The Water Baptism of 1 Corinthians 12:13

[praise_yeshua]

Um when we believe not when we are water baptized

You have a problem with scripture.

What about Jews that already had faith in Messiah?

 

[TomL]

The Spirit fell UPON them. He did not enter their hearts, indwell them, or resurrect them. He empowered them with the gift of tongues and praise.

Sorry you have evidence of that.

They received the Spirit

John 7:38–39 (LEB) — 38 the one who believes in me. Just as the scripture said, ‘Out of his belly will flow rivers of living water.’ ” 39 (Now he said this concerning the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were about to receive. For the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus had not yet been glorified.)

Receiving the Spirit is clearly associated with indwelling

And you are still avoiding the point

They were baptized en the Holy Ghostb

These had been baptized into Christ, but (as far as I can tell from Scripture) only the Apostles could pass on miraculous empowerment, and Philip, who baptized these Samaritans, was not an Apostle. So these men had the indwelling of the Spirit of the Spirit, but not the empowerment that the Apostles alone could convey.

Nothing states one must have miraculous empowerment to perform the signs of an apostle having been baptized en the spirit

this is another assumption you make.

They were in fact baptized en the Spirit, and baptized into Christ

One in Christ is obviously saved

When they expressed their faith (pistis). You still want to make "belief" a purely mental thing. It means "faith", not just intellectual assent.

Nope, I have a problem with people like you you bastardize it for your own ends.

Sorry it is more than a mental thing

It is a matter of the heart, trust

Your problem is you assume much

 

[TomL]

What about Jews that already had faith in Messiah?

What about them?

Once pentecost had come all were available to receive the Holy Spirit

 

[TomL]

No, it was not.

It has already been agreed that they "received the Spirit", but be specific about what part/manifestation of the Spirit they received. Did they receive the indwelling (baptism en the Spirit)? NO. They received miraculous empowerment, just as the Apostles did on Pentecost ("at the beginning").

Again with the misunderstanding of what faith is?

Again you are in denial of scripture

Acts 11:15–16 (LEB) — 15 And as I was beginning to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them, just as also on us at the beginning. 16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’

What caused Peter to remember this?

 

[Eternally-Grateful]

Again you are in denial of scripture

Acts 11:15–16 (LEB) — 15 And as I was beginning to speak, the Holy Spirit fell on them, just as also on us at the beginning. 16 And I remembered the word of the Lord, how he said, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’

What caused Peter to remember this?

I think a problem here is semantics.

The Holy spirit coming on a person is the anointing of the spirit. think in the OT when the priest was anointed with the Holy Oil.

The problem is the sacrifice came first, as well as the washing, where he is the baptism of the spirit, he baptizes us into the death and burial of Christ (romans 6) where our sins are washed away, he then baptizes us into Christ (gal 3) and then baptized us into the body (1 cor 12)

it is only after this, that we are justified or made righteous, and then the HS is free to come in or upon us. as Peter witnessed.

 

[MTMattie]

The Spirit fell UPON them. He did not enter their hearts, indwell them, or resurrect them. He empowered them with the gift of tongues and praise.

These had been baptized into Christ, but (as far as I can tell from Scripture) only the Apostles could pass on miraculous empowerment, and Philip, who baptized these Samaritans, was not an Apostle. So these men had the indwelling of the Spirit of the Spirit, but not the empowerment that the Apostles alone could convey.

When they expressed their faith (pistis). You still want to make "belief" a purely mental thing. It means "faith", not just intellectual assent.

Nope, I have a problem with people like you you bastardize it for your own ends.

Babel on with your own misunderstandings.

Ηλίθιοι abound.

 

[Doug Brents]

It just sounds that way to you because you don't understand and you promote salvation by faith (your version of faith) and works. Faith is from the heart and not just from our head. Man is justified (accounted as righteous) by faith apart from works (Romans 3:24-28; 4:5-6) and also justified (shown to be righteous) by works. (James 2:21-26)

You continue to redefine your words to fit the circumstance so that they fit your eisegesis.

Abraham's faith was accounted to him for righteousness in Genesis 15:6 (also see Romans 4:2-3) many years before he offered up his son Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22. The work of Abraham did not have some kind of intrinsic merit to account him as righteous, but it showed or manifested the genuineness of his faith. (James 2:18) That is the "sense" in which Abraham was "justified by works." He was shown to be righteous.

Man is not righteous unless he is accounted so by God. Abraham was not righteous and then "shown to be" by his faith. He was credited with righteousness by God because of his faith (what he believed in his heart and how he acted upon that belief).

You continue to trust in what you DO for salvation rather that what Jesus has already DONE. We receive the gift of the Holy Spirt prior to water baptism. (Acts 10:43-47) We are sealed with the Holy Spirit of promise the moment we believe the gospel. (Ephesians 1:13)

I mean believe, trust, reliance.

