acts 2:38

[Schroeder]

why is this considered a command to be done, generally dealing with just the word baptism. it says it was Peters responce. THEN why does the word baptism here said to be water baptism. I keep seeing it stated that scriptures says we MUST believe repent and be baptized(water). Are not they all the same or happen at the same time. if you repent you obviously have believed if you truelly believe in your heart you will be baptized(Spirit) SO for Peter to say repent and be baptized s it not the same as saying turn from the old covenant and you will be baptized by Christ which will give you the forgiveness of sins and the SPirit in you. "ill stop there i have scripture but i will wait for responses to make them fit better.

 

[KJVisTruth]

I just looked at Acts 2:38, and it didnt come off like a command. What it tells me is, if you repent, you will be baptized with the Holy Ghost (Spirit). The water baptism is a symbolic act, imo... pretty different from the spiritual baptism.

 

[Beasley]

Well to not neglect context I have to consider the previous few verses.

36"Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ--this Jesus whom you crucified." 37Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren,what shall we do?" 38Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.



They are not told to repent of their sins. They are told to change their minds about Christ.

be baptized is an imperative or command but it is in the passive voice. In other words they don't baptize themselves, they receive the action of the verb. A person can't make the Holy Spirit baptize them into the body of Christ. Its an action that is preformed upon them when they change their mind about who their Messiah is.

 

[bigdAddyweAve423]

why is this considered a command to be done, generally dealing with just the word baptism. it says it was Peters responce. THEN why does the word baptism here said to be water baptism. I keep seeing it stated that scriptures says we MUST believe repent and be baptized(water). Are not they all the same or happen at the same time. if you repent you obviously have believed if you truelly believe in your heart you will be baptized(Spirit) SO for Peter to say repent and be baptized s it not the same as saying turn from the old covenant and you will be baptized by Christ which will give you the forgiveness of sins and the SPirit in you. "ill stop there i have scripture but i will wait for responses to make them fit better.

Just a heads up, I have participated in 2 thread with the same topic & they both ended up a pretty heated debate.


May God Bless you in your search for the truth.

 

[Schroeder]

Just a heads up, I have participated in 2 thread with the same topic & they both ended up a pretty heated debate.


May God Bless you in your search for the truth.

Yes i know i am RIGHT IN THE MIDDLE of them. that is why i bring this up because this is preety much the ONLY passage they use to stand on this water baptism idea. this and mark 16:16 which they also get wrong.

 

[Schroeder]

Well to not neglect context I have to consider the previous few verses.

36"Therefore let all the house of Israel know for certain that God has made Him both Lord and Christ--this Jesus whom you crucified." 37Now when they heard this, they were pierced to the heart, and said to Peter and the rest of the apostles, "Brethren,what shall we do?" 38Peter said to them, "Repent, and each of you be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins; and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.



They are not told to repent of their sins. They are told to change their minds about Christ.

be baptized is an imperative or command but it is in the passive voice. In other words they don't baptize themselves, they receive the action of the verb. A person can't make the Holy Spirit baptize them into the body of Christ. Its an action that is preformed upon them when they change their mind about who their Messiah is.

this is a good explination. though do you consider the word "baptism" in it to be speaking of water baptism or spirit baptism. Scripture does not EVER show water baptism as giving either the SPirit or remission of sins. SO it has to be a error on Peters part or mean spirit baptism.

 

[Beasley]

Schroeder:

Good question. Normally, I don't hedge because there is only one baptism (Eph 4) and that is the baptism of the Spirit, preformed by Christ at salvation, that enters a person into the body of Christ. The indwelling Spirit creates the temple in the body of the believer for the indwelling Shekinah glory. I don't believe water baptism is for us. I think it was for Israel.

Acts is transitional period. Peter's audience is Jews who had rejected Christ while he was alive (he came unto his own and his own received him not) and they needed to change their mind (repent of their sin of rejecting him) about who their Messiah was. John the Baptist came preaching and baptizing with water for the remission of sins I guess instead of animal sacrifice. The Jews understood ritual cleansing from the washing of the priests before they went into the temple. Water baptism taught the baptism of the Spirit or identification with Christ in his death, burial and resurrection before the doctrine was recorded in the New Testament. I think it was more or less a teaching aid, as all OT rituals were. After all if the blood of bulls and goats could never take away sin, water won't either. As a teaching aid before recorded New Testament doctrine on the baptism of the Spirit, I think some of the early Gentiles of the church were also baptized with water to teach their identification with Christ.

