WHY WATER BAPTISIM HAD TO GO AWAY ??

bling said:

People believe lots of stuff, we are to listen to God.

Click to expand...

Yes, and many make up lots of wisdom of words to explain their works righteousness for salvation

bling said:

Do you have a problem with the list of good stuff it provides the new convert?

Click to expand...

All works flow from God in us

Hebrews 13: 20. Now the God of peace, that brought again from the dead our Lord Jesus, that great shepherd of the sheep, through the blood of the everlasting covenant, 21. Make you perfect in every good work to do his will, working in you that which is wellpleasing in his sight, through Jesus Christ; to whom be glory for ever and ever. Amen.”
Abd without Jesus we can do nothing.

But this is not ordinances that flow from within

bling said:

Col. 2: 12. 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.”

Click to expand...

This is spiritual inward immersion into Christ like a seed that’s planted in the dirt and given life breaks forth and rises up with him.

Romans 6: 5. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:”

Notice the planted together talk. What is planted and where is it planted?

The seed,the word of God is planted in our hearts

Luke 8: 11. Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God. 12. Those by the way side are they that hear; then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their hearts, lest they should believe and be saved. 13. They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away. 14. And that which fell among thorns are they, which, when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to perfection.”

James 1: 18. Of his own will begat he us with the word of truth, that we should be a kind of firstfruits of his creatures. 21. Wherefore lay apart all filthiness and superfluity of naughtiness, and receive with meekness the engrafted word, which is able to save your souls.”

1 Peter 1: 23. Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.”

Notice the seed and word of God part.

This seed,word,is also the light that lights men in

Psalm 97: 11. Light is sown for the righteous, and gladness for the upright in heart.”

Notice the sown part like during a seed.

and that is where the life ,new birth takes place where Christ dwells in our heart by faith and where we have Christ formed in us.

Ephesians 3: 17. That Christ may dwell in your hearts by faith; that ye, being rooted and grounded in love,”

Isaiah 61: 3. To appoint unto them that mourn in Zion, to give unto them beauty for ashes, the oil of joy for mourning, the garment of praise for the spirit of heaviness; that they might be called trees of righteousness, the planting of the LORD, that he might be glorified.”

Fir this seed to be planted or for men to be circumcised in heart they must break up the fallow ground in th ed heart

Hosea 10: 12. Sow to yourselves in righteousness, reap in mercy; break up your fallow ground: for it is time to seek the LORD, till he come and rain righteousness upon you.”

bling said:

I do not see anyone following John’s baptism of repentance after Pentecost, but performing Christian water baptism.

Click to expand...

Yes, they were following Johns water baptism in the same form and for remission of sins even if they don’t it with the expression “in the name of Jesus” .

Also that expression “be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ” can also have another meaning to be immersed into Jesus Christ or into Christ . To be baptized into a name can also imply immersing into the character, power, authority virtue and other aspects of that name.

Jesus said he kept them in the name of the Father and manifested the Fathers name. The name of the Lord is a high tower the righteous tin into it and are safe. How do you run into (or we could apply it to be immersed into ) a name?

But as far as the New Testament Jewish believers were still following John “water” baptism. The expression Jesus said about Johns baptism was to stress the “water aspect. John “baptized [past tense] with water, but”… this shows the stress on any baptizing”with water” that was the outward type and shadow and as we read the many divers washings were to cease.they were outward and figured of there.

Hebrews 9: 8. The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: 9. Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 10. Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.”

But now back to evidence that the Jewish believers were still practicing baptizing “with water” following John’s water baptism and perhaps the Jewish custom oral tradition of the Halakah law,

Acts 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.”

Peter was reminded of this by God just after the Holy Ghost fell on the Gentiles and when he was questioning things and ask who can forbid water. He then heard this. This reference to John’s WATER baptism comes right as Peter wants to bring the Gentiles to be the same as the Jews and do Johns water baptism for the remission of sins.

Peter akdd sad I was doing similar things as we read in Galatians 2 where Paul questions them and says

Galatians 2: 14. But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?”

Notice the part

“, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?””

bling said:

Acts 1:5 “For John baptized with water, but in a few days you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.” Jesus did not say, “you will baptize with the Holy Spirit”, but they (specifically) would be baptized with the Spirit.

Click to expand...

No,Jesus is making a difference from Johns water baptism that has past and the baptism He would give eith the Holy Ghost

bling said:

Acts 8:12 “But when they believed Philip as he proclaimed the good news of the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.” This is not with the Spirit since later we have: Acts 8:16 “because the Holy Spirit had not yet come on any of them; they had simply been baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Again, John’s baptism was not “in the name of Jesus” and these are non-Jews.

