpose of the falling of the HS was not to put them into Christ, it was to give them "power" (Acts 1:8), just as it gave the people in Numbers the power to prophecy.

Why wouldn't it have happened in the same manner (burning tongues) to the Gentiles in Acts 10:44?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



In my opinion, if this was the case, I'm pretty sure Scripture would have mentioned it.

So your argument soley rests on omission, that is, it's not spoken of in that specific verse. I have shown more than one example that would show it was indeed seen in Acts 10:44. You have no evidence to counter this.

Going by your logic of omission, let's look at Ephesians 2:8. It says that we are saved by grace through faith. Now, according to your logic, I could argue that the blood of Jesus and repentance has nothing to do with our salvation, because it's not mentioned in that verse. But we know that that is ridiculous, but so is your argument of omission, in light of the evidence that I have that shown. If I didn't have any Biblical evidence to show that the falling of the HS is visual, then your arguement would be valid, because I would have not evidence to counter it. But this is not the case, for I do have evidence to counter it.

As I pointed out earlier, in Numbers 11:25, the HS rested upon their heads, just like in Acts 2:3.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Yes, it seems to match. Still doesn't prove or provide any evidence of what your assuming.

Sure it does! It shows consistency, which is my entire arguement!

You come up with highly flawed theology that says:


quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
If spirit baptism saves us, then new converts would have the tongues of fire upon accpeting Christ.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Where is the Scripture for this? You can't provide it because IT ISN'T THERE

But I HAVE shown multiple scriptures to support this. All you have is an empty argument of omission, which is easily refuted by the evidence that I've shown which supports the consistency of my argument. Where is your evidence?

In both cases, that same Spirit had the same effect upon the recipients - miraculous abilities.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



True again, but it's pretty funny you seem to be backing away from Cloven Tongues of Fire.

Again, the purpose was to show consistency, which it does show, and you agreed to - "Yes, it seems to match." And yes, I do contend that it was visual as it was in the NT. I have evidence to support this, you don't.

Well, the baptism in the name of the Lord, which is done with water, was done AFTER the HS fell upon the Gentiles in Acts 10:47-48.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------



Agreed for the most part. Only problem with that statement is you assume water is included now.

Show me in scripture where it says that the baptism in the name of the Lord will no longer use water. What, did God get it wrong at first or something? Why would it have changed?

 

[c.moore]

As I've pointed out several times, baptism "in the name of the Lord" uses water, which is proven in Acts 10:47-48. Now, the people in Acts 2:38 were batpized "in the name of Jesus Christ". Compare the two:

· Baptism in the "name of the Lord"

· Baptism in the "name of Jesus Christ

But you miss something again in the scripture you mention , and that is they were spiritual baptized before any ritual baptism

Of course we must use Jesus name because it the baptism of being washed in His blood that saves.

In a baptism you don`t say in the name of water,you say the name that make you saved Jesus and his blood , not water.

I will continue , but I must stop now,I`ll be back

peace

 

[Kevin]

drbrumley,

This is in regards to your post about my "state of salvation" comment.

I agree that "The Bible plainly teaches Assurance", but that assurance is only good as long as the believer stays within God's grace, which one can fall from (Gal. 5:4). One can fall from God's saving grace. That's why I call it a state of salvation, because we are in that state as long as we keep God's commandments. If we stray from them, we are no longer in God's grace, thus no longer in a state of salvation.

When and IF we are judged worthy of Heaven by Jesus, then we are "saved", and nothing will ever be able to take that away. But while we are still alive in this mortal body, we have the ability to turn our backs on God and fall from His grace.

 

[Kevin]

c.moore,

In a baptism you don`t say in the name of water,you say the name that make you saved Jesus and his blood , not water.

Um, hello? I pointed out that the baptism in the name of the Lord USES WATER (ACTS 10:47-48). Why do you continaully ignore this simple fact?

Why do I bother debating a person who won't even acknowledge what I say...

 

[Kevin]

JAC, Evangelion,

Thanks for the support guys! :up:

 

[Kevin]

H'mong,

I have no quarell with Romans 6:1-11.

