Ephesians 4:5 - The One Baptism of The Sevenfold Unity of The Spirit.

[dwight92070]

Did you notice that Zaccheus was saved before he was baptized? Yes, they DID have baptism then, and it represented the same thing then as it did after Jesus' resurrection, i.e. even today. All new disciples of Jesus were baptized by the twelve disciples, or in the case of a large crowd of new disciples, other disciples. John 4:1-2 "Therefore when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John (although Jesus Himself was not baptizing, but His disciples were) ... " John 4:1-2
Jesus told Zaccheus "Today salvation has come to this house, because he, too, is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost. Luke 19:9-10 Undoubtedly Zaccheus was baptized later. Several people were saved during Jesus' ministry but weren't baptized at the same time, including Zaccheus:
1.The sinful woman who stood behind Him weeping and wiping His feet with her tears - Jesus told her "Your sins have been forgiven" and "Your faith has saved you."
Luke 7:50
2. He told the paralytic "Son, your sins are forgiven. He was saved." Mark 2:5
3. The man who was born blind and then healed by Jesus became a disciple. John 9:35-38
4. Many Samaritan became believers in Jesus. John 4:39-42
5. The demoniac who lived in caves became a disciple. John 5:18-20
6. At least one of the ten lepers appears to have become a disciple. Luke 17:15-19
7. Zaccheus was saved. Luke 19:9-10
8. Bartimaeus followed Jesus after receiving his sight. He was a disciple. Mark 10:51-52
9. Nathanael was saved. John 2:49 He was probably Bartholemew, one of the twelve.
10. Andrew was saved. John 1:40
11. Philip was saved. John 1:43
12. Simon Peter was saved. John 1:41
13. James and John were saved.
14. All the rest of the twelve were saved (including Judas Iscariot), with no record of their being baptized at the same time.
15. Mary and her sister Martha, and Lazarus were disciples of Jesus

Doug and others say, "Oh that was under the Law - we can't go by that anymore." Hypocrites! You claim to be disciples of Jesus, but you disallow anything that He said or didn't say, taught or didn't teach, did or didn't do, to be used today for instruction and doctrine. There's much riches of truth in all of those, but you say, "we can't use that because that was under the Law".
Going by that reasoning, we can't glean any truth that we can use today from Jesus and His life. Who is it that wants us to believe that? That's right - Satan. Jesus came to explain and reveal God to us, but since supposedly, He lived under the Old Testament era, we can't benefit from any of that today. That is an evil Satanic lie! Where does the Bible say that the four gospels are part of the Old Covenant? It doesn't. Why are they the first books in the New Testament? Because they are considered part of the New Covenant.

The truth is that the New Covenant began in Matthew 1:1 and has continued to this day. Yes, He told people to keep the Law, but He also didn't always keep the Law. He never kept the Sabbath, nor did He teach others to keep it. He disregarded the Law about touching dead bodies or lepers. Instead of directing people to offer sacrifices for their sins, He forgave them for their sins right on the spot. Yet at other times He directed them to obey the Law. The truth is that Jesus' whole lifetime was a TRANSITION PERIOD away from the Old and into the New Covenant. Even the people who put the canon of scripture together considered Matthew, Mark, Luke and John, to be part of the New Testament of Covenant.

In fact He Himself WAS the NEW COVENANT. Isaiah 49:8 says:
Thus says the Lord, "In a favorable time I have answered You, and in a day of salvation I have helped You; and I will keep You and GIVE YOU FOR A COVENANT OF THE PEOPLE, ..."
This is why the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are in the New Testament, because that was the beginning of the New Testament or Covenant.

My conclusion is that a large number of new disciples, new believers, became part of the body of Christ during His lifetime, but there is no record of them being baptized at the time of their conversion. We can safely conclude that ALL of them did get baptized in water after they were saved. John 4:1-2 tells us that this is true.

This is a direct contradiction to Doug Brent's false teaching and the teaching of the Church of Christ.

 

[mailmandan]

You have proven otherwise according to your preconceptions, but not according to Scripture. Your refusal to accept what faith really is blinds you to accepting what is required to receive initial salvation from God.