Click to expand...

They were saved when they believed. When this happens they are baptized by the Spirit into Christ or into the body of Christ.

The Holy Ghost would seem to baptize into Christ and Jesus Christ then will baptize with the Holy Ghost.

As we see in scripture

1 Corinthians 12: 13. 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.”

Luke 3: 16. John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:”

So a person must first be in Chrust and have Jesus in him then ajesys will baptize with the Holy Ghost.

To be saved and have Jesus in you is like drinking water of life. Then the water will bubble up from within and power like a fountain of water flowing comes as Jesus baptised us with the Holy Ghost.

John 7: 37. In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. 38. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)”

bling said:

Acts 8:36 As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?”…”And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him.”

This is the same Philip who baptized non-Jews in Acts 8:12. The eunuch goes on his way, so when and how was he baptized with the Spirit?

Click to expand...

Philip was still following the Jewish believers who were zealous of the law the temple and customs and John’s water baptism. God sees the heart and this inward faith is the key part it is to believe with their hearts

Acts 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? 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.”

And the baptism into Christ is by the Spirit.Jesus will baptize with the Holy Ghost as men walk in faith

bling said:

Again, the Eunuch understanding of “baptism” had to do with water and not something the Spirit had already done to him.

Click to expand...

No,t doesn’t say that, he had a spiritual revelation. All Jews at that time when a foreigner was converted to the Jewish belief were water baptised even before Jonna water baptism. They had to be fully submerged and offer two turtle dishes and be circumcised. The Ethiopian would have been familiar with this . He also may have heard report of the baptizing of John and at Pentecost which the Jewish believers were doing and also they were following the law, sacrifices ,going to the temple, circumcision etc.

bling said:

Acts 10:47 “Surely no one can stand in the way of their being baptized with water. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.” 48 So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked Peter to stay with them for a few days.”

Click to expand...

Peter was in a questioning way here and we see in the next chapter he was reminded by God (I believe) about Jesus telling at the beginning that Johns water baptism was to end

bling said:

Does this not point out that being “baptized in the name of Jesus Christ” was “water baptism”?

Click to expand...

No, as I showed the Jewish believers still followed the “diverse washings” (Hebrews 9) and carnal ordinances for a long time and Johns water baptism was close to them, the apostles had water baptized as well.

But to be baptised into Jesus Christ is not to be baptised into water.

The one baptism must be the one that all believers have had it is saving according to Peter and do the saving one baptism must be by the spirit into Christ.

As scripture shows

Galatians 3: 27. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”

Romans 6: 3. Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?”

Baptized means to immerse into

1 Corinthians 12: 13. 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.”

Baptism never went away.
If it was supposed to, then the Apostles never got the memo, and no Christian ever believed this. The New Testament certainly doesn't teach it.

If your doctrine didn't exist until you made it up, then safe to say it's all in your head and you shouldn't believe it.

The phrase "water baptism" is intentionally deceptive. It's just called Baptism. The phrase "water baptism" is like saying "food meal" or "feet shoes" or "head hat" or "dirt soil"--it's entirely redundant. And couching language in this way is deceptive because the goal is to dismiss and undermine the plain meaning of Scripture and insert new ideas and false doctrine. Things which the Bible doesn't say, and Christians have never believed.

I do not feel you have to take the Lord’s Supper every Sunday, but if you are among a group of Christians and you are asked to join them in partaking of the Lord’s Supper can you without any excuse refuse and be pleasing to God?

The Lord’s Supper is a act of worship, but it is to help us and not just command following.

Are we to treat adult believer Christian water baptism like the Lord’s Supper?

LoveofTruth said:

LoveofTruth said:

Yes, they were following Johns water baptism in the same form and for remission of sins even if they don’t it with the expression “in the name of Jesus” .

Click to expand...

Click to expand...

That is something you made up, since there is nothing showing or stating this in scripture.

John would not have been baptizing “in the name of Jesus” since his author was coming down from heaven,, so where did that idea come from?

LoveofTruth said:

Also that expression “be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ” can also have another meaning to be immersed into Jesus Christ or into Christ . To be baptized into a name can also imply immersing into the character, power, authority virtue and other aspects of that name.

Jesus said he kept them in the name of the Father and manifested the Fathers name. The name of the Lord is a high tower the righteous tin into it and are safe. How do you run into (or we could apply it to be immersed into ) a name?

Click to expand...

Bible dictionary: In the Bible, the phrase "in the name of" (Greek: en tō onomati or eis to onoma) primarily refers to acting under authority, representing someone's character, or signifying possession. It is not a "magic formula" of words, but a declaration of the legal and spiritual standing of the person acting.