If you don't put your butt in the chair, then you don't trust the chair.
If you don't put your weight on the bridge, you don't trust the bridge.
If you don't obey Jesus, you don't really trust Him.

True about the umbrella. If I truly believed it was going to rain today then I would take a raincoat or an umbrella.

That is faith.

I did not skip the water part in John 3:5 and why would I assume that Jesus meant baptism?

You shouldn't "assume", but you should connect it to what other Scripture says about it.

Jesus already connected receiving eternal life with believing "apart from baptism" multiple times in John chapter 3 and in John 4:10,14 and John 7:38-39

No, He didn't. He connected eternal life with faith, and baptism is an act of faith.

Jesus connects living water with the Holy Spirit and with eternal life. Plain, ordinary H20 has no power to cleanse the heart from sin and only living water reaches the heart.

Ordinary water indeed has no power to cleanse the heart from sin, but then, it doesn't have the power to cleanse disease, yet it is through water that God commanded people to do make themselves "ceremonially clean" when entering the Temple/Tabernacle.

You have a misguided assurance that trusts in your works/performance for salvation instead of Jesus Christ alone.

You keep telling yourself that. But it is not true.

Change of mind is correct. Why do you place repentance "after" belief/faith?

I do not. Repentance is a part of faith, but must come after intellectual assent.

Change of mind is once again is correct but now you are adding moral self-reformation to it. When we repent unto salvation, we "change our mind" and place our faith in the death, burial and resurrection of Christ as the ALL-sufficient means of our salvation. (Acts 11:17,18; 15:7-9)

The initial turning from sin to God is what is required to receive salvation to begin with. But after initial salvation is received the person must continually turn back to God every time he stumbles into sin again. You are talking only about initial repentance leading to initial salvation, but I am talking about both that and continual repentance throughout the rest of life.

The Bible also tells us that true repentance will result in a change of actions. Acts 26:20 declares, "I preached that they should repent and turn to God and prove their repentance by their deeds." This is the fruit of repentance (Matthew 3:8) and not the essence of repentance (change of mind). Folks who promote salvation by faith and works typically confuse the "fruit of repentance" with the "essence of repentance" (and also do the same thing with faith) and end up teaching works righteousness.

Just as with faith, you cannot separate the two: decision and action. If you "make the decision", but don't take the actions, did you really make the decision? Paul say, no you didn't. The same goes for faith. If you "believe" but you don't obey (John 3:36), then you really don't believe.

You are in disagreement with Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; Acts 5:31and Acts 11:17,18. The new direction of this change of mind in repentance is faith in Jesus Christ alone for salvation. (Acts 20:21) Two sides to the same coin. We receive remission of sins the moment we believe in Hin/place faith in Him for salvation and repentance is already implied or assumed. (Acts 10:43; Acts 26:18) When only repentance is mentioned in connection with remission of sins belief/faith is already implied or assumed. Where you have one you must have the other.

That is because repentance is a part of the faith that is required for salvation. And so is confession of Jesus as Lord, and baptism. All of them "LEAD TO" or "RESULT IN" salvation being received. And if you exclude any of them from your doctrine of salvation, then you are ignoring those Scriptures or turning them into lies.

The CoC 4 step plan of salvation is 1. Believe 2. Repent 3. Confess 4. Be baptized. Only after all 4 steps are complete the person is finally saved according to that plan.

Are you confessing by the Holy Spirit that Jesus is Lord or simply reciting those words from a check list of steps as an additional requirement for salvation?

If a person is just "checking a box", then their confession is not real, and thus salvation doesn't happen. Confession of Jesus must be sincere or you are taking His name in vain.

And the Holy Spirit. (1 Thessalonians 1:5)

Of course.

Unbelievers do not confess by the Holy Spirit that Jesus is Lord until the moment of conversion. Anyone can simply call Jesus Lord but that does not necessarily mean they are saved. (Matthew 7:22-23) The Holy Spirit does operate in drawing lost people to Christ in order to lead them to conversion.

Precisely. And again, the confession of Jesus as Lord must come BEFORE they are saved, because that confession RESULTS IN them receiving salvation.

Like I said before, the word of faith is in our mouth and in our heart together. (Romans 10:8) Paul is not talking about rounding up folks at Walmart and reciting the words Jesus is Lord to them from a check list of steps as a work for salvation.

When and where did I EVER say anything like this? Why are you making stuff up?

Believes unto righteousness does not leave one in a lost state (see Romans 4:5) until one confesses Christ a days, weeks or months later. Believers confess by the Holy Spirit which is the point of why we will be saved. Water baptism comes after step 3 and you teach we are not saved until after water baptism which negates Romans 10:9,10.