Yes, it is clear as far as it goes, but it does not tell the whole story just as Mark 15:26 is clear but does not tell the whole story.

Not according to Scripture, it does not. Rom 6 says we die to sin in baptism, not before. Col 2 says our sin is cut from us by the Holy Spirit in baptism, not before. 1 Pet 3:21 says we are saved in baptism, not before.

Noah had already demonstrated his faith, and that was the basis for God showing him grace. His faith continued and so was continually rewarded by grace. The example of building the Ark was not the beginning of his faith, but it was the brightest shining example of it. But the harlot Rahab's faith began with her saving the spies. Isn't it interesting how you pick your battles and exclude examples that don't tell the story you want told?

The thief on the cross is not an example of NT salvation. He was saved under the OT, and so does not enter into this conversation.

That is very true. The Holy Spirit does not meet people in the water if there is no faith in their heart. But He also does not ever remove their sin before they enter the water, because one must be born of both water and the Spirit to enter the Kingdom of God.

Great story, but it is just that, a story, it is not truth. NO ONE in the NT era is ever forgiven of their sins before they are water baptized. If that ever happens, then Scripture is a lie, and there is no sense having faith in it. Just as Paul says, if Jesus did not raise from the dead, then our faith is in vain. So too, if anyone ever receives forgiveness without being reborn of both water and the Spirit, then John 3:5, Col 2:11-14, Rom 6:1-7, 1 Pet 3:21, and other passages are lies, which would make the whole of Scripture a lie, which would invalidate our faith completely.

We have been over this again, and again, and again. Belief is not just thinking. Belief is faith, and faith requires, demands, is dead and useless without action/works. If there is no works, then the faith/belief is meaningless. God has said that repentance is required BEFORE forgiveness of sin is received (Acts 2:38, Acts 3:19). He has also said that the physical action of confessing Jesus as Lord with the mouth is required BEFORE salvation is received (because it results in salvation)(Rom 10:9-10). He has also said that water baptism is required BEFORE salvation is received (Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16, John 3:5, 1 Pet 3:21, Acts 22:16). All of these verses give specific reference to what it means to "believe", "trust", "have faith", etc. in Jesus.

It is completely unnecessary to say "believes and obeys" because if you don't obey then you really don't believe. True belief includes the concept of obedience automatically; it goes without saying (which is why Paul didn't say it). To obey the Son is to do what the Son says. In Luke 6:46, Jesus asks why they call Him Lord, but don't do what He says. And in John 14:15 Jesus says that if we Love Him, we will keep His commandments.

That is your narrow view of what it means to obey, shaded so that it will fit with your preconception. But that is not the Scriptural view of it. To obey is not just to believe in Him, but to do what He says, live how He lived, follow where He walked. If we don't do what He said, then He is not our Lord. If we don't do what He said, we don't really love Him. If we don't do what He says, then we don't really have faith/trust in Him.

We have already covered that repentance is an act of faith in Jesus. It is part of what it means to trust in Jesus, just as confessing Him as Lord is also an act of faith in Him to save us. But just confessing Him as Lord does not make Him your Lord. Obedience to what He commands is what actually makes Him your Lord.

That is your explanation so that the verse will fit with your preconception. There is nothing in the language that makes "each one of you be baptized" into a parenthetical phrase. "For the remission of sins" refers back to BOTH clauses. If it only refers back to one, then it refers back to the one that is closest to it, which would be "each one of you be baptized".

They received the Holy Spirit's miraculous power of tongues before they were saved in water baptism. They did not receive the indwelling of the Spirit, or forgiveness of their sins, or become part of the Body of Christ when the Spirit fell on them in tongues of fire as on Pentecost.

Belief in Jesus is not just the mental exercise of accepting the truth about Jesus from Scripture. Belief in Him includes doing what He has commanded of those who would have Him as their Lord. So whoever believes in Him will do those things that He has said result in receiving remission of sin, and so they receive remission of sin. If you don't do what He said results in receiving remission of sin, then you don't really believe in Him, and so you don't receive remission of sin.