If I baptize someone “in the name of Christ” or Father, son and Holy Spirit”, I am doing it by their authority.

Where are you finding: “in the name of” meaning immersed by the person named, that would be magical?

LoveofTruth said:

But as far as the New Testament Jewish believers were still following John “water” baptism. The expression Jesus said about Johns baptism was to stress the “water aspect. John “baptized [past tense] with water, but”… this shows the stress on any baptizing”with water” that was the outward type and shadow and as we read the many divers washings were to cease.they were outward and figured of there.

Click to expand...

You seem to disregard Acts 8: 35 Then Philip began with that very passage of Scripture and told him the good news about Jesus.36 As they traveled along the road, they came to some water and the eunuch said, “Look, here is water. What can stand in the way of my being baptized?” [37] 38 And he gave orders to stop the chariot. Then both Philip and the eunuch went down into the water and Philip baptized him. 39 When they came up out of the water, the Spirit of the Lord suddenly took Philip away, and the eunuch did not see him again, but went on his way rejoicing.

Philip told him the good news about Jesus, not John’s baptism.

The Eunuch certainly thinks water is need for his baptism.

Philip baptized him (and not the Spirit at this time), for we know Philip did not have the apostle’s power to lay hands on him for Spiritual power (previous in Acts 8).

Philip leaves the Eunuch right after his Christian water baptism, so nothing is said of Spirit baptism.

LoveofTruth said:

Hebrews 9: 8. The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: 9. Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 10. Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.”

But now back to evidence that the Jewish believers were still practicing baptizing “with water” following John’s water baptism and perhaps the Jewish custom oral tradition of the Halakah law,

Acts 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.”

Peter was reminded of this by God just after the Holy Ghost fell on the Gentiles and when he was questioning things and ask who can forbid water. He then heard this. This reference to John’s WATER baptism comes right as Peter wants to bring the Gentiles to be the same as the Jews and do Johns water baptism for the remission of sins.

Click to expand...

It said nothing about it being “John’s baptism”, but look further Peter had to go all the way back to what John said about Pentecost, to find a similar Spirit baptism. The Spirit baptism that happened on Pentecost was very special, nothing like that is being seen today. John also promised Christ bringing baptism of fire, but that is not going to happen to everyone.

LoveofTruth said:

Peter akdd sad I was doing similar things as we read in Galatians 2 where Paul questions them and says

Galatians 2: 14. But when I saw that they walked not uprightly according to the truth of the gospel, I said unto Peter before them all, If thou, being a Jew, livest after the manner of Gentiles, and not as do the Jews, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?”

Click to expand...

I repeat: Jewish Christians including Peter did seem to push some of the Jewish Law activities on the Gentiles, But:

John’s baptism was not one of the Jewish Laws as far as I can tell.

But the main obvious thing is this: Paul definitely did not push any Jewish teaching on the Gentiles and from this passage he was against the Jews following the Old Law among the Gentiles, dividing Jews and Gentile Christians, but yet Paul baptized gentile believers with water:

1 Cor. 1: 14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 15 so no one can say that you were baptized in my name. 16 (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.)

Paul is not talking about the Spirit baptizing them, because he specifically says “I baptized them”. He baptized them but it was not into his name.

LoveofTruth said:

Notice the part

“, why compellest thou the Gentiles to live as do the Jews?””

No,Jesus is making a difference from Johns water baptism that has past and the baptism He would give eith the Holy Ghost

They were saved when they believed. When this happens they are baptized by the Spirit into Christ or into the body of Christ.

The Holy Ghost would seem to baptize into Christ and Jesus Christ then will baptize with the Holy Ghost.

As we see in scripture

1 Corinthians 12: 13. 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.”

Luke 3: 16. John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire:”

So a person must first be in Chrust and have Jesus in him then ajesys will baptize with the Holy Ghost.

To be saved and have Jesus in you is like drinking water of life. Then the water will bubble up from within and power like a fountain of water flowing comes as Jesus baptised us with the Holy Ghost.

John 7: 37. In the last day, that great day of the feast, Jesus stood and cried, saying, If any man thirst, let him come unto me, and drink. 38. He that believeth on me, as the scripture hath said, out of his belly shall flow rivers of living water. 39. (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.)”

Philip was still following the Jewish believers who were zealous of the law the temple and customs and John’s water baptism. God sees the heart and this inward faith is the key part it is to believe with their hearts

Acts 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? 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.”