Nevertheless, whatever took place then, there is now only one baptism and that is baptism of the Spirit. As Peter said - its not getting wet, 1 Pet 3:21 "21Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh (not getting wet), but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

John the Baptist said Matt 3:11 "11"As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

So when we get over to Acts 2, it might be both, John's baptism of repentance and then also Christ baptized them with the Holy Spirit.

One thing to keep in mind is that the OT saints were not indwelt by the Holy Spirit. " But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified." Some of them were temporarily rested upon, or endued, but even the Apostles were not indwelt until after the Ascension. If you recall there was a veil between God and man in the temple, through which the High Priest entered only after the ritual cleansing. But, the normal OT believer did not have access to the Holy of Holies or the right to represent himself directly to God for cleansing of sin. When the veil was torn at the Cross, the veil in the Temple was torn in two. The way into the Holy of Holies was opened by the torn veil of Christs flesh. (Heb 10:20) Until Christ as true humanity had presented himself in the heavenly Holy of Holies, perfect and acceptable to the Father, God, neither Father, Son nor Spirit, permanently indwelt the believer. It was impossible prior to the Cross occurring in history because justification was not complete. The OT saint weren't even allowed into heaven when they died but went to Paradise until the Cross occurred. It remained to Paul to record the mystery doctrine of the church or those doctrines that taught what God was able to do for the believer because the Cross had actually occurred. At any rate there had to be some way to teach the believers new position in Christ and his permanent indwelling by the Spirit prior to it being recorded in Scripture.

Beasley

 

[Schroeder]

Schroeder:

Good question. Normally, I don't hedge because there is only one baptism (Eph 4) and that is the baptism of the Spirit, preformed by Christ at salvation, that enters a person into the body of Christ. The indwelling Spirit creates the temple in the body of the believer for the indwelling Shekinah glory. I don't believe water baptism is for us. I think it was for Israel.

Acts is transitional period. Peter's audience is Jews who had rejected Christ while he was alive (he came unto his own and his own received him not) and they needed to change their mind (repent of their sin of rejecting him) about who their Messiah was. John the Baptist came preaching and baptizing with water for the remission of sins I guess instead of animal sacrifice. The Jews understood ritual cleansing from the washing of the priests before they went into the temple. Water baptism taught the baptism of the Spirit or identification with Christ in his death, burial and resurrection before the doctrine was recorded in the New Testament. I think it was more or less a teaching aid, as all OT rituals were. After all if the blood of bulls and goats could never take away sin, water won't either. As a teaching aid before recorded New Testament doctrine on the baptism of the Spirit, I think some of the early Gentiles of the church were also baptized with water to teach their identification with Christ.

Nevertheless, whatever took place then, there is now only one baptism and that is baptism of the Spirit. As Peter said - its not getting wet, 1 Pet 3:21 "21Corresponding to that, baptism now saves you--not the removal of dirt from the flesh (not getting wet), but an appeal to God for a good conscience--through the resurrection of Jesus Christ,

John the Baptist said Matt 3:11 "11"As for me, I baptize you with water for repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, and I am not fit to remove His sandals; He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire.

So when we get over to Acts 2, it might be both, John's baptism of repentance and then also Christ baptized them with the Holy Spirit.

One thing to keep in mind is that the OT saints were not indwelt by the Holy Spirit. " But this He spoke of the Spirit, whom those who believed in Him were to receive; for the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus was not yet glorified." Some of them were temporarily rested upon, or endued, but even the Apostles were not indwelt until after the Ascension. If you recall there was a veil between God and man in the temple, through which the High Priest entered only after the ritual cleansing. But, the normal OT believer did not have access to the Holy of Holies or the right to represent himself directly to God for cleansing of sin. When the veil was torn at the Cross, the veil in the Temple was torn in two. The way into the Holy of Holies was opened by the torn veil of Christs flesh. (Heb 10:20) Until Christ as true humanity had presented himself in the heavenly Holy of Holies, perfect and acceptable to the Father, God, neither Father, Son nor Spirit, permanently indwelt the believer. It was impossible prior to the Cross occurring in history because justification was not complete. The OT saint weren't even allowed into heaven when they died but went to Paradise until the Cross occurred. It remained to Paul to record the mystery doctrine of the church or those doctrines that taught what God was able to do for the believer because the Cross had actually occurred. At any rate there had to be some way to teach the believers new position in Christ and his permanent indwelling by the Spirit prior to it being recorded in Scripture.

