Acts 22:16 Paul's salvation

[dwight92070]

[Doug] I don't know of a single prison that won't allow a prisoner, even one in solitary confinement, to go, under guard, to a place where he can be baptized. Even prisoners in solitary can receive ministerial services, and if that prisoner comes to faith in Christ, baptism can be arranged for them.


That's amazing how you know what all prisons will or will not allow. How about China? or Russia? or North Korea? or Iran? Syria? Venezuela? In fact, I doubt that you know what all prisons even here in America will or will not allow.

Do you really think that a prison in a communist country would allow a prisoner to get baptized? I thought you were smarter than that. But, according to you, if they won't let a prisoner get baptized, then that prisoner is lost forever.
Also, according to you, that would be HIS OWN FAULT because he should've gotten saved BEFORE he was arrested.

 

[dwight92070]

Doug "Don't give me the, "they never had a chance" routine."

I'm not the one giving out the "they never had a chance" routine. You are. You say that if they don't get baptized, they'll never have a chance to be saved.
I say "they have a chance until they die" (to put their faith in Jesus), whether they are baptized or not.

 

[MTMattie]

Yes, the truth should be plain as the nose on your face. God said, "Repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of sin and your will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit." In other words "whoever believes and is baptized will be saved".

Maybe that is something that we ought to leave up to God. I think He might be able to figure such things out and do the right thing.



Maybe you should follow your own advice.

Mark 16:16 never tells us what happens to people who believe but are not baptized.
But instead of leaving that up to God, you have to "help Him out" by telling us that such people are lost - not saved.

But that verse DOES NOT say that - you have no authority to suggest that it does.
[/QUOTE]

You do know that the jury is still out if Mark 16:16 was written by the same author as the Goespel of Mark?

The continuity is not there from from leaving Mark 16:8

 

[MTMattie]

That's silly. No, it's not water that saves us. It is God that saves us when He forgives us and gives us the gift of the Holy Spirit. He said He would do that when we repent and are baptized. He further added that was a promise. Do you believe in God's promises?

I do, but I also now know that you do believe in the water necessity as part of salvation.

Your words speak loud and clear.

Blessings

CRella

 

[Jim]

@MTMattie said,

Mark 16:16 never tells us what happens to people who believe but are not baptized.
But instead of leaving that up to God, you have to "help Him out" by telling us that such people are lost - not saved.

But that verse DOES NOT say that - you have no authority to suggest that it does.

You are correct, Mark 16:16 doesn't tell us what happens to people who believe abut are not baptized. And neither does any other passage. That is probably because such would never have happened. How can someone believe in God and not believe what He said?

 

[Jim]

I do, but I also now know that you do believe in the water necessity as part of salvation.

Your words speak loud and clear.

Blessings

CRella

It is not so much that water is a necessary part of salvation. Rather, it is that God has said that when the repentant believer is baptized in the name of Jesus Christ, He will forgive his sins, and he will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Acts 2:38). And there is not a single passage of scripture that contradicts that. There are passages which do not specifically mention baptism, but there are passages where it tells of some being saved where it doesn't specifically mention faith. In fact, there are about 14 passages in the book of Acts that describe some being saved. Of those, baptism is mentioned more times that believing. I would also point out that Acts is the only book where we read of anyone actually being saved. The other books speak about salvation, but do not ever speak of someone being saved.

 

[dwight92070]

Maybe that is something that we ought to leave up to God. I think He might be able to figure such things out and do the right thing.



Maybe you should follow your own advice.

Mark 16:16 never tells us what happens to people who believe but are not baptized.
But instead of leaving that up to God, you have to "help Him out" by telling us that such people are lost - not saved.

But that verse DOES NOT say that - you have no authority to suggest that it does.

You do know that the jury is still out if Mark 16:16 was written by the same author as the Goespel of Mark?

The continuity is not there from from leaving Mark 16:8
[/QUOTE]

The Syriac, Old Latin, and Gothic bibles ALL contain the long ending, all of which are older than the oldest Greek manuscripts. Also Iraneus and Paician both quoted from the long ending in 170 A.D. - also Tertulian quoted from the long ending in 215 A.D. - Hippoletus quoted from the long ending in 235 A.D.
Later manuscripts, in the 4th century, the Vaticanus and the Sinaiaticus left out the long ending.

Also, there is NO strong evidence that Mark did not write the long ending.

So the evidence seems to lean towards Mark writing the long ending.

Mark 16:16 tells us that a believer should get baptized after he believes, which I believe lines up with all of the gospels.
However, Mark 16:16 DOES NOT say that the absence of baptism will keep a person from being saved - rather it says that disbelief will keep them from being saved.

 

[Jim]

Mark 16:16 tells us that a believer should get baptized after he believes, which I believe lines up with all of the gospels.
However, Mark 16:16 DOES NOT say that the absence of baptism will keep a person from being saved - rather it says that disbelief will keep them from being saved.

The word "and" in the sentence means that both believing and being baptized are required. You should have learned the logical meaning of that grammatical construction at a very early age even before your studies in English in grammar school. Would any of those believing Peter at Pentecost have whined about the need to be baptized and have argued that repenting should be all that was required? I don't think so. That would have been foolish.

 

[Johann]

The word "and" in the sentence means that both believing and being baptized are required. You should have learned the logical meaning of that grammatical construction at a very early age even before your studies in English in grammar school. Would any of those believing Peter at Pentecost have whined about the need to be baptized and have argued that repenting should be all that was required? I don't think so. That would have been foolish.

And is baptized (kai baptistheis). The omission of baptized with “disbelieveth” would seem to show that Jesus does not make baptism essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on disbelief, not on baptism. So salvation rests on belief. Baptism is merely the picture of the new life not the means of securing it. So serious a sacramental doctrine would need stronger support anyhow than this disputed portion of Mark.
Robertson.


He that believeth -- See Jas_2:24 note "Being Saved" Justified by faith.

J.

 

[Jim]

And is baptized (kai baptistheis). The omission of baptized with “disbelieveth” would seem to show that Jesus does not make baptism essential to salvation. Condemnation rests on disbelief, not on baptism. So salvation rests on belief. Baptism is merely the picture of the new life not the means of securing it. So serious a sacramental doctrine would need stronger support anyhow than this disputed portion of Mark.
Robertson.