And the baptism into Christ is by the Spirit.Jesus will baptize with the Holy Ghost as men walk in faith

No,t doesn’t say that, he had a spiritual revelation. All Jews at that time when a foreigner was converted to the Jewish belief were water baptised even before Jonna water baptism. They had to be fully submerged and offer two turtle dishes and be circumcised. The Ethiopian would have been familiar with this . He also may have heard report of the baptizing of John and at Pentecost which the Jewish believers were doing and also they were following the law, sacrifices ,going to the temple, circumcision etc.

Peter was in a questioning way here and we see in the next chapter he was reminded by God (I believe) about Jesus telling at the beginning that Johns water baptism was to end

No, as I showed the Jewish believers still followed the “diverse washings” (Hebrews 9) and carnal ordinances for a long time and Johns water baptism was close to them, the apostles had water baptized as well.

But to be baptised into Jesus Christ is not to be baptised into water.

The one baptism must be the one that all believers have had it is saving according to Peter and do the saving one baptism must be by the spirit into Christ.

As scripture shows

Galatians 3: 27. For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.”

Romans 6: 3. Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?”

Baptized means to immerse into

1 Corinthians 12: 13. 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.”

Click to expand...

Paul spends a ton of words teaching and promoting unity between Jewish and Gentile Christians. The lots of the Jewish Christians were trying to get the Gentile Christians to follow the Law in the food laws, circumcision and Sabbaths. Paul teaches against these requirements heavily, but I never read of Paul telling the Gentiles to not be water baptized, even though you would agree that was happening.

ViaCrucis said:

Baptism never went away.
If it was supposed to, then the Apostles never got the memo, and no Christian ever believed this. The New Testament certainly doesn't teach it.

If your doctrine didn't exist until you made it up, then safe to say it's all in your head and you shouldn't believe it.

The phrase "water baptism" is intentionally deceptive. It's just called Baptism. The phrase "water baptism" is like saying "food meal" or "feet shoes" or "head hat" or "dirt soil"--it's entirely redundant. And couching language in this way is deceptive because the goal is to dismiss and undermine the plain meaning of Scripture and insert new ideas and false doctrine. Things which the Bible doesn't say, and Christians have never believed.

Click to expand...

This redundancy began its usage in the 1970's with the rise of Pentecostal and Charismatic movements in their interpretation of Acts 1. Baptism in the HS (with reference to the spectacular gifts) was superior to "water" baptism. From that time on, American Christianity adopted the term "water baptism" as distinct from "spirit baptism" a distinction not found in Scripture.

Ain't Zwinglian said:

This redundancy began its usage in the 1970's with the rise of Pentecostal and Charismatic movements in their interpretation of Acts 1. Baptism in the HS (with reference to the spectacular gifts) was superior to "water" baptism. From that time on, American Christianity adopted the term "water baptism" as distinct from "spirit baptism" a distinction not found in Scripture.

Click to expand...

No,there was a clear distinction in scripture,

Acts 1: 5. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.”

Mark 1: 8. I indeed have baptized you with water: but he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost.”

1 Corinthians 12: 13. 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.”

Notice the word baptize with water…but…

Dan Perez said:

AND you quoted COL 2:12 Having been together with HIM in. the BAPTISM. really says BAPTISMA when you check

the Greekb. TEXT , so how. will you. TRANSLATE BAPTISMA NOW N. in. COL 2:12. ??

dan p

Click to expand...

The word baptism in Colossians 2:12 is in zgreek

Baptizo - meaning

from 907; baptism (technically or figuratively):--baptism.
from a derivative of 911; to immerse, submerge; to make whelmed (i.e. fully wet); used only (in the New Testament) of ceremonial ablution, especially (technically) of the ordinance of Christian baptism:--Baptist, baptize, wash

ViaCrucis said:

Baptism never went away.

Click to expand...

The saving one baptism” that Peter speaks of in 1 Peter 3:21, never went away ,but he is not speaking of water baptism. The one baptism that all believers have is this one

1 Corinthians 12: 13. 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.”

There are many baptisms in scripture and they are not all water baptism. We read of the baptism eith the Holy Ghost, the baptism unto Moses, the baptism of suffering ,the baptism of Jesus to manifest himself to Israel, the baptism of water for remission of sins by a John, the baptism into christ at salvation where we are baptized into Christ and into one body of Christ.

ViaCrucis said:

If it was supposed to, then the Apostles never got the memo,

Click to expand...

The early Jewush believers didn’t fully get the memo about the old covenant fading away and vanishing, or that the temple,animal sacrifices,circumcision and keeping the law zealously never went away for a long tomebandbgheyvetill kept going them even in Acts 21 we see this among believing Jews.

Peter didn’t fully understand his ministry to continue Gentiles until zGod revealed it to him in acts 20.Even though he had there from ajesys much earlier in the great commission.