Beasley

Its nice to see someone get it right. i think you are as dispensationalist, which doesnt bother me all that much. Its the whole reason i KEEP bringing it up. but NOT to my surprise no one wants to debate it. It think they know they have nothing to stand on when you truelly look at scripture ALL OF IT. When you focus on there most trusted passage for water baptism as a command for us and show it is NOT there, they run.

 

[mark kennedy]

why is this considered a command to be done, generally dealing with just the word baptism. it says it was Peters responce. THEN why does the word baptism here said to be water baptism. I keep seeing it stated that scriptures says we MUST believe repent and be baptized(water). Are not they all the same or happen at the same time. if you repent you obviously have believed if you truelly believe in your heart you will be baptized(Spirit) SO for Peter to say repent and be baptized s it not the same as saying turn from the old covenant and you will be baptized by Christ which will give you the forgiveness of sins and the SPirit in you. "ill stop there i have scripture but i will wait for responses to make them fit better.

Consider the message and the pattern in the book of Acts:

This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens but he saith himself,"

"The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thy foes thy footstool."

Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."(Acts 2:31-36)​

This is the same message that is preached by Peter and John at the Temple:

But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled. Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. (Acts 3:18-21)​

Notice that the message of the prophets is emphasised as well as the 'refreshing'. There are two key elements here that run throughout the New Testament, hearing the Gospel and receiving the Holy Spirit.

To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 10:31,32)​

With that in mind consider this, there were those who were baptised and yet did not receive the Holy Spirit. The disciples of John at Ephesus and the Samaritans.

"Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John, Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost" (Acts 8:14-18)​

Baptism is identified with repentance but salvation is identified by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. I believe you should be baptised just like I think you should be buried when you die. You would be just as dead if you were not buried and the same thing is true of the death of the old man.

For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Acts 6:7-11)​

Isn't it odd that the commandment in the Old Testament to do no work on the Sabbath became a part of a works righteousness? Do you think that it is conceivable that we sometimes turn baptism into a kind of a work when we make it a requirement for salvation.

Don't get me wrong, I know how important baptism is and would never diminish this sacred ceremony. I was baptised as an infant, baptised later in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and again later baptised in Jesus name. You know what, I am even circumcised so I am completely confident that I have been sufficiently ceremonialized. None of this should convince me or anyone else that I am indeed 'In Christ', only the indwelling of the Holy Spirit can assure us of that.

I don't mean to preach and I certainly don't want to get involved in some divisive or contentious debate on water salvation. I'm just saying, despite it's wonderful significance you are justified by faith not by even our most sacred rites.

Grace and peace,
Mark

 

[Schroeder]

Consider the message and the pattern in the book of Acts:

This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed forth this, which ye now see and hear. For David is not ascended into the heavens but he saith himself,"​

"The Lord said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right hand, until I make thy foes thy footstool."​

Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made the same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."(Acts 2:31-36)​

This is the same message that is preached by Peter and John at the Temple:

But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled. Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord. And he shall send Jesus Christ, which before was preached unto you: Whom the heaven must receive until the times of restitution of all things, which God hath spoken by the mouth of all his holy prophets since the world began. (Acts 3:18-21)​

Notice that the message of the prophets is emphasised as well as the 'refreshing'. There are two key elements here that run throughout the New Testament, hearing the Gospel and receiving the Holy Spirit.

To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins. While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word. And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 10:31,32)​

With that in mind consider this, there were those who were baptised and yet did not receive the Holy Spirit. The disciples of John at Ephesus and the Samaritans.

"Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John, Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost. And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost" (Acts 8:14-18)​

Baptism is identified with repentance but salvation is identified by the indwelling of the Holy Spirit. I believe you should be baptised just like I think you should be buried when you die. You would be just as dead if you were not buried and the same thing is true of the death of the old man.

For he that is dead is freed from sin. Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him: Knowing that Christ being raised from the dead dieth no more; death hath no more dominion over him. For in that he died, he died unto sin once: but in that he liveth, he liveth unto God. Likewise reckon ye also yourselves to be dead indeed unto sin, but alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord. (Acts 6:7-11)​

Isn't it odd that the commandment in the Old Testament to do no work on the Sabbath became a part of a works righteousness? Do you think that it is conceivable that we sometimes turn baptism into a kind of a work when we make it a requirement for salvation.

