WHY PAULS GOSPEL THE MOST IMPORTANT GOSPEL. IN THE WORLD. !!

PastorMichaelDelBrown said:

One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism: Why Paul’s Words Still Divide the Church
By Michael Del Brown
Few biblical phrases are quoted more confidently—and examined less carefully—than Paul’s declaration in Ephesians 4:5: “One Lord, one faith, one baptism.” The verse is frequently invoked to promote unity, yet paradoxically, baptism remains one of the most divisive practices within modern Christianity.
The division is not merely denominational. It is theological. And at its core lies a fundamental question: Which baptism is Paul referring to?
For many believers, baptism is assumed—almost instinctively—to mean water baptism. It is treated as a universal ordinance, binding on all Christians in every age. But when Paul’s writings are examined on their own terms, a striking tension emerges—one that the modern church has often overlooked.
In 1 Corinthians 1:17, Paul makes a statement that should stop us cold: “Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel.” This is not a casual remark. It is a deliberate distinction. Paul separates his gospel commission from water baptism in a way no other apostle ever does.
If water baptism were essential to the gospel Paul preached—if it were the outward sign of entrance into the body of Christ—his words would be incomprehensible, even irresponsible. Yet Paul doubles down on this distinction throughout his epistles.
In Romans 6, Paul speaks of baptism not in terms of ritual, but reality: believers are baptized into Christ’s death, buried with Him, and raised to newness of life. The agent of this baptism is not water, but the Spirit. In 1 Corinthians 12:13, Paul is explicit: “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.”
This baptism is not performed by human hands. It is not administered by clergy. It is not repeated, recorded, or photographed. It occurs the moment a person believes the gospel of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. It is inward, spiritual, and effectual.
By contrast, water baptism—while commanded in Israel’s prophetic program and practiced under the kingdom gospel—belongs to a different context. John’s baptism was explicitly “for Israel” (Acts 13:24). Peter’s call at Pentecost tied baptism to repentance and covenantal restoration (Acts 2:38). These were not abstract symbols; they were covenantal acts rooted in Israel’s national hope.
Paul never places water baptism at the center of justification, salvation, or church unity. In fact, when the Corinthians began forming identities around who baptized whom, Paul rebuked
them sharply. His concern was not improper administration, but misplaced emphasis. The cross—not the water—had become secondary.
This distinction matters because theology shapes practice. When churches conflate Israel’s ordinances with Paul’s gospel, confusion follows. Salvation becomes something supplemented rather than received. Assurance becomes fragile. Unity becomes institutional rather than spiritual.
Paul’s gospel proclaims a finished work. Christ’s death was sufficient. His resurrection was decisive. The believer’s identification with Him is complete—without ritual reinforcement. To insist on water baptism today as a requirement, or even as a normative expression of obedience, risks obscuring the very sufficiency Paul labored to defend.
This is not an argument against baptismal history or against sincere believers who practice it. It is a call to rightly divide the Word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15). Scripture does not flatten God’s unfolding purposes into a single undifferentiated system. Distinctions are not divisions; they are clarifications.
The tragedy is that Paul’s unique apostleship—to the Gentiles, with the revelation of the mystery—has often been absorbed into a broader narrative that was never meant to contain it. When that happens, the church loses sight of what makes the body of Christ distinct: not ritual continuity, but spiritual union.
“One Lord, one faith, one baptism” is not a slogan. It is a doctrinal anchor. And according to Paul, that one baptism is the Spirit’s work—not man’s ceremony.
If the modern church hopes to recover true unity, it must begin where Paul began: not at the font, but at the cross.

Click to expand...

PastorMichaelDelBrown said:

I have addressed Paul baptizing at length in my new book: Christ Sent me not to baptize: Paul's gospel and the one baptism. Available at Amazon, kindle, audible.View attachment 375155

Click to expand...

tdidymas said:

How do you interpret 1 Cor 1:14 "I thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius"? Do you think he did not baptize those 2?