He that believeth -- See Jas_2:24 note "Being Saved" Justified by faith.

J.

Rom 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel.

2Th_1:8 in flaming fire, rendering vengeance to them that know not God, and to them that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus:

1Pe 4:17 For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?

Both Paul and Peter speak about what happens to those who do not obey the gospel. That would indicate, at least imply, that there is a need to obey the gospel. Is that limited to just believing? I don't think so. As someone else has said, "How can you say you believe in God if you don't do what He says?"

He says, "believe and be baptized" (Mark 16:16). He says make disciples by "baptizing and teaching" (Mat 28:10-20).He says "repent and be baptized" (Acts 2:38). He says, "Arise and be baptized" (Acts 22:16). He says be "buried with Him in baptism" (Rom 6:4-5). He says, "be baptized into Christ" (Gal 3:27). He says, "having been buried with Him in baptism" (Cor 2:12). He says "baptism now saves you" (1 Pet 3:21).

In the book of Acts, it references about 14 occasions where one or more people were said to be saved. In those, baptism is mentioned even more times than believing.

The washing stated in Acts 22:16, Ephesians 5:26 and Titus 3:5 all suggest water baptism.

You can discount baptism as a precondition to salvation if you like, but I think you do so only at your own peril.

 

[Johann]

Rom 10:16 But they have not all obeyed the gospel.

2Th_1:8 in flaming fire, rendering vengeance to them that know not God, and to them that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus:

1Pe 4:17 For it is time for judgment to begin at the household of God; and if it begins with us, what will be the outcome for those who do not obey the gospel of God?

Both Paul and Peter speak about what happens to those who do not obey the gospel. That would indicate, at least imply, that there is a need to obey the gospel. Is that limited to just believing? I don't think so. As someone else has said, "How can you say you believe in God if you don't do what He says?"

He says, "believe and be baptized" (Mark 16:16). He says make disciples by "baptizing and teaching" (Mat 28:10-20).He says "repent and be baptized" (Acts 2:38). He says, "Arise and be baptized" (Acts 22:16). He says be "buried with Him in baptism" (Rom 6:4-5). He says, "be baptized into Christ" (Gal 3:27). He says, "having been buried with Him in baptism" (Cor 2:12). He says "baptism now saves you" (1 Pet 3:21).

In the book of Acts, it references about 14 occasions where one or more people were said to be saved. In those, baptism is mentioned even more times than believing.

The washing stated in Acts 22:16, Ephesians 5:26 and Titus 3:5 all suggest water baptism.

You can discount baptism as a precondition to salvation if you like, but I think you do so only at your own peril.

Relax @Jim.

How to Be Baptized Without Getting Wet

graceambassadors.com

"BAPTISM"
Spirit Baptism Saves Us, Not Water Baptism!
INTRODUCTION
Another objection to the necessity of baptism involves making a distinction between baptism in the Spirit and baptism in water; this view proclaims...
"The baptism which saves is a baptism in the Spirit at the point of faith"
"Passages like Ro 6:3-7, Ga 3:27, etc., refer to Spirit baptism, not water baptism"

Those upholding this view point out...
There are many different types of baptisms in the Bible
We should not assume that water baptism is always the subject under consideration

As expressed by one proponent of this view...
"There is a way to distinguish between water baptism and Spirit Baptism in those scriptures which do not specifically tell which type is being discussed."
"That way is this: if the passage is talking about being placed into Christ, then it is talking about Spirit Baptism, not Water Baptism, for Spirit Baptism is how we are placed into Christ."
"...in Romans 6, for example, it is obvious that the context is being placed into Christ and the passage dwells on the believer's identification with Christ, with His death, and with His resurrection. In this passage, the believer is not baptized into WATER, but into the death of Christ." - Baptism and Salvation, Charles T. Buntin

-- Of course, this argument presumes the very point to be proven
[There are several problems that I have with this effort to explain away the necessity of baptism in water for the remission of sins. To begin with, the Bible teaches...]

THERE IS ONE BAPTISM
THE BIBLE DOES DESCRIBE MANY BAPTISMS...
At the very least there are six...
The baptism of Moses (Israel) - 1Co 10:1-2
The baptism of John, a baptism in water - Mk 1:4-5
The baptism of the Holy Spirit - Mt 3:11; Lk 3:16; Ac 1:5; 2:1-4; 10:44,45; 11:15-16
The baptism of fire (judgment) - Mt 3:11; Lk 3:16,17
The baptism of suffering (persecution) - Mt 20:20-33; Lk 12:50
The baptism of the Great Commission, which was a baptism in water - Mt 28:19; Mk 16:15-16; Ac 2:38; 8:12-13,35-38; 10:47-48; 22:16
Some include two more...
The baptism of Noah, metaphorically speaking, which involved water - 1Pe 3:20
The baptism of Jesus, which involved water and the Spirit - Mt 3:16-17

THERE IS NOW JUST ONE BAPTISM...
In describing the unity of the Spirit...
Paul proclaims there is one baptism - Ep 4:3-7
Just as there is only one Lord, one faith, one hope, etc.
To which of the six (or eight) baptisms was Paul referring?
I believe we can safely rule out all but two
The issue boils down to this: Is the one baptism of Ep 4:5...
The baptism of the Holy Spirit?
The baptism of the Great Commission?

-- Or might there actually be a connection between these two, with the end result there being one baptism with two elements: water and the Spirit?
[Whichever, we cannot have two or more baptisms; there is only one baptism! Now let me explain why regarding the one baptism...]

IT IS THE BAPTISM OF THE GREAT COMMISSION
WHY THE BAPTISM OF THE GREAT COMMISSION...?
This is the baptism...
Commanded by Jesus
For people of all nations - Mt 28:19
For every person in the world - Mk 16:15-16
Commanded by the apostles in response to the gospel
As proclaimed to the Jews at Pentecost - Ac 2:38
As commanded by Peter to the Gentiles - Ac 10:48

-- Indeed, every example of conversion described in detail in the book of Acts involves this baptism!