Don't get me wrong, I know how important baptism is and would never diminish this sacred ceremony. I was baptised as an infant, baptised later in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit and again later baptised in Jesus name. You know what, I am even circumcised so I am completely confident that I have been sufficiently ceremonialized. None of this should convince me or anyone else that I am indeed 'In Christ', only the indwelling of the Holy Spirit can assure us of that.

I don't mean to preach and I certainly don't want to get involved in some divisive or contentious debate on water salvation. I'm just saying, despite it's wonderful significance you are justified by faith not by even our most sacred rites.

Grace and peace,
Mark

AMEN i agree with you. I find it odd, not really, that when i bring such an idea up or passage that it is not commented on by those with this water baptism for salvation and everything else theology. this is not the first time i have tried to get this point across but it is most always ignored. If you try to narrow it down to one passage to show there error the stay away.

 

[plmarquette]

Acts 2.38 (amplified) And Peter answered them, Repent (change your views and purpose to accept the will of God in your inner selves instead of rejecting it) and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of and release from your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
[ in line with the great commission ]

...distinguish from the baptism of John (repentance)

Acts 19. 4And Paul said, John baptized with the baptism of repentance, continually telling the people that they should believe in the One Who was to come after him, that is, in Jesus [having a conviction full of joyful trust that He is Christ, the Messiah, and being obedient to Him].
5On hearing this they were baptized [again, this time] in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6And as Paul laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke in [foreign, unknown] tongues (languages) and prophesied.

 

[Schroeder]

Acts 2.38 (amplified) And Peter answered them, Repent (change your views and purpose to accept the will of God in your inner selves instead of rejecting it) and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of and release from your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.
[ in line with the great commission ]

...distinguish from the baptism of John (repentance)

Acts 19. 4And Paul said, John baptized with the baptism of repentance, continually telling the people that they should believe in the One Who was to come after him, that is, in Jesus [having a conviction full of joyful trust that He is Christ, the Messiah, and being obedient to Him].
5On hearing this they were baptized [again, this time] in the name of the Lord Jesus. 6And as Paul laid his hands upon them, the Holy Spirit came on them; and they spoke in [foreign, unknown] tongues (languages) and prophesied.

And you are assuming water baptism when it ACTUALLY says INTO the name, which could give it a different meaning(the word baptism,as in immersing them into what Jesus taught). john the baptist said reptentance and forgiveness of sins. Again NO where does it say water baptism gives us ANYTHING. show me where it does in more then one place(as in just acts 2:38) If this is what you are suggesting water baptism is for.

 

[dan p]

In verse Acts 2:36 , Peter is accusing the house of Israel of ctucifying Christ. Their are no christians here, but Jews. In v37 , they are pricked in their heart and said unto to Peter, WHAT SHALL WE DO ? Do about what ? We killed Him and we can not bting Him back. Peter in v 38 tells them what to do.
1) they are to repent and be baptized

2) for the killing of Jesus and THAT sin will be fogiven.

3) this is not for Christians, for they are not in view HERE, ONLY JEWS.

4) Then this baptism was for the house of Israel only.

 

[chosenpath]

Ok folks this reminds me of when Paul debated circumcision of the flesh verses circumcision of the heart. Food for thought Paul did not debate baptism of water. He did however make this statement in 1Corinthians 1:10-17
Now I plead with you, brethren, by the name of our Lord Jesus Christ, that you all speak the same thing, and that there be no divisions among you, but that you be perfectly joined together in the same mind and in the same judgment. For it has been declared to me concerning you, my brethren, by those of Chloe's household, that there are contentions among you
Now I say this, that each of you says, "I am of Paul," or "I am of Apollos," or "I am of Cephas," or "I am of Christ." Is Christ divided? Was Paul crucified for you? Or were you baptized in the name of Paul? thank God that I baptized none of you except Crispus and Gaius, lest anyone should say that I had baptized in my own name. Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas. Besides, I do not know whether I baptized any other. For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.






Peter did make this statement concerning the Gentile in Acts 10:44-48
While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered, Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?" And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then they asked him to stay a few days.

 

[Stephen Kendall]

We need to do more than stumble over the wisdom of words as said above:

Chosenpath: For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel, not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of no effect.