Perfect harmony implies the inclusion of EVERY verse that applies to the subject. You have included only those verses that don't conflict/contradict your conclusion. When you include in your harmony the passages (like Acts 2:38 properly understood, and 1 Pet 3:21, and Acts 22:16, and Mark 16:16, and Col 2:11-14, and Rom 6:1-7, and Gal 3:26-27, and Eph 5:26, and John 3:5 etc.), then you must include repentance, and confession of Jesus as Lord, and baptism as all being required to receive remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit.

You covered it based on your faulty doctrine, but you did not cover it based on proper Scriptural truth. Gal 3:26 says that we are sons and daughters of God through faith in Christ Jesus, this is true. But the thought does not stop there. The Holy Spirit through Paul goes on to say that we are sons and daughters of God through faith in Jesus because we have been baptized into Christ and thereby have been clothed in Him. All who have been baptized into Him have been clothed with Him, but if you have not been baptized into Him then you have not been clothed with Him.

And in Mark 15:27 we read that the charge against Jesus read, "The King of the Jews". What happened to Him being from Nazareth? What happened to Greek, Latin, and Hebrew? Not every verse that deals with a subject has to state every detail of what is involved in that subject.

Baptism is an act of faith that God has commanded as the point at which salvation is received. And it is through baptism that the grace of salvation is received (1 Pet 3:21, Acts 2:38, Mark 16:16, etc.). It doesn't matter that you don't believe it, it is still truth.

The Holy Spirit is indeed referred to as Living Water, but that is not the water that is associated with baptism. Phillip and the Eunuch did not pass by the Spirit, or go down into the Spirit, or come up out of the Spirit. They went by physical water, and went down into physical water, and came up out of physical water. The water of the Flood that floated the Ark was not the Spirit, and the Flood water was a foreshadowing of the water of baptism, so the water of baptism is not the Holy Spirit. You make a good argument, but it does not agree with what Scripture says.

Nothing could be further from the truth. If I did not trust in Him, then doing what He says would have no value or impact. But I cannot trust in Him without trusting in what He said.

We do not become saved the moment we make up our mind to believe the Gospel. That is a purely mental exercise which is not faith. Faith is not a purely mental exercise. We become saved when we DO what Jesus commanded that LEADS TO/RESULTS IN receiving salvation. Intellectual assent belief is meaningless. Rom 10:9-10 says clearly that the physical action of confessing Jesus with the mouth RESULTS IN receiving salvation. And then in verse 14 that confession is said to be "calling on the name of the Lord" which is what Saul was commanded to do in baptism which resulted in his sins being washed away. Just choosing to believe the Gospel is not the act of obedience that saves.

Belief is not just intellectual assent (choosing to believe the Gospel). That is what I have been trying to get you to see through these hundreds of posts. Belief requires physical actions; the physical actions that Scripture says lead to/result in receiving salvation.

All of these things should happen at the same time. Repentance does not precede faith. It is a step of faith. And it does not precede believing, because there is no reason to turn around if we do not believe we are going the wrong direction in the first place. Confession must come as soon as the intellectual assent belief is reached, and should be done as part of baptism (calling on the name of the Lord). This is all one process, not multiple steps over weeks or months (that is your church's unBiblical practices influencing your belief), but as demonstrated in Acts, should be done with haste, all in the same hour.

No. Repentance, confessing Jesus, and baptism are not "good works" that would earn or merit salvation. They are acts of faith that lead to receiving salvation from God.

The logic is not flawed. Healing from leprosy was a gift from God: grace. Salvation is a gift from God: grace. Both are received through obedient action to the commands of God that He said lead to receiving them.

 

[Behold]

There are over 5 "Baptisms" Listed in the Bible.

The one that is the ONE, that Saves, is... "the washing of REGENERATION", and that is not the city water supply.
That is the HOLY Spirit, birthing the Believer's Spirit into the Holy Spirit.

Notice...

"GOD is A Spirit"......... The Holy Spirit......and """JESUS is THAT Spirit""">.

If your corrupted bible version says "god is spirit" then your bible is not making the True Distinction between God's Holy Spirit and the UN-Holy Spirit or the Spirit in a Dog, or the Spirit in an UNBELIEVER..

So, when we are born again, that is the BAPTISM that is the Spiritual Birth, INTO Christ, as "ONE with God" who is " A Spirit".