If there is only one baptism...
It must involve this one, for it is commanded of all who would come to Christ!
Otherwise we must throw it out (as some have done)
WHAT ABOUT THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT...?
This is a difficult subject, about which the Bible actually says very little...
John promised that Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit - Mt 3:11
Jesus promised that He would baptize with the Holy Spirit - Ac 1:5
But the baptism of the Holy Spirit is then explicitly mentioned in just two places
At the conversion of Cornelius - Ac 10:44-45; 11:15-16
Which reminded Peter of Pentecost - Ac 11:15-16; 2:1-4

This has led to much confusion about what the baptism of the Spirit is...
Some say that it was an event that occurred only twice
On the day of Pentecost, and only upon the apostles - Ac 2
At the conversion of Cornelius and his household, the first Gentiles - Ac 10,11

Some say it is an event that occurs at every conversion
When a person is saved, they are that moment "baptized" with the Holy Spirit

Occurs to all who become Christians, and no miraculous manifestations need be present
Others say it is an event that occurs after conversion
A "second work of grace" that must be sought diligently

Many people understand "speaking in tongues" to be a sign of this "baptism of the Holy Spirit"
Some even say that it is necessary to be truly saved
I am persuaded the baptism of the Holy Spirit...

Refers to the pouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost - Ac 2:1-21
Was a one-time event, but with ramifications lasting throughout the gospel age

In which the Holy Spirit is now available in some way to all whom God calls through the gospel - 2Th 2:13-14; Tit 3:7
For those who receive the Spirit, the Spirit then empowers whom He wills to the degree He wills - 1Co 12:4-13
For the servants of God used in the revelation and confirmation of His Word, the Spirit imparted "spiritual gifts" (this work of the Spirit was temporary, and ended once God's revelation was completed)

For all of the servants of God, the Spirit serves as the "instrumental agent" by which God strengthens and blesses them (this work of the Spirit continues today, and will until Christ returns)
-- This view presumes that one receives the Spirit at baptism (see below) - Ac 2:38-39; 1Co 12:13; Tit 3:5-7
So while at first there may be have been two baptisms spoken of by Jesus...
The baptism of the Great Commission - Mt 28:19; Mk 16:15-16
The baptism of the Spirit - Ac 1:5 ...once the Spirit was poured out, only "one baptism" remained, which was that baptism commanded of people in every nation!
[Having declared the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" a promise that was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost, let me emphasize concerning the "baptism of the Great Commission"...]

IT INVOLVES BOTH WATER AND THE SPIRIT
THAT IT INVOLVES WATER...
Is evidenced by conversion of the Ethiopian - Ac 8:35-38
Is made clearer by the command of Peter - Ac 10:47-48
Is alluded to by Paul and Peter in their epistles - Ep 5:26; 1Pe 3:20-21

THAT IT INVOLVES THE SPIRIT...
Is indicated when Jesus declared that one must be "born again" - Jn 3:3-5
To be born "of water and the Spirit"
Not two births, but one birth with two elements (water and Spirit)
Is made clearer when Paul wrote to Titus - Tit 3:5-6
God saved us "through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit"
That washing (a clear allusion to baptism) involved a regeneration and renewing of the Spirit!
Is seen in Paul's remarks to the Corinthians - 1Co 12:13
By the Spirit were we baptized into the one body
In baptism, the Spirit not only regenerates, but incorporates us into the body of Christ!
[The baptism of the Great Commission is more than just an immersion in water. At the moment the penitent believer is lowered into the water, the Spirit is very much at work in renewing, regenerating, and incorporating us into the Body of Christ. In other words...]

IT HAS SPIRITUAL SIGNIFICANCE
IT INVOLVES A BURIAL INTO THE DEATH OF CHRIST...
As Paul explains in Ro 6:3-7
Baptism into Christ is a burial into His death
In baptism we are crucified with Christ
In baptism we thus die to sin, and rise to walk in newness of life
Some contend Paul is teaching what water baptism symbolizes...
That it pictures what took place when we were saved before baptism
That it depicts the Spirit baptism which occurred at the moment of faith
-- But if so, then we have two baptisms, and Paul taught there was only one!
Others say Paul is describing Spirit baptism...
That water baptism (i.e., the baptism of the Great Commission) is not even under consideration
That this passage is depicting what happens before water baptism
-- Again, we would have two baptisms, not one!
This passage describes what happens when a person is baptized into Christ...
Since there is only one baptism, it must be referring to that baptism
Since the one baptism is the baptism of the Great Commission, Paul is describing the spiritual significance of what takes place when one is baptized in water!

THERE ARE OTHER THINGS OF SPIRITUAL SIGNIFICANCE...
The one baptism (of the Great Commission) involves...
A cutting away of sin - Col 2:11-13
A putting on of Christ - Ga 3:27
Again, some contend these passages are describing...
"Spirit baptism" at the point of faith
Not the baptism of the Great Commission

-- But this makes two baptisms, when there is only one!

Since the baptism of the Great Commission involves both water and the Spirit...
There is no reason God (i.e., the Spirit) could not be at work when a person is immersed in water
God has chosen to use baptism in water to be the point in time in which His Spirit does His work of regeneration and renewal! - Tit 3:5; Ac 22:16

CONCLUSION
Some people want to "have their cake and eat it too"...

They want to say passages like Ro 6:3-7; Ga 3:27; Col 2:11-13 are describing "Spirit baptism", not "water baptism"

But then appeal to these passages when they seek to describe "water baptism" as symbolic of "Spirit baptism" which has already occurred

Note well: If these passages are not discussing "water baptism" (i.e., the baptism of the Great Commission)...

We have no Scripture that tells us what is the true significance and meaning of the baptism commanded by Christ and His apostles!
The Lord has commanded water baptism, with no explanation as to what it means!

-- Any explanation as to the meaning and purpose of the baptism of the Great Commission is pure conjecture and without any scriptural basis!

The "unity of the Spirit" proclaims there is only one baptism...