Gid told Peter to eat unclean animals in Acts 10 but it seems Peter didn’t understand and tried arguing with God.

Etc

ViaCrucis said:

and no Christian ever believed this.

Click to expand...

Paul said Christ sent him not to baptize but to preach the gospel. He defines in the sane book of Corinthians the true saving baptism by the Spirit into the body of Christ in 1 Cor.12:13, habanero defines the saving gospel in 1 Cor.15:1-4. Notice that the water baptism is not part of the gospel.

Aldo, there are professing Christian groups that did not believe water baptism was to continue according to scripture.

ViaCrucis said:

The New Testament certainly doesn't teach it.

Click to expand...

Paul said Chridt sent him not to baotize,he didn’t add the words “not to “ primarily” baotize. Yes? He baptized a few,but thanks God he did do little of it and moons rise did he baptize yet he preached the gospel to them and they were saved by grace through faith no water added.there 1 Cor.15:1-4 and notice what Jesus.

ViaCrucis said:

If your doctrine didn't exist until you made it up,

Click to expand...

I didn’t make it up. It is based on scripture .

Hebrews 9: 10. Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.”

I believe all ot types shadows and divers washings “baptizmos in Greek-from 907; ablution (ceremonial or Christian):--baptism, washing.) were to end according to this scripture and others .

ViaCrucis said:

then safe to say it's all in your head and you shouldn't believe it.

Click to expand...

No, it’s as ll
According to scripture. You seem to have no scripture to refute it and rely on tradition and history etc.

Imagine the reformers when they exposed some of the errors of their day that were held by many for a long time before they had revealed them to be not right. Those who heard them may have said similar arguments. Because they trusted in the tradition of men.

ViaCrucis said:

The phrase "water baptism" is intentionally deceptive. It's just called Baptism.

Click to expand...

Acts 1: 5. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.”

Not deceptive, but clearly revered to in scripture abd the OT shadows under John and others.

ViaCrucis said:

The phrase "water baptism" is like saying "food meal" or "feet shoes" or "head hat" or "dirt soil"--it's entirely redundant.

Click to expand...

No,water refers to the element baptism to immersion into

We read of being baptized into Christ. The word baptism there dies not mean water but to be immersed into Christ. Or to be baptized with the Holy Ghost, I’d not water baptism there.

ViaCrucis said:

And couching language in this way is deceptive because the goal is to dismiss and undermine the plain meaning of Scripture and insert new ideas and false doctrine. Things which the Bible doesn't say, and Christians have never believed.

Click to expand...

No,not deception here. But a bit of misunderstanding and lack of revelation on your part. There are many baptisms in scripture and they are not all connected to water.

LoveofTruth said:

The saving one baptism” that Peter speaks of in 1 Peter 3:21, never went away ,but he is not speaking of water baptism. The one baptism that all believers have is this one

Click to expand...

So which is it: Peter did or didn't "get the memo"? Also, go back and read 1 Peter 3:21, he's talking about water.

LoveofTruth said:

1 Corinthians 12: 13. 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.”

Click to expand...

Yes, that's called Baptism. Which involves the application of water.

LoveofTruth said:

There are many baptisms in scripture and they are not all water baptism. We read of the baptism eith the Holy Ghost, the baptism unto Moses, the baptism of suffering ,the baptism of Jesus to manifest himself to Israel, the baptism of water for remission of sins by a John, the baptism into christ at salvation where we are baptized into Christ and into one body of Christ.

Click to expand...

The only baptism Christ instituted for His Church is that which is done in the name of the Father, Son, and the Holy Spirit.

Show me where your ideas can be found anywhere in the history of the Christian Church.

ViaCrucis said:

So which is it: Peter did or didn't "get the memo"?

Click to expand...

There are various things Peter and the Jewish believers grew in and came to understand.we see this all through the New Testament writings. For example Peter was told to go to the whole world in the great commission but he didn’t go to the Gentiles later many years later in Acts 10 and even then he was not fully understanding until God showed him.

This would be found also I. Galatians 2 where Paul had to correct him or “withstand him” face to face because he was to be blamed. There was progression of knowledge of the truth in scripture. Jesus even said this to the apostles before the Holy Ghost was given,

John 16: 12. I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.”

But it is very clear from scripture that this reformation from the old covenant to the new covenant took time and that the Jewish believers were still going to the temple, sacrificing animals, circumcising, keeping the whole law zealously,and the customs (many traditions) of the Jews for many years after Christ death. It took time to grow in these things. Drivers washings and carnal ordinances were imposed upon the Jews until the time of reformation. So they still were doing these things.

It’s not that they didn’t get the memo, the memo was given by Jesus, it’s just that they were bring led along by the Spirit and it took time to reform.