Good.

For believers, going under the water shows that our old self has been buried

"Has been" buried... as in past tense? Nope. Baptism is what actually buries our old man of sin, as stated in Romans 6. Verse 5 is the conditional verse. IF we have been baptized into His death, then we have put away our old man of sin, not before. It goes on in verse 7 to say that "He who has died" has been freed from sin. The condition of being freed from in is dying with Christ through baptism. That is the Biblically stated purpose of baptism, which is a far cry from baptism being "simply the outward declaration that one has faith in Christ."

Actually it is espoused in 1 Peter 3:21. Peter does say "Baptism now saves you" - but also adds "Not the removal of dirt from the flesh,the pledge of a good conscience toward God - through the resurrection of Jesus Christ."

"Not the removal of flesh" - well of course the water doesn't save. This is said because baptism's purpose isn't a physical cleansing, it's a spiritual cleansing. This does not mean that water isn't used, however. The same guy who wrote 1 Peter 3:21 practiced baptizing people in the name of the Lord, which uses water, as spoken by Peter himself (Acts 10:47-48).

"The answer of a good conscience towards God" - Indeed, a good conscience towards God would cause one to be baptized into Christ. When a person is baptized into Christ, that person has a "good conscience towards God" because he has obeyed the command of baptism and it reborn in Christ, putting away the old man of sin. The eunuch in Acts 8:36 is a good example of this. AFTER he was baptized, he went on his way, rejoicing... having a good conscience towards God.

Peter is stating that Baptism is the symbolic expression us being born again.

No, Peter is saying that baptism now saves us.

 

[Evangelion]

No worries, mate. :up:

 

[c.moore]

. Both baptisms are in the name of the same person: Jesus Christ, our Lord. And since Acts 10:47-48 shows that baptism in the name of the Lord is done with water, then the baptism spoken of in Acts 2:38 uses water also, for they are the same baptism in the same name of the same person!!! There's ONE baptism, and it's done the SAME way.

Acts 2 cames before acts 10.
Act2 is verifying that the Holy Ghost baptism came before water baptism which is proved in Acts 10.

this is why your answer saying that we recieve the spiritual baptism when we come out the water is false, and backwards according to the word of God.

You also make a assumption that Acts 2 is meaning water baptism when there is still no water mentionin the text like in Act 10,there is something wrong here in your interpretaion again.

The Book of Acts is mainly about the Holy Spirit coming, and people full with power, and wittnessing the Word of God with boldness, and Acts describe the work of the risen Christ, not the old John the baptist baptismo ritual,but more on the Holy Spirit , and the Spiritual baptism which many were waitng for.

, baptism in the name of the Lord is what puts us into Christ, and is what the apostles practiced when converting people.

Don`t you see that being baptized in the name is spiritual.
Do you really think that you write the name of Jesus on the bottom of the pool or you throw big cut out words of in the name of Jesus in the water and you go down in the water with the cut out name of the Lord in the water ?

No this is all spiritual either way,praise God.

I can`t see where it says in Acts 2:38 that they were baptized in the blood of Jesus.

Look at what repentance is , and how is our sin forgiven, by the blood of Jesus,not water forgives , it`s Jesus that forgive, and make us white as snow.

1Jo:1:7: But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.

Show me in scripture where it says that when one believes that they are baptized for the remission of sins as soon as they believe the word.

Ac:8:37: And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Ac:11:14: Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.
Ac:11:15: And as I began to speak, the Holy Ghost fell on them, as on us at the beginning.
Ac:11:16: 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.
Ac:11:17: 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?
Ac:11:18: When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted repentance unto life.

Quote c.moore
so Eunuch was Spiritual baptised when he believed

Scripture?

Ac:8:36: And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
Ac:8:37: And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.

Ac:10:47: Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Look here Kevin which have received the Holy Ghost that is before the water baptism,so eunuch was baptized before any water ritual baptism demostrating of the spiritual.

I get your point, c.moore. This isn't the first time I've seen you say this. You have every right to believe that, but that doesn't make you right.

Thank god that this is just your opinion, and not God`s

let God bless you
peace