Not two baptisms, one of the Spirit at the time of salvation, and one later for some unexplained reason

But one baptism, involving both water and the Spirit, in response to the preaching of Christ and His apostles

This one baptism...
Is a rebirth involving both water and the Spirit - Jn 3:5
Is for the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit - Ac 2:38; 22:16
Is a baptism in water - Ac 8:35-38; 10:47-48
Involves the Spirit incorporating us into the body of Christ - 1Co 12:13
Is a burial into the death of Christ in which we are crucified with Him - Ro 6:3-7
Clothes us with Christ - Ga 3:27
Is a spiritual circumcision, in which our sins are cut away - Col 2:11-13
Is a washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, who was poured out as promised by Jesus - Tit 3:5-7; Ac 1:5; 2:1-4
Saves us, not through some physical cleansing, but by the resurrection of Jesus! - 1Pe 3:21
Should we be surprised that the Great Commission of our Lord contains a great command having great significance?

"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen. (Mt 28:19-20)

And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." (Mk 16:15-16)
'And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.' (Ac 22:16)

Do you see why I’m hesitant to get into this? Let’s look at what Paul is actually saying here.

The ECF's holds to baptismal regeneration, are you aware of this?

J.

 

[Jim]

Relax @Jim.


"BAPTISM"
Spirit Baptism Saves Us, Not Water Baptism!
INTRODUCTION
Another objection to the necessity of baptism involves making a distinction between baptism in the Spirit and baptism in water; this view proclaims...
"The baptism which saves is a baptism in the Spirit at the point of faith"
"Passages like Ro 6:3-7, Ga 3:27, etc., refer to Spirit baptism, not water baptism"

Those upholding this view point out...
There are many different types of baptisms in the Bible
We should not assume that water baptism is always the subject under consideration

As expressed by one proponent of this view...
"There is a way to distinguish between water baptism and Spirit Baptism in those scriptures which do not specifically tell which type is being discussed."
"That way is this: if the passage is talking about being placed into Christ, then it is talking about Spirit Baptism, not Water Baptism, for Spirit Baptism is how we are placed into Christ."
"...in Romans 6, for example, it is obvious that the context is being placed into Christ and the passage dwells on the believer's identification with Christ, with His death, and with His resurrection. In this passage, the believer is not baptized into WATER, but into the death of Christ." - Baptism and Salvation, Charles T. Buntin

-- Of course, this argument presumes the very point to be proven
[There are several problems that I have with this effort to explain away the necessity of baptism in water for the remission of sins. To begin with, the Bible teaches...]

THERE IS ONE BAPTISM
THE BIBLE DOES DESCRIBE MANY BAPTISMS...
At the very least there are six...
The baptism of Moses (Israel) - 1Co 10:1-2
The baptism of John, a baptism in water - Mk 1:4-5
The baptism of the Holy Spirit - Mt 3:11; Lk 3:16; Ac 1:5; 2:1-4; 10:44,45; 11:15-16
The baptism of fire (judgment) - Mt 3:11; Lk 3:16,17
The baptism of suffering (persecution) - Mt 20:20-33; Lk 12:50
The baptism of the Great Commission, which was a baptism in water - Mt 28:19; Mk 16:15-16; Ac 2:38; 8:12-13,35-38; 10:47-48; 22:16
Some include two more...
The baptism of Noah, metaphorically speaking, which involved water - 1Pe 3:20
The baptism of Jesus, which involved water and the Spirit - Mt 3:16-17

THERE IS NOW JUST ONE BAPTISM...
In describing the unity of the Spirit...
Paul proclaims there is one baptism - Ep 4:3-7
Just as there is only one Lord, one faith, one hope, etc.
To which of the six (or eight) baptisms was Paul referring?
I believe we can safely rule out all but two
The issue boils down to this: Is the one baptism of Ep 4:5...
The baptism of the Holy Spirit?
The baptism of the Great Commission?

-- Or might there actually be a connection between these two, with the end result there being one baptism with two elements: water and the Spirit?
[Whichever, we cannot have two or more baptisms; there is only one baptism! Now let me explain why regarding the one baptism...]

IT IS THE BAPTISM OF THE GREAT COMMISSION
WHY THE BAPTISM OF THE GREAT COMMISSION...?
This is the baptism...
Commanded by Jesus
For people of all nations - Mt 28:19
For every person in the world - Mk 16:15-16
Commanded by the apostles in response to the gospel
As proclaimed to the Jews at Pentecost - Ac 2:38
As commanded by Peter to the Gentiles - Ac 10:48

-- Indeed, every example of conversion described in detail in the book of Acts involves this baptism!

If there is only one baptism...
It must involve this one, for it is commanded of all who would come to Christ!
Otherwise we must throw it out (as some have done)
WHAT ABOUT THE BAPTISM OF THE HOLY SPIRIT...?
This is a difficult subject, about which the Bible actually says very little...
John promised that Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit - Mt 3:11
Jesus promised that He would baptize with the Holy Spirit - Ac 1:5
But the baptism of the Holy Spirit is then explicitly mentioned in just two places
At the conversion of Cornelius - Ac 10:44-45; 11:15-16
Which reminded Peter of Pentecost - Ac 11:15-16; 2:1-4

This has led to much confusion about what the baptism of the Spirit is...
Some say that it was an event that occurred only twice
On the day of Pentecost, and only upon the apostles - Ac 2
At the conversion of Cornelius and his household, the first Gentiles - Ac 10,11

Some say it is an event that occurs at every conversion
When a person is saved, they are that moment "baptized" with the Holy Spirit

Occurs to all who become Christians, and no miraculous manifestations need be present
Others say it is an event that occurs after conversion
A "second work of grace" that must be sought diligently

Many people understand "speaking in tongues" to be a sign of this "baptism of the Holy Spirit"
Some even say that it is necessary to be truly saved
I am persuaded the baptism of the Holy Spirit...