The Baptism that we all need to go through is the reality of the baptism of the cup or cross. We need to follow humbly and stop amusing ourselves. There is much to be done. God didn't make us lazy to debate away our lives. Paul said that he didn't want any blood guilt to be on his hands. We have work to do in every part of our time & day. Let us please our Father in this work of Christ. The debate tables do not feed the hungry for the word of God. If you think that you are making the word of God from these tables (or kitchens) think again. You have your servant-like work to do. Get busy.

Here in this forum, in Bible studies, in conversations, in thought & deed, let us not carry out judgments, but the commands of our Lord Jesus Christ (humble ourselves, bring the Good News (not the juicy debate)) Serve God and not our worldly & fleshly entertainment desires. Give your days to the Lord.

 

[Stephen Kendall]

I am rethinking my purpose here in forums across the web. Are we just debating out of a love of competition? I didn't come here for that. Are debate lovers part of the children of God? I am not going to be able to change anyone or anything. My thoughts are local. They are not conquers on a conquest. The best that I can do is obey Christ as his servant and watch the vine grow and the formation of fruit in time. Praise God.

We give the "Good News" and the "Holy Spirit" convicts souls to Christ. Our part isn't to expand the "Good News" to match our thinking or accepted salvation (into our thoughts and acceptance), but to just humbly give it, prepared by the Word of God, Jesus Christ. It is Christ and the Holy Spirit that causes life and fruit. Step back and let it happen, live in peace with Christ & God.

Love you all.

 

[calluna]

why is this considered a command to be done, generally dealing with just the word baptism. it says it was Peters responce. THEN why does the word baptism here said to be water baptism. I keep seeing it stated that scriptures says we MUST believe repent and be baptized(water).

That isn't what Peter said, though.

'Peter replied, "Repent and be baptised, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins."' Ac 2:38 NIV

He did not say 'Believe." What he told them to actually do, in fact, was no more than John had told his followers, and we know that John's baptism was inadequate. So why were the same things different now? Because what was entailed in water baptism was not the same in each case; the important factor in baptism was not the act of baptism itself- there was no 'magic' in it, effecting salvation, as later came to be believed. The important factor in baptism was the name into which one was baptised. And name, to the ancients, was not mere appellation, as it is for us. A name conveyed a whole stance, an attitude to life, politically, philosophically or spiritually. So when Peter later said to the Sanhedrin:

"Salvation is found in no-one else, for there is no other name under heaven given to men by which we must be saved" (Ac 4:12 NIV)

he was not just giving these people a name to follow, he was identifying a whole 'package' (to use a rather inadequate word) of beliefs and attitudes, and indeed setting the cat among the pigeons as far as these hearers were concerned.

So when Peter said 'Be baptised" he did indeed mean "Commit your way to Jesus as both Lord and Christ". The actual baptism in water signified public declaration of this complete change of attitude already made in the minds of those baptised. These people were already justified before they were baptised, just as Abram was justified before he was circumcised.

Just as there were many circumcised Israelites and Jews who were rebels, who were justly disowned or destroyed by God, there have been, and there remain, many who are baptised in water but live as enemies of God. Water baptism is thereby devalued as a public witness. In some traditions, a more meaningful practice is the giving of a testimony of one's conversion before a whole congregation, which may or may not be followed by water baptism. The reason for this is that, while God knows precisely when a soul is justified, the church does not, and membership cannot be granted on a mere desire for it, or a mere say-so that there has been conversion. The immediate post-apostolic church found a 'wait-and-see' policy was necessary for prospective new members, and this is required even more now. Good and reliable evidence of the fruits of the Spirit is necessary before church membership is allowed.

 

[A Brother In Christ]

why is this considered a command to be done, generally dealing with just the word baptism. it says it was Peters responce. THEN why does the word baptism here said to be water baptism. I keep seeing it stated that scriptures says we MUST believe repent and be baptized(water). Are not they all the same or happen at the same time. if you repent you obviously have believed if you truelly believe in your heart you will be baptized(Spirit) SO for Peter to say repent and be baptized s it not the same as saying turn from the old covenant and you will be baptized by Christ which will give you the forgiveness of sins and the SPirit in you. "ill stop there i have scripture but i will wait for responses to make them fit better.

in Eph 4:5 states only one baptism saves... what one...

then romans 8:9 states if one does not have the spirit of Christ they are not His....

how does one get the spirit By God indwelling you! 1 cor 12:12-13, 1 jn 5:11-13

acts 1:5 states that water baptism is different than a future spirit baptism ... look forward to it