Click to expand...

tdidymas said:

You didn't answer the question. How do you interpret :14? Paul said he didn't baptize anyone EXCEPT Crispus and Gaius. Does it clearly mean that he baptized those two guys? If you claim no, then you have the burden of proof by exegesis to explain why you don't think it means that. It's not appropriate interpretation just to quote another verse as a contradiction, which is pitting scripture against scripture. Please explain verse :14.

Click to expand...

PastorMichaelDelBrown said:

One Lord, One Faith, One Baptism: Why Paul’s Words Still Divide the Church
By Michael Del Brown
Few biblical phrases are quoted more confidently—and examined less carefully—than Paul’s declaration in Ephesians 4:5: “One Lord, one faith, one baptism.” The verse is frequently invoked to promote unity, yet paradoxically, baptism remains one of the most divisive practices within modern Christianity.
The division is not merely denominational. It is theological. And at its core lies a fundamental question: Which baptism is Paul referring to?
For many believers, baptism is assumed—almost instinctively—to mean water baptism. It is treated as a universal ordinance, binding on all Christians in every age. But when Paul’s writings are examined on their own terms, a striking tension emerges—one that the modern church has often overlooked.
In 1 Corinthians 1:17, Paul makes a statement that should stop us cold: “Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel.” This is not a casual remark. It is a deliberate distinction. Paul separates his gospel commission from water baptism in a way no other apostle ever does.
If water baptism were essential to the gospel Paul preached—if it were the outward sign of entrance into the body of Christ—his words would be incomprehensible, even irresponsible. Yet Paul doubles down on this distinction throughout his epistles.
In Romans 6, Paul speaks of baptism not in terms of ritual, but reality: believers are baptized into Christ’s death, buried with Him, and raised to newness of life. The agent of this baptism is not water, but the Spirit. In 1 Corinthians 12:13, Paul is explicit: “For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body.”
This baptism is not performed by human hands. It is not administered by clergy. It is not repeated, recorded, or photographed. It occurs the moment a person believes the gospel of Christ’s death, burial, and resurrection. It is inward, spiritual, and effectual.
By contrast, water baptism—while commanded in Israel’s prophetic program and practiced under the kingdom gospel—belongs to a different context. John’s baptism was explicitly “for Israel” (Acts 13:24). Peter’s call at Pentecost tied baptism to repentance and covenantal restoration (Acts 2:38). These were not abstract symbols; they were covenantal acts rooted in Israel’s national hope.
Paul never places water baptism at the center of justification, salvation, or church unity. In fact, when the Corinthians began forming identities around who baptized whom, Paul rebuked
them sharply. His concern was not improper administration, but misplaced emphasis. The cross—not the water—had become secondary.
This distinction matters because theology shapes practice. When churches conflate Israel’s ordinances with Paul’s gospel, confusion follows. Salvation becomes something supplemented rather than received. Assurance becomes fragile. Unity becomes institutional rather than spiritual.
Paul’s gospel proclaims a finished work. Christ’s death was sufficient. His resurrection was decisive. The believer’s identification with Him is complete—without ritual reinforcement. To insist on water baptism today as a requirement, or even as a normative expression of obedience, risks obscuring the very sufficiency Paul labored to defend.
This is not an argument against baptismal history or against sincere believers who practice it. It is a call to rightly divide the Word of truth (2 Timothy 2:15). Scripture does not flatten God’s unfolding purposes into a single undifferentiated system. Distinctions are not divisions; they are clarifications.
The tragedy is that Paul’s unique apostleship—to the Gentiles, with the revelation of the mystery—has often been absorbed into a broader narrative that was never meant to contain it. When that happens, the church loses sight of what makes the body of Christ distinct: not ritual continuity, but spiritual union.
“One Lord, one faith, one baptism” is not a slogan. It is a doctrinal anchor. And according to Paul, that one baptism is the Spirit’s work—not man’s ceremony.
If the modern church hopes to recover true unity, it must begin where Paul began: not at the font, but at the cross.

Click to expand...

tdidymas said:

Since you keep evading the question, I'm done with you.

Click to expand...

tdidymas said:

You're contradicting the clear verse that says Paul baptized 2 people in Corinth. So I'm out of here.

Click to expand...