Refers to the pouring out of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost - Ac 2:1-21
Was a one-time event, but with ramifications lasting throughout the gospel age

In which the Holy Spirit is now available in some way to all whom God calls through the gospel - 2Th 2:13-14; Tit 3:7
For those who receive the Spirit, the Spirit then empowers whom He wills to the degree He wills - 1Co 12:4-13
For the servants of God used in the revelation and confirmation of His Word, the Spirit imparted "spiritual gifts" (this work of the Spirit was temporary, and ended once God's revelation was completed)

For all of the servants of God, the Spirit serves as the "instrumental agent" by which God strengthens and blesses them (this work of the Spirit continues today, and will until Christ returns)
-- This view presumes that one receives the Spirit at baptism (see below) - Ac 2:38-39; 1Co 12:13; Tit 3:5-7
So while at first there may be have been two baptisms spoken of by Jesus...
The baptism of the Great Commission - Mt 28:19; Mk 16:15-16
The baptism of the Spirit - Ac 1:5 ...once the Spirit was poured out, only "one baptism" remained, which was that baptism commanded of people in every nation!
[Having declared the "baptism of the Holy Spirit" a promise that was fulfilled on the day of Pentecost, let me emphasize concerning the "baptism of the Great Commission"...]

IT INVOLVES BOTH WATER AND THE SPIRIT
THAT IT INVOLVES WATER...
Is evidenced by conversion of the Ethiopian - Ac 8:35-38
Is made clearer by the command of Peter - Ac 10:47-48
Is alluded to by Paul and Peter in their epistles - Ep 5:26; 1Pe 3:20-21

THAT IT INVOLVES THE SPIRIT...
Is indicated when Jesus declared that one must be "born again" - Jn 3:3-5
To be born "of water and the Spirit"
Not two births, but one birth with two elements (water and Spirit)
Is made clearer when Paul wrote to Titus - Tit 3:5-6
God saved us "through the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit"
That washing (a clear allusion to baptism) involved a regeneration and renewing of the Spirit!
Is seen in Paul's remarks to the Corinthians - 1Co 12:13
By the Spirit were we baptized into the one body
In baptism, the Spirit not only regenerates, but incorporates us into the body of Christ!
[The baptism of the Great Commission is more than just an immersion in water. At the moment the penitent believer is lowered into the water, the Spirit is very much at work in renewing, regenerating, and incorporating us into the Body of Christ. In other words...]

IT HAS SPIRITUAL SIGNIFICANCE
IT INVOLVES A BURIAL INTO THE DEATH OF CHRIST...
As Paul explains in Ro 6:3-7
Baptism into Christ is a burial into His death
In baptism we are crucified with Christ
In baptism we thus die to sin, and rise to walk in newness of life
Some contend Paul is teaching what water baptism symbolizes...
That it pictures what took place when we were saved before baptism
That it depicts the Spirit baptism which occurred at the moment of faith
-- But if so, then we have two baptisms, and Paul taught there was only one!
Others say Paul is describing Spirit baptism...
That water baptism (i.e., the baptism of the Great Commission) is not even under consideration
That this passage is depicting what happens before water baptism
-- Again, we would have two baptisms, not one!
This passage describes what happens when a person is baptized into Christ...
Since there is only one baptism, it must be referring to that baptism
Since the one baptism is the baptism of the Great Commission, Paul is describing the spiritual significance of what takes place when one is baptized in water!

THERE ARE OTHER THINGS OF SPIRITUAL SIGNIFICANCE...
The one baptism (of the Great Commission) involves...
A cutting away of sin - Col 2:11-13
A putting on of Christ - Ga 3:27
Again, some contend these passages are describing...
"Spirit baptism" at the point of faith
Not the baptism of the Great Commission

-- But this makes two baptisms, when there is only one!

Since the baptism of the Great Commission involves both water and the Spirit...
There is no reason God (i.e., the Spirit) could not be at work when a person is immersed in water
God has chosen to use baptism in water to be the point in time in which His Spirit does His work of regeneration and renewal! - Tit 3:5; Ac 22:16

CONCLUSION
Some people want to "have their cake and eat it too"...

They want to say passages like Ro 6:3-7; Ga 3:27; Col 2:11-13 are describing "Spirit baptism", not "water baptism"

But then appeal to these passages when they seek to describe "water baptism" as symbolic of "Spirit baptism" which has already occurred

Note well: If these passages are not discussing "water baptism" (i.e., the baptism of the Great Commission)...

We have no Scripture that tells us what is the true significance and meaning of the baptism commanded by Christ and His apostles!
The Lord has commanded water baptism, with no explanation as to what it means!

-- Any explanation as to the meaning and purpose of the baptism of the Great Commission is pure conjecture and without any scriptural basis!

The "unity of the Spirit" proclaims there is only one baptism...

Not two baptisms, one of the Spirit at the time of salvation, and one later for some unexplained reason

But one baptism, involving both water and the Spirit, in response to the preaching of Christ and His apostles

This one baptism...
Is a rebirth involving both water and the Spirit - Jn 3:5
Is for the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit - Ac 2:38; 22:16
Is a baptism in water - Ac 8:35-38; 10:47-48
Involves the Spirit incorporating us into the body of Christ - 1Co 12:13
Is a burial into the death of Christ in which we are crucified with Him - Ro 6:3-7
Clothes us with Christ - Ga 3:27
Is a spiritual circumcision, in which our sins are cut away - Col 2:11-13
Is a washing of regeneration and renewing by the Holy Spirit, who was poured out as promised by Jesus - Tit 3:5-7; Ac 1:5; 2:1-4
Saves us, not through some physical cleansing, but by the resurrection of Jesus! - 1Pe 3:21
Should we be surprised that the Great Commission of our Lord contains a great command having great significance?

"Go therefore and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, teaching them to observe all things that I have commanded you; and lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the age." Amen. (Mt 28:19-20)

And He said to them, "Go into all the world and preach the gospel to every creature. He who believes and is baptized will be saved; but he who does not believe will be condemned." (Mk 16:15-16)
'And now why are you waiting? Arise and be baptized, and wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord.' (Ac 22:16)

Do you see why I’m hesitant to get into this? Let’s look at what Paul is actually saying here.

The ECF's holds to baptismal regeneration, are you aware of this?

J.

Baptism with/in/by the Holy Spirit occurs in water baptism. There is one baptism. It is in water. There are two essential results, forgiveness of sin and regeneration. Regeneration, the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit, is Spirit baptism.

 

[Johann]

Baptism with/in/by the Holy Spirit occurs in water baptism. There is one baptism. It is in water. There are two essential results, forgiveness of sin and regeneration. Regeneration, the gift of the indwelling Holy Spirit, is Spirit baptism.