So in 1 Peter 3:21 it seems that Peter came to understand that the one saving baptism is not in water or the “putting away of the filth of the flesh”. But rather, an inward salvation being baptized or immersed into Christ where the conscience is made clean and perfect by truth and the risen Lord where we are also risen with him into the heavenly places.

ViaCrucis said:

Also, go back and read 1 Peter 3:21, he's talking about water.

Click to expand...

No, the water (or to be saved through water) is a type or figure of the spiritual reality, to be lifted up above the water judgement of the old world, is a type of being in Christ or being in the ark.

The type shows that judgment comes to the old world (old man by extension), and the only place to be saved was in the ark (or being baptized into Christ). Then the ark was lifted up from the earth into the heavens as believers are trusting in Christ death and resurrection and also are raised up with him into heavenly places.

But in 1 Peter 3:22 there is another word that gives a clue to the meaning there we read ;

1 Peter 3: 21. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:”

The “answer if a good conscience” means the inquiry of a good conscience. IThe word conscience points to being with knowledge” Thr Old Testament saints could not have a good or perfect or clean conscience by the death of animals and divers washings and carnal ordinances. They did not have the knowledge or good conscience of how the final work was finished and no more consciousness of sin was attained . They had to have continual sacrifices because of this not being finished yet by Christ. So their conscience (with knowledge) could not be good, perfect, clean. There was always reminder of sin by the continual sacrifices.

If we read in Hebrews 9 we see this spoken of.

Hebrews 9: 8. The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: 9. Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 10. Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.”

So, notice that the conscience cannot be clean or perfect by the blood of animals or outward washing of water ,”diverse washings”. So no outward sign of water baptism can make a good conscience. But what can clean the conscience and make a perfect conscience (with knowledge)?

This can. The next few verses,

Hebrews 9: 14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?”

Notice, only by the Spirit and the blood of Christ and I would also say by his resurrection showing the God approved of him and that gave us a full assurance of hope, can this be done and now our being “with knowledge “, in our conscience and the inquiry how this can happen is understood by us, being baptized into christ through believing the gospel of Christ death for sin and burial and resurrection (1 Cor.15:1-4).

LoveofTruth said:

There are various things Peter and the Jewish believers grew in and came to understand.we see this all through the New Testament writings. For example Peter was told to go to the whole world in the great commission but he didn’t go to the Gentiles later many years later in Acts 10 and even then he was not fully understanding until God showed him.

This would be found also I. Galatians 2 where Paul had to correct him or “withstand him” face to face because he was to be blamed. There was progression of knowledge of the truth in scripture. Jesus even said this to the apostles before the Holy Ghost was given,

John 16: 12. I have yet many things to say unto you, but ye cannot bear them now. 13. Howbeit when he, the Spirit of truth, is come, he will guide you into all truth: for he shall not speak of himself; but whatsoever he shall hear, that shall he speak: and he will shew you things to come.”

But it is very clear from scripture that this reformation from the old covenant to the new covenant took time and that the Jewish believers were still going to the temple, sacrificing animals, circumcising, keeping the whole law zealously,and the customs (many traditions) of the Jews for many years after Christ death. It took time to grow in these things. Drivers washings and carnal ordinances were imposed upon the Jews until the time of reformation. So they still were doing these things.

It’s not that they didn’t get the memo, the memo was given by Jesus, it’s just that they were bring led along by the Spirit and it took time to reform.

So in 1 Peter 3:21 it seems that Peter came to understand that the one saving baptism is not in water or the “putting away of the filth of the flesh”. But rather, an inward salvation being baptized or immersed into Christ where the conscience is made clean and perfect by truth and the risen Lord where we are also risen with him into the heavenly places.

No, the water (or to be saved through water) is a type or figure of the spiritual reality, to be lifted up above the water judgement of the old world, is a type of being in Christ or being in the ark.

The type shows that judgment comes to the old world (old man by extension), and the only place to be saved was in the ark (or being baptized into Christ). Then the ark was lifted up from the earth into the heavens as believers are trusting in Christ death and resurrection and also are raised up with him into heavenly places.

But in 1 Peter 3:22 there is another word that gives a clue to the meaning there we read ;

1 Peter 3: 21. The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:”

The “answer if a good conscience” means the inquiry of a good conscience. IThe word conscience points to being with knowledge” Thr Old Testament saints could not have a good or perfect or clean conscience by the death of animals and divers washings and carnal ordinances. They did not have the knowledge or good conscience of how the final work was finished and no more consciousness of sin was attained . They had to have continual sacrifices because of this not being finished yet by Christ. So their conscience (with knowledge) could not be good, perfect, clean. There was always reminder of sin by the continual sacrifices.

