Starting today August 7th, 2024, in order to post in the Married Couples, Courting Couples, or Singles forums, you will not be allowed to post if you have your Marital status designated as private. Announcements will be made in the respective forums as well but please note that if yours is currently listed as Private, you will need to submit a ticket in the Support Area to have yours changed.
Peter was the evangelist in Acts 2 and he put the command to repent and be baptized upon those that believed his gospel message. No such thing as proxy baptism where Peter(evangelist) is baptized for someone else.But you are putting the command to baptize as being incumbent on the new believer; when scripture puts it on the evangelist.
You are making the baby christian responsible for the irresponsibility of the evangelist.
Is that right? Is that God? I don't think so.
Of course not. That is not what water baptism is all about.Can you by baptizing with water either bring on or deter THE HOLY SPIRIT?
No man can either deter or bring on the HOLY SPIRIT but GODBut you are putting the command to baptize as being incumbent on the new believer; when scripture puts it on the evangelist.
You are making the baby christian responsible for the irresponsibility of the evangelist.
Is that right? Is that God? I don't think so.
You are mistaking the Holy Spirit Upon (which happened to the disciples in Acts 2) and Holy Spirit Within (which happened to the disciples in Acts 1. Regeneration occurs with the indwelling of the Spirit. Cornelius et al exhibited Spirit Upon.but then he experienced that the house of cornelius received the holy spirit without any water baptism,
ExactlyOf course not. That is not what water baptism is all about.
You are mistaking the Holy Spirit Upon (which happened to the disciples in Acts 2) and Holy Spirit Within (which happened to the disciples in Acts 1. Regeneration occurs with the indwelling of the Spirit. Cornelius et al exhibited Spirit Upon.
Peter also experienced spirit upon when he immediately left the upper room and began to preach. Peter was sanctified yes by the in dwelling SPIRIT but his sanctification ( just as any believer) is an ongoing work by THE SANCTIFIER who leads us and teaches usYou are mistaking the Holy Spirit Upon (which happened to the disciples in Acts 2) and Holy Spirit Within (which happened to the disciples in Acts 1. Regeneration occurs with the indwelling of the Spirit. Cornelius et al exhibited Spirit Upon.
Not so. Baptism (immersion, mikvah) ALWAYS requires water unless SPECIFICALLY stated otherwise.when it talks about baptism in matt 28, remember that to be baptized "into" the name of the father son and holy spirit does not take water. But you can definitly be dunked into some water without being grafted (or baptized) into the trinity. So, its getting into christ that matters, not getting into water.
Not so. Baptism (immersion, mikvah) ALWAYS requires water unless SPECIFICALLY stated otherwise.
The idea of immersion was not some new doctrine going into a vacuum. It was well known. On the temple mount (where 3000 were baptized in Acts 2) there were HUNDREDS of baptsmal pools. They were used on a daily basis.
Proxy baptism?Peter was the evangelist in Acts 2 and he put the command to repent and be baptized upon those that believed his gospel message. No such thing as proxy baptism where Peter(evangelist) is baptized for someone else.
Salvic, as in for salvation? Simple, because it goes hand in hand with John 3:5, where Jesus states that "Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and the Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God."
The apostles were baptized, and then were given the power by Jesus to go and baptize others, in both water and spirit.
I fail to see how this is still a discussion when the answer is right there in black and white.
Is this one if the seven methods of baptism you mentioned?Not so. Baptism (immersion, mikvah) ALWAYS requires water unless SPECIFICALLY stated otherwise.
The idea of immersion was not some new doctrine going into a vacuum. It was well known. On the temple mount (where 3000 were baptized in Acts 2) there were HUNDREDS of baptsmal pools. They were used on a daily basis.
When it is laid upon your conscience or heart in your walk with the Lord, you should seek to do it then...Is water baptism a requirment to be saved
No i dont, becuase peter did only say as response to the seekers in jerusalem "repent and be baptized and you will receive the holy spirit"
Is this one if the seven methods of baptism you mentioned?
What are the other 6
But according to Acts 19, John's baptism was no longer valid.But in jewish thinking, it is the same thing, it was called "the baptism of repentance", and john the baptiser was the first to bring the real meaning of it.
Unscriptural. It violates 1 Jn 5.13:
These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, so that you may know that you have eternal life.
Read the rest of the book leading up to that verse. It is about knowing IN THIS LIFE that we are saved.
The NT says we HAVE BEEN SAVED, that we are BEING SAVED, and in the future we will BE SAVED.
My pastor describes it this way: we have been saved from the penalty of sin, we are being saved from the temptation of sin and we in the future will be saved from the very presence of sin. I have heard other similes as well, but this one works as well as any I have heard.
That was Peter discharging HIS OWN RESPONSIBILITY in the baptizmal issue. He is NOT his transferring the responsibility to someone else. He is telling those who are responding to the gospel that they are to submit to being baptized by the apostles.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?