I guess you did not read thoughtfully, ready for a comeback @Jim

Following the Lord in Baptism

graceambassadors.com

How to Be Baptized Without Getting Wet

Justin Johnson

When most people think of baptism they think of water. Whether it be immersion, sprinkled, splashed, or sprayed, they think water has something to do with it.

Did you know the Bible teaches it is possible to be baptized without getting wet?

Consider John the Baptist. That he baptized with water is clear (John 1:31; Mark 1:5). Everyone John baptized got wet.

However, in Matthew 3:11 the only man to be called Baptist in the Bible identifies two other baptisms that do not include water.

“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:” – Matthew 3:11

The Holy Ghost is spiritual and so is not made of water, and I’m pretty sure the baptism with fire would evaporate any moisture left on anyone who participates in that fiery furnace (Isa 4:4: Mal 3:2).

Then there is the baptism of the nation Israel unto Moses in 1 Corinthians 10:2. They walked across the sea on dry ground and the Egyptians who were dunked in the water drowned.

After Jesus was baptized with water by John, he spoke of another baptism for himself which would end in his death. The only water involved in the death of Jesus was that which flowed out of him (John 19:34).

“But I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how am I straitened till it be accomplished!” – Luke 12:50

Many Baptisms: Some Dry, Some Wet

There are many different baptisms in the Bible and most of them are dry.

Baptism has become synonymous with water baptism, but baptism does not mean water. A better definition would be how someone is identified with something.

This is why Paul describes a baptism into the body of Christ in 1 Corinthians 12:13. Everyone who is saved by the gospel of Christ today is identified with the Lord in his second baptism unto death.

“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.” – 1 Corinthians 12:13

“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?” – Romans 6:3
Baptism into Christ is identification with Christ. We become crucified with Christ without ever touching water (Gal 2:20).

Baptism with water never symbolized death, but cleansing, as in the remission of sins (Mark 1:4). In the present dispensation of grace, our sins are forgiven through the blood of Christ through his death.

There is only one baptism Paul says is necessary in the church, and it does not include water or a priest to perform it. It is performed by the operation of God when we believe the gospel of the death and resurrection of Christ (Eph 4:5).

“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.” – Col 2:12

If you think baptism must always include water, then you are a little wet behind the ears.

Baptism does not require water, there are many examples in the Bible, and the one baptism you need does not require a single drop.



Related Posts:
- List: Baptisms in the Bible
- One Lord, One Faith, Three Baptisms!
- Following the Lord in Baptism
- Should I Be Water Baptized?
- Why was the Lord Baptized?
- The Most Important Baptism

Question-What is the most important Baptism? Water? Or Spirit? What verse comes to mind @Jim?

J.

 

[Jim]

Question-What is the most important Baptism? Water? Or Spirit? What verse comes to mind @Jim?

Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit--just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call-- 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all

 

[Jim]

I guess you did not read thoughtfully, ready for a comeback @Jim

I disagree with most of that. It is typical Zwingliism.

 

[Johann]

Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit--just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call-- 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all

Eph 1:13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,
Eph 1:14 Which is the earnest of our inheritance until the redemption of the purchased possession, unto the praise of his glory.

Thanks @Jim

J.

 

[Johann]

I disagree with most of that. It is typical Zwingliism.

Not at all-if you disagree, @Jim, don’t attack the messenger. Instead, address and rebut what I’ve posted.


The term Zwinglianism refers to the theological beliefs and practices associated with Huldrych Zwingli (1484–1531), a Swiss reformer and contemporary of Martin Luther during the Protestant Reformation. Zwinglianism is most commonly known for its views on the sacraments, particularly the Lord’s Supper, and its emphasis on the primacy of Scripture in worship and church governance. Below is a detailed exploration of what Zwinglianism entails:

1. Core Beliefs of Zwinglianism
A. The Lord's Supper (Eucharist)

Zwingli's Symbolic View:

Zwingli argued that the bread and wine of the Lord’s Supper are purely symbolic representations of Christ’s body and blood. He rejected the Roman Catholic doctrine of transubstantiation (the bread and wine becoming the literal body and blood of Christ) and also opposed Martin Luther's view of consubstantiation (Christ’s real presence alongside the elements).
Key Scripture: “Do this in remembrance of me” (Luke 22:19). Zwingli emphasized the word "remembrance" to stress that the Lord’s Supper is a memorial act, not a mystical or sacramental means of grace.

B. Sola Scriptura (Scripture Alone)
Zwingli emphasized the absolute authority of Scripture in all matters of faith and practice, rejecting any traditions or doctrines not explicitly rooted in the Bible.

He was an early advocate of biblical preaching and expository teaching, focusing on the direct interpretation of Scripture rather than allegorical readings.

C. Church and State
Zwingli believed in the close relationship between church and state. He argued that civil authorities should enforce biblical morality and support the church's mission. This view made him a key figure in establishing a theocratic governance model in Zurich.
Unlike Luther, Zwingli believed the church had a responsibility to influence and reform societal structures directly.

D. Baptism
Zwingli upheld infant baptism, not as a means of imparting grace but as a covenantal sign of belonging to the Christian community, akin to circumcision in the Old Testament.
He opposed the Anabaptists, who argued for believer's baptism only, leading to significant conflict and even persecution of Anabaptists in Switzerland.

2. Distinctions from Other Reformers
A. Zwingli vs. Luther
The Eucharist Debate:
Zwingli and Luther clashed during the Marburg Colloquy (1529) over the nature of the Lord’s Supper. Luther insisted on Christ’s real presence (“This is my body”), while Zwingli maintained a purely symbolic interpretation.
This disagreement created a significant theological divide within the Reformation movement, contributing to the separation between Lutheran and Reformed traditions.