If we read in Hebrews 9 we see this spoken of.

Hebrews 9: 8. The Holy Ghost this signifying, that the way into the holiest of all was not yet made manifest, while as the first tabernacle was yet standing: 9. Which was a figure for the time then present, in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices, that could not make him that did the service perfect, as pertaining to the conscience; 10. Which stood only in meats and drinks, and divers washings, and carnal ordinances, imposed on them until the time of reformation.”

So, notice that the conscience cannot be clean or perfect by the blood of animals or outward washing of water ,”diverse washings”. So no outward sign of water baptism can make a good conscience. But what can clean the conscience and make a perfect conscience (with knowledge)?

This can. The next few verses,

Hebrews 9: 14. How much more shall the blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God, purge your conscience from dead works to serve the living God?”

Notice, only by the Spirit and the blood of Christ and I would also say by his resurrection showing the God approved of him and that gave us a full assurance of hope, can this be done and now our being “with knowledge “, in our conscience and the inquiry how this can happen is understood by us, being baptized into christ through believing the gospel of Christ death for sin and burial and resurrection (1 Cor.15:1-4).

Click to expand...

Show me an example of someone, in the long history of the Church, who taught what you're teaching. I'll need a very good reason to believe the Apostles were terrible teachers and preachers if they couldn't teach something as basic as this to those who listened to them and learned from them--since everyone who heard them preach, who committed themselves to their doctrine, got this all wrong. And why I should consider your interpretation superior to what was taught from the 1st century until the 21st century.

ViaCrucis said:

Show me where your ideas can be found anywhere in the history of the Christian Church.

Click to expand...

They were first of all shown in scripture as so have a small example of this.

But here are just a few that have taught on this .and no,just because I show others understandings on this does not mean I believe all they say. I like some things for example that slugger wrote ,but not other things, or Wesley or many other writers, but I do not agree wth all they say.

But here’s a few examples


That was from around the 1600s

The Salvation Army doesn’t believe in water baptism today either etc

But interestingly some in the early church among these called “fathers” taught baptismal regeneration error and later infant baptism etc. these traditional errors still with us today Antiquity and tradition from ancient times after the scriptures didn’t make them right.

Stick with the scripture

LoveofTruth said:

They were first of all shown in scripture as so have a small example of this.

But here are just a few that have taught on this .and no,just because I show others understandings on this does not mean I believe all they say. I like some things for example that slugger wrote ,but not other things, or Wesley or many other writers, but I do not agree wth all they say.

But here’s a few examples

Apology, Proposition 12

That was from around the 1600s

The Salvation Army doesn’t believe in water baptism today either etc

But interestingly some in the early church among these called “fathers” taught baptismal regeneration error and later infant baptism etc. these traditional errors still with us today Antiquity and tradition from ancient times after the scriptures didn’t make them right.

Stick with the scripture

Click to expand...

Very good, you found a fringe opinion from the 17th century. That does technically meet half of my criteria.

How about the other half?

I don't care what the Salvation Army does or doesn't do as it pertains to the Sacraments. That is irrelevant.

You accuse the earliest Christians, those who heard and learned directly from the Apostles, as teaching errors; but this claim of error is unsubstantiated. I suspect that you've done this because you know, perfectly well, that you won't find support for your position from the earliest generations of Apostle-taught believers. Which is why you've had to resort to a modern fringe writer (Robert Barclay)

ViaCrucis said:

Very good, you found a fringe opinion from the 17th century. That does technically meet half of my criteria.

Click to expand...

1676 I believe

ViaCrucis said:

How about the other half?

I don't care what the Salvation Army does or doesn't do as it pertains to the Sacraments. That is irrelevant.

You accuse the earliest Christians, those who heard and learned directly from the Apostles, as teaching errors; but this claim of error is unsubstantiated. I suspect that you've done this because you know, perfectly well, that you won't find support for your position from the earliest generations of Apostle-taught believers. Which is why you've had to resort to a modern fringe writer (Robert Barclay)

Click to expand...

No, I like many Christian through history have refuted baptismal regeneration and I infant baptism. There are many things to read against these if you’re interested.

And we’re not put men above that which is written even if they were the so called “church fathers”. Stick with scripture.

There are so many man are traditions in the church from way back to today that are against the clear scripture teachings. We would be here all day to go through them.