This is why being born again is to be defined as a Spiritual Birth.

 

[TomL]

Baptizo



Do you have a single new testament verse in an established translation which reads immerse

Do you have any evidence to immerse means to submerge and emerge

baptizo translated wash

Mark 7:4 (KJV 1900) — 4 And when they come from the market, except they wash, they eat not. And many other things there be, which they have received to hold, as the washing of cups, and pots, brasen vessels, and of tables.

Luke 11:38 (NASB 2020) — 38 When the Pharisee saw this, he was surprised that Jesus had not first ceremonially washed before the meal.

907 βαπτίζω [baptizo /bap·tid·zo/] verb. From a derivative of 911; TDNT 1:529; TDNTA 92; GK 966; 80 occurrences; AV translates as “baptize” 76 times, “wash” twice, “baptist” once, and “baptized + 2258” once. 1 to dip repeatedly, to immerse, to submerge (of vessels sunk). 2 to cleanse by dipping or submerging, to wash, to make clean with water, to wash one’s self, bathe. 3 to overwhelm

James Strong, Enhanced Strong’s Lexicon (Woodside Bible Fellowship, 1995).

Bump @ Doug Brents

 

[Doug Brents]

Did you notice that Zaccheus was saved before he was baptized?

Did you notice that this occurred before Jesus died? Before His blood was shed which sealed the New Covenant? Jesus had the authority during His life to forgive sin at His sole discretion. So He could forgive Zaccheus' sin simply at His command. But we live after Jesus' death, so we are not freed from sin in just any fashion. We are only freed from sin as His Scriptures declare it: through water baptism.

Yes, they DID have baptism then, and it represented the same thing then as it did after Jesus' resurrection. All new disciples of Jesus were baptized by the twelve disciples, or in the case of a large crowd of new disciples, other disciples. John 4:1-2 "Therefore when the Lord knew that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John (although Jesus Himself was not baptizing, but His disciples were) ... " John 4:1-2
Jesus told Zaccheus "Today salvation has come to this house, because he, too, is a son of Abraham. For the Son of Man has come to seek and to save that which was lost. Luke 19:9-10
Doug and others say, "Oh that was under the Law - we can't go by that anymore." Hypocrites! You claim to be disciples of Jesus, but you disallow anything that He said or didn't say, taught or didn't teach, did or didn't do, to be used to learn truth. There's much riches of truth in all of those, but you say, "we can't use that because that was under the Law".
Going by that reasoning, we can't glean any truth that we can use today from Jesus and His life. Who is it that wants us to believe that? That's right - Satan. Jesus came to explain and reveal God to us, but since supposedly He lived under the Old Testament era, we can't benefit from any of that today. That is an evil Satanic lie!

That is not what I am saying at all. That is your straw man fabrication to distort the truth of what I am saying. Jesus' teachings are all relevant to us today. But He lived under the Law, and so was bound to keep the Law perfectly. Jesus was required by the Law to offer sacrifices at the Temple in Jerusalem. Should we bind ourselves to live as He did and annually journey to Jerusalem to offer sacrifices in the Temple that hasn't existed in 1954 years? We are not under the Law today, so we do not have to offer sacrifices at the Temple in Jerusalem. His teachings are relevant to us today, but some of His commands and actions (like His statement of the salvation of Zaccheus' house, and to the thief on the cross) are only relevant to the individual to whom they were spoken.

The truth is that the New Covenant began in Matthew 1:1 and has continued to this day.

WRONG!! The New Covenant began at Jesus' death. Jesus spent His whole life living subject to the Old Covenant (Gal 4:4-5).

Yes, He told people to keep the Law, but He also didn't always keep the Law. He never kept the Sabbath, nor did He teach others to keep it.

Wrong. Jesus kept the sabbath as God intended it to be kept. He did not keep the Pharisees' "hedge of protection" around the Law pertaining to the sabbath, but He did keep the sabbath.

He disregarded the Law about touching dead bodies or lepers.

He raised the dead, and cured the lepers. Their impurity did not flow from them to Him, but His purity flowed from Him to them cleansing their disease/raising them from the dead.

Instead of directing people to offer sacrifices for their sins, He forgave them for their sins right on the spot.