B. Zwingli vs. Calvin
Sacraments:
John Calvin, who followed Zwingli in many respects, moderated Zwingli’s symbolic view of the sacraments. Calvin argued for a spiritual presence of Christ in the Lord’s Supper, distinct from Zwingli’s memorialist view.
Calvin also expanded on covenant theology in ways that Zwingli had not fully developed.
3. Legacy of Zwinglianism
Reformed Tradition:

Zwingli’s theology laid the groundwork for the broader Reformed tradition, which was later shaped more definitively by Calvin. Many Reformed churches today trace their roots to Zwingli’s emphasis on Scripture, covenant theology, and symbolic sacraments.
Liturgical Simplicity:

Zwingli’s reforms included the removal of icons, statues, and ornate decorations from church buildings, along with the abolition of elaborate liturgical practices. This simplicity influenced many Reformed churches.
Influence on Anabaptist Criticism:

While Zwingli himself did not embrace Anabaptist beliefs, his emphasis on sola Scriptura inspired radical reformers who went further than Zwingli in rejecting infant baptism and advocating for the separation of church and state.
Summary
Zwinglianism represents the early Swiss Reformation's theological and ecclesiastical principles, characterized by its emphasis on the symbolic nature of the sacraments, the authority of Scripture, and the integration of church and state. It contributed significantly to the development of the Reformed tradition and left a lasting impact on Protestant theology and practice, even though it is often overshadowed by Calvinism.

My posts to you is solely Scripture, not Zwingli.

Thanks

J.

 

[MTMattie]

You do know that the jury is still out if Mark 16:16 was written by the same author as the Goespel of Mark?

The continuity is not there from from leaving Mark 16:8

The Syriac, Old Latin, and Gothic bibles ALL contain the long ending, all of which are older than the oldest Greek manuscripts. Also Iraneus and Paician both quoted from the long ending in 170 A.D. - also Tertulian quoted from the long ending in 215 A.D. - Hippoletus quoted from the long ending in 235 A.D.
Later manuscripts, in the 4th century, the Vaticanus and the Sinaiaticus left out the long ending.

Also, there is NO strong evidence that Mark did not write the long ending.

So the evidence seems to lean towards Mark writing the long ending.

Mark 16:16 tells us that a believer should get baptized after he believes, which I believe lines up with all of the gospels.
However, Mark 16:16 DOES NOT say that the absence of baptism will keep a person from being saved - rather it says that disbelief will keep them from being saved.
[/QUOTE]

I do not care who has it first , last or never. I would like to know the author of the additional verses in Mark.

The continuity IS NOT THERE.

We have Mark 16 stating

16 When Shabbat was over, Miryam of Magdala, Miryam the mother of Ya‘akov, and Shlomit bought spices in order to go and anoint Yeshua.

2 Very early the next day, just after sunrise, they went to the tomb.

3 They were asking each other, “Who will roll away the stone from the entrance to the tomb for us?

4 Then they looked up and saw that the stone, even though it was huge, had been rolled back already.

5 On entering the tomb, they saw a young man dressed in a white robe sitting on the right; and they were dumbfounded.

6 But he said, “Don’t be so surprised! You’re looking for Yeshua from Natzeret, who was executed on the stake. He has risen, he’s not here! Look at the place where they laid him.

7 But go and tell his talmidim, especially Kefa, that he is going to the Galil ahead of you. You will see him there, just as he told you.”

8 Trembling but ecstatic they went out and fled from the tomb, and they said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.
It continues, by repeating some....
[9 When Yeshua rose early Sunday, he appeared first to Miryam of Magdala, from whom he had expelled seven demons.

10 She went and told those who had been with him, as they were crying and mourning. (question. What happened to
vs 8 = they said nothing to anyone, because they were afraid.)

11 But when they heard that he was alive and that she had seen him, they wouldn’t believe it.

12 After that, Yeshua appeared in another form to two of them as they were walking into the country.

13 They went and told the others, but they didn’t believe them either.

THEN
14 Later, Yeshua appeared to the Eleven as they were eating, and he reproached them for their lack of trust and their spiritual insensitivity in not having believed those who had seen him after he had risen.
(These 11 are the same 11 in Matt 28: 16 So the eleven talmidim went to the hill in the Galil where Yeshua had told them to go. 17 When they saw him, they prostrated themselves before him; but some hesitated. 18 Yeshua came and talked with them. He said, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. 19 Therefore, go and make people from all nations into talmidim, immersing them into the reality of the Father, the Son and the Ruach HaKodesh,
And He needs to repeat it? )

15 Then he said to them, “As you go throughout the world, proclaim the Good News to all creation.

16 Whoever trusts and is immersed will be saved; whoever does not trust will be condemned.

17 And these signs will accompany those who do trust: in my name they will drive out demons, speak with new tongues,

18 not be injured if they handle snakes or drink poison, and heal the sick by laying hands on them.”

19 So then, after he had spoken to them, the Lord Yeshua was taken up into heaven and sat at the right hand of God.[b]

20 And they went out and proclaimed everywhere, the Lord working with them and confirming the message by the accompanying signs.
Notes: So we have Jesus , arisen from the dead, appear to the women.... and in verse 8 they were afraid to tell anyone.
Move on down to verse 9 where at least Mary Magdalene did try to spread the word... but as usual... being a woman she was not believed. ( my insertion of the woman part)

Footnotes​

1. Mark 16:9 Verses 9–20 are found in many ancient Greek manuscripts but not in the two oldest ones.

AND
2. Mark 16:19 = Psalm 110:1, “(A Psalm of David.) The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.”

SO If you want to debate the authenticity I will be happy to oblige, but today is rather short on time.

I will let you read and digest what Got Questions has to say because it is a concise explanation and does not jump from source to source as a debate will bring on.
“(A Psalm of David.) The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou at my right hand, until I make thine enemies thy footstool.”

Should Mark 16:9-20 be in the Bible?​

Answer

The very last part of the Gospel of Mark has been a controversial passage for almost as long as the church has been in existence. The question is whether that portion of the Gospel, specifically, Mark 16:9–20, should be included as part of Mark, or if the Gospel should end with verse 8. Many scholars, from all theological persuasions, consider Mark 16:9–20 to be a spurious addition to Mark’s Gospel.