And you are resorting to the …I have more people on my side argument which is not a biblical one. Many of Luther’s day or Eycliffs day or Huss would have used the ,”who are you,your only one man against years of tradition and our large numbers” argument to try and prove thier case

As I said, use scripture. When men cannot recite clear scripture they often go into man’s traditions of other fancy argument's they to use the so called “church fathers” as a reason for those unbiblical views.But right around the time of the so called “church fathers” many went astray and we see it in history. The baptism issue caused many disputes and many argued for all sorts of arguments about baptism.

ViaCrucis said:

Show me an example of someone, in the long history of the Church, who taught what you're teaching. I'll need a very good reason to believe the Apostles were terrible teachers and preachers if they couldn't teach something as basic as this to those who listened to them and learned from them--since everyone who heard them preach, who committed themselves to their doctrine, got this all wrong. And why I should consider your interpretation superior to what was taught from the 1st century until the 21st century.

Click to expand...

Again you are using the “I have more ancient traditions and men than you do” argument.

I use scripture you go beyond that which is written and put men above that which is written.

For example if Paul taught that every part of the body in gatherings can edify minister use thier gifts to build up one another and he spoke this as the commandment of God for the church,and anyone today or in the early church set up one man over all as a pastor and if that man was lording over. Then they were wrong and Paul was right,no matter how many later on created a fajse clergy laity division .

1 Cor. 15:26-38, Ephesians 4:10-16, etc.

The “I only see a few speaking of things argument doesn’t stand.

And Peter and the Jews were still going to the temple sacrificing animals, keeping the law, circumcising etc and following the Jewish customs for many years after.(Acts. 20, Acts 15,Acts 21etc) This is easily proven by scripture. But this does not mean that God could not use them or that they did not speak truth. When Paul had to withstand Peter face to face because he was to be blamed it doesn’t mean that everything Peter said was wrong.

But Paul said some important things about that event I think you should also consider Paul’s words here and not put men above that which is written.


Galatians 2: 6. But of these who seemed to be somewhat, (whatsoever they were, it maketh no matter to me: God accepteth no man's person for they who seemed to be somewhat in conference added nothing to me: .,11. But when Peter was come to Antioch, I withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed.”

ViaCrucis said:

Yes, that's called Baptism. Which involves the application of water.

Click to expand...

No, now it sounds like your just making things up with no scripture.

the Spirit baptism and the outward water baptism are separate and different and not the same as scripture shows.

Acts 1: 5. For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.”

John 3: 6. That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.”


“Obj. As to what is commonly alleged by way of explanation upon the text, that the baptism of water and of the Spirit make up this one baptism, by virtue of the sacramental union.

Answ. I answer, This exposition hath taken place not because grounded upon the testimony of the Scripture but because it wrests the Scripture to make it suit to their principle of water baptism, and so there needs no other reply but to deny it, as being repugnant to the plain words of the text, which saith not that there are two baptisms, to wit, one of water, the other of the Spirit, which do make up one baptism, but plainly, that there is "one baptism," as there is "one faith" and "one God." Now there goeth not two faiths, nor two Gods, nor two Spirits, nor two bodies, whereof the one is outward and elementary and the other spiritual and pure, to the making up of the one faith, the one God, the one body, and the one Spirit; so neither ought there to go two baptisms to make up the one baptism.

Obj. But secondly, if it be said the baptism is but one, whereof water is the one part, to wit, the sign; and the Spirit, the thing signified, the other.

Answ. I answer, this yet more confirmeth our doctrine, for, if water be only the sign, it is not the matter of the one baptism (as shall further hereafter by its definition in Scripture appear), and we are to take the one baptism for the matter of it, not for the sign, or figure and type, that went before, even as where Christ is called the "one offering" in Scripture though he was typified by many sacrifices and offerings under the Law, we understand only by the one offering, his offering himself upon the cross, whereof though those many offerings were figures and types, yet we say not that they go together with that offering of Christ to make up the one offering; so neither, though water baptism was a sign of Christ's baptism, will it follow that it goeth now to make up the baptism of Christ. If any should be so absurd as to affirm that this one baptism here were the baptism of water and not of the Spirit, that were foolishly to contradict the positive testimony of the Scripture, which saith the contrary, as by what followeth will more amply appear.

Secondly, that this one baptism, which is the baptism of Christ, is not a washing with water, appears, first, from the testimony of John, the proper and peculiar administrator of water baptism (Matt. 3:11), "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance; but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear; he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire." Here John mentions two manners of baptizings and two different baptisms, the one with water, and the other with the Spirit, the one whereof he was the minister of, the other whereof Christ was the minister of: and such as were baptized with the first were not therefore baptized with the second: "I indeed baptize you, but he shall baptize you." Though in the present time they were baptized with the baptism of water, yet they were not as yet, but were to be, baptized with the baptism of Christ. From all which I thus argue,”