And then commanded them to go and make the appropriate sacrifices with the priests at the Temple.

Yet at other times He directed them to obey the Law. The truth is that Jesus' whole lifetime was a TRANSITION PERIOD away from the Old and into the New Testament.

It was a period of reteaching the commandments from the Old Testament to what was going to be true under the New Covenant. But it was still the Old Covenant under which Jesus lived His WHOLE life.

In fact He Himself WAS the NEW COVENANT. Isaiah 49:8 says:
Thus says the Lord, "In a favorable time I have answered You, and in a day of salvation I have helped You; and I will keep You and GIVE YOU FOR A COVENANT OF THE PEOPLE, ..."

Jesus was the sacrifice whose blood sealed the New Covenant. As Heb 9:16-17 says, a covenant is never in force while the one who made it is alive (Jesus being the one who made the New Covenant).

This is why the books of Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are in the New Testament, because that was the beginning of the New Covenant.

The Gospels tell about the life of Christ, but they all occur under the Old Covenant, not the New. The New Covenant does not start until Jesus' death, which occurs in Matt 27, Mark 15, Luke 23, and John 19. Everything in these books before these chapters occurred during/under the Old Covenant.

 

[Doug Brents]

Bump @ Doug Brents

What does that mean?

 

[Doug Brents]

I know my words are falling on your deaf ears. I am sorry that you cannot see the truth, but remain mired in Satan's false teaching of "faith only". But just as the Apostles continued to teach the Truth even to their deaths, I will also continue to teach the truth even in the face of your disbelief. I pray that you will come to accept and teach the Truth before it is too late.

 

[TomL]

What does that mean?

It means I was looking for a response from you

https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/ephesians-4-5-the-one-baptism-of-the-sevenfold-unity-of-the-spirit.1969/post-107500

 

[Doug Brents]

It means I was looking for a response from you

https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/ephesians-4-5-the-one-baptism-of-the-sevenfold-unity-of-the-spirit.1969/post-107500

I responded to that post in the very next post in the thread, and you responded to my response in the next one. Why are you wanting to go backward?

 

[mailmandan]

I know my words are falling on your deaf ears. I am sorry that you cannot see the truth, but remain mired in Satan's false teaching of "faith only". But just as the Apostles continued to teach the Truth even to their deaths, I will also continue to teach the truth even in the face of your disbelief. I pray that you will come to accept and teach the Truth before it is too late.

Oh, the irony.

 

[mailmandan]

It means I was looking for a response from you

https://berean-apologetics.community.forum/threads/ephesians-4-5-the-one-baptism-of-the-sevenfold-unity-of-the-spirit.1969/post-107500

You can explain the truth to Doug Brents until you are blue in the face but until the blinders are removed it will continue to fall on deaf ears. (2 Corinthians 4:3,4)

Campbellites cannot grasp the difference between "faith only" per James (which is an empty profession of faith/dead faith that remains "alone" barren of works (James 2:14) with faith that trusts in Jesus Christ "alone" for salvation (Romans 3:24-28; 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9) which results in producing good works. (Ephesians 2:10)

Man is saved through faith and not by works (Romans 4:5-6; Ephesians 2:8,9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9); yet genuine faith is (evidenced) by works. (James 2:14-26)

*Christ saves us through faith based on the merits of His finished work of redemption "alone" and not based on the merits of our works.

It is through faith "in Christ alone" (and not based on the merits of our works) that we are justified on account of Christ (Romans 4:5-6; 5:1; 5:9); yet the faith that justifies does not remain alone (unfruitful, barren) if it is genuine. (James 2:14-26) *Perfect Harmony*

 

[Bob Carabbio]

* So why is baptism in water still being practiced?

Because it was done Biblically whenever people became Born Again of the Holy Spirit. plenty of Biblical indication. It Doesn't "SAVE", it doesn't make you a Christian, but it WAS DONE. so we do it.

I was Born again on a Wednesday night in my bedroom, and the Following Sunday I was Immersed in water in the name of the Father Son And the Holy Spirit based on my confession of faith. The only thing that CHANGED was that I WAS dry, and then I was wet. period. I was born again before, and after being Baptized in water.