If the number of later Greek manuscripts containing Mark 16:9–20 were the only factor, then the passage would be confirmed as genuine. But there are other factors. One that cannot be ignored is the evidence from other manuscripts. Two of the oldest and most respected manuscripts, the Codex Sinaiticus and Codex Vaticanus, do not contain the longer ending to the Gospel of Mark. Both of those ancient Greek manuscripts end at Mark 16:8. They are given credence because, the older the manuscript, the closer it is to the original autographs. The fewer generations of copies, the fewer opportunities for deviation, and thus an older manuscript can be assumed to be more accurate than a newer one. Since the oldest manuscripts do not contain Mark 16:9–20, many scholars doubt that these verses were in the original Gospel of Mark.

In addition to the commonly accepted wording of Mark 16:9–20, there exist two other endings to the book of Mark found among ancient manuscripts This one is translated as an optional ending and included (in brackets) in the New American Standard Bible:

And they promptly reported all these instructions to Peter and his companions. And after that, Jesus Himself also sent out through them from east to west the sacred and imperishable proclamation of eternal salvation.

And this passage is found in various other manuscripts:

This age of lawlessness and unbelief is under Satan, who does not allow the truth and power of God to prevail over the unclean things of the spirits. “Therefore reveal your righteousness now”—thus they spoke to Christ. And Christ replied to them, “The term of years of Satan’s power has been fulfilled, but other terrible things draw near. And for those who have sinned I was handed over to death, that they may return to the truth and sin no more, in order that they may inherit the spiritual and incorruptible glory of righteousness that is in heaven.”

We should also consider the testimony of the ancient church leaders. Some early church fathers were aware of the long ending of the Gospel of Mark and even quoted from it. However, in the fourth century, two scholars who were aware of the long ending, Eusebius and Jerome, reported that nearly all the known Greek manuscripts ended with Mark 16:8.

Then there is internal evidence against the genuineness of Mark 16:9–20. Consider the transition between verses 8 and 9:

8 So they [the women] went out quickly and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid.

9 Now when He rose early on the first day of the week, He appeared first to Mary Magdalene, out of whom He had cast seven demons. (NKJV)

We can make four points here:

1) The transition is abrupt, and the two sections are disjointed. The subject of the narrative was the discovery of the empty tomb by the women, told from the women’s perspective. Suddenly, the focus shifts to Jesus and one woman, Mary Magdalene.

2) The word now at the beginning of verse 9 is a conjunction in the Greek. It is akin to saying, “but,” “and,” “therefore,” or “on the other hand.” The point is that now should link what comes next with what came before. It doesn’t, but only serves as a clumsy transition between verses 8 and 9.

3) The Greek participle translated “having risen” in verse 9 is masculine and should be referring to Jesus, but Jesus is not mentioned in the previous verse. (Some translations add the word Jesus to verse 9 for clarity, but the name is not in the original.) If Mark wrote verse 9 and placed it after verse 8, he was guilty of sloppy grammar and illogical sentence construction.

4) Verse 9 seems to introduce Mary Magdalene as if for the first time. But Mark had already mentioned her three times previously in his Gospel (Mark 15:40, 47; 16:1).

Beyond what has been shared already is the consideration of the unique vocabulary of Mark 16:9–20. These last verses certainly don’t read like Mark’s. There are eighteen words in this section that are never used anywhere else by Mark. For example, the title “Lord Jesus,” used in verse 19, is not found anywhere else in Mark. Other words unique to this section of Mark include apisteó (“disbelieve”), blaptó (“hurt”), theaomai (“behold, look”), and husteron (“afterwards, later”). Another word, thanasimon (“deadly”) is found nowhere else in the entire New Testament. The same can be said of the expression in verse 10, toís met’ aftoú genoménois (“those having been with Him”), referring to the disciples: nowhere else in the Bible is this wording applied to the disciples.

Also, the reference to signs in Mark 16:17–18 is unique. This is the only post-resurrection account in the Gospels of a discussion of picking up serpents, speaking in tongues, casting out demons, drinking poison, or laying hands on the sick. Of course, these signs were demonstrated during the apostolic age, so verses 17 and 18 don’t contradict any biblical doctrine, per se. But questions persist about whether Jesus actually said this. Because of the difficulties surrounding Mark 16:9–20, it is unwise to base a doctrine solely on what is found in this section of Mark.

Most likely, the long ending to the book of Mark represents an attempt by an ancient, anonymous someone to provide a more “satisfactory” ending. In reality, ending the book with verse 8 is entirely consistent with the rest of Mark’s narrative. Amazement at the Lord Jesus is a theme in Mark:

• “They were amazed at his teaching” (Mark 1:22)
• “They were all amazed, so that they debated among themselves” (Mark 1:27)
• “He healed the paralytic, and they were all amazed and were glorifying God saying, ‘We’ve never seen anything like this’” (Mark 2:12)

See also Mark 4:41; 5:15, 33, 42; 6:51; 9:6, 15, 32; 10:24, 32; 11:18; 12:17; 16:5. Astonishment at Jesus’ work is found throughout Mark’s narrative. With that in mind, consider Mark 16:8: “So they went out quickly and fled from the tomb, for they trembled and were amazed. And they said nothing to anyone, for they were afraid” (NKJV). Mark ends his Gospel on yet another note of amazement, a fitting conclusion to a book full of amazement.

 

[MTMattie]

Eph 4:4 There is one body and one Spirit--just as you were called to the one hope that belongs to your call-- 5 one Lord, one faith, one baptism, 6 one God and Father of all, who is over all and through all and in all

“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:” – Matthew 3:11

 

[Johann]

“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:” – Matthew 3:11

Eph 1:13 In Moshiach you also, having heard the message of HaEmes, the Besuras HaGeulah of Yeshu'at Eloheinu which is yours, having also come to emunah, received your chotam (seal) in Moshiach with the Ruach Hakodesh of havtachah (promise),
Eph 1:14 Who is bestowed as an eravon (pledge) of our nachalah (allotted inheritance, TEHILLIM 16:5-6), with a view to the Geulah of Hashem's own possession, to the tehilat kavod (praise of glory) of Him.


Eph 1:13 in whom also you, when you heard [*This participle (“hearing”) and the following one (“believing”) are understood as temporal] the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation, in whom also when you believed you were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit,
Eph 1:14 who is the down payment of our inheritance, until the redemption of the possession, to the praise of his glory.

J.