No Dan, that does not negate Rom 10:9-10. smh
If I tell you that I am wearing a shirt and jeans.
And later I tell you that I am wearing a salmon colored polo.
And in another place I tell you that I am wearing a ball cap.
Do the latter two statements negate the first? No. They give clarification and additional details.
That is what you find in Scripture in many places. There is a situation, or a doctrine and in one place we see it from one side (only faith mentioned), and in another place we see it from another side (only repentance mentioned), and in another place we see it a little differently from that same side (repentance and baptism both mentioned), etc. All of these support each other and work together. They do not negate, conflict, or contradict each other.

My valid points there are not stupidity. You have bo rebuttal.

Your points are senseless. I have rebutted them many times, but you do not listen or learn.

A deep personal conviction is from the heart. Simple acknowledgement is from the head.

Partially correct, but still missing the mark.
A deep personal conviction will include action (faith). And if there is no action, then it is just a head acknowledgement (no faith).

You cannot seem to grasp a deeper faith from the heart that involves trusting in Jesus Christ alone for salvation so you then add action/works to mental assent belief as if that will save you. It's important to understand the difference between commands for salvation and commands that come after salvation.

Indeed it is important to understand that difference. And as I have shown you over and over, there are three actions that Scripture says LEAD TO or RESULT IN receiving salvation. All other actions come after salvation is received, but these three MUST come before it is received, because they result in salvation. It is too simple, but it is impossible for your hard heart to comprehend.

Your eisegesis negates (Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; 5:31; 11:17,18) and salvation through faith.

No, it does not negate anything.

Speaking of the Greek text. As Greek scholar AT Robertson explains: And be baptized every one of you (κα βαπτισθητω εκαστος υμων). Rather, "And let each one of you be baptized." Change of number from plural to singular and of person from second to third. This change marks a break in the thought here that the English translation does not preserve.

Baptism is a passive event, the teacher does the immersing of the student, thus it is a third person event. And it is not a group thing, but a singular, individual, one at a time thing, thus the shift from the plural to the singular. Basically Peter is saying, "All y'all repent, and each one of you come and be baptized by one of us, and you will be forgiven of your sins."

One will decide the use here according as he believes that baptism is essential to the remission of sins or not. My view is decidedly against the idea that Peter, Paul, or any one in the New Testament taught baptism as essential to the remission of sins or the means of securing such remission. So I understand Peter to be urging baptism on each of them who had already turned (repented) and for it to be done in the name of Jesus Christ on the basis of the forgiveness of sins which they had already received.

So you are admitting that your preconception is driving your eisegesis? Now we are getting somewhere.
I am not letting any preconception drive my interpretation. I looked at ALL of what Scripture says about salvation, and then searched through all of the passages that talked about anything specific (repentance, confession, baptism, forgiveness, etc.) and found all the ones that say what leads to or results in receiving salvation. The parable of the unforgiving servant talks about forgiveness being required for forgiveness, but it is addressed to the Apostles (already saved, I believe) and so is not something that leads to or result in salvation (I think it refers to continued forgiveness (not OSAS)).

My exegesis of Acts 2:38 is in perfect harmony with (Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:7-9; 26:18) Your eisegesis is not.

You have that backwards, as you admitted in the previous paragraph.

Absolutely false. It saddens me to see how you resort to blatant dishonesty in order to accommodate your biased church doctrine at all costs.

Compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism. (Acts 10:47)

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) and spoke in tongues (spiritual gift that is only for the body of Christ - 1 Corinthians 12) and this was all BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

You are trying to use the obscure and vague to explain away the clear and concise. 1 Pet 3:21 is very clear that it is in water baptism that we are saved. Acts 22:16 is very clear that Saul's sins were washed away through baptism in Jesus' name. And I could go on.
What is the purpose of miracles? Frequently they are called "signs". What is it a sign of? Nicodemus tells us. "Signs" were a way that God proclaimed who His messengers were. Look at the signs that God gave Moses from the Bush. They were signs to prove that the messenger was really from God. (There was also a negative proof, but that is not relevant to this discussion). The sign of speaking in tongues in the Gentiles was not a sign that they were saved already. It was a sign to the Jews that the Gentiles were acceptable to God, and that they were to be accepted into the Church as equals with the Jews. That is why Peter commanded that they be baptized into Christ immediately.

Whoever believes/has faith in Him for salvation(and not in themselves or in works) is not condemned. Amen! I don't skip John 3:36 because the words "does not obey" appears in certain translations. I cite the verses in John where Jesus is personally speaking. John the Baptist cited the words in John 3:36, but I will still be more than happy to discuss that verse with you. The word "obey" really seems to tickle the ears of works-salvationists.

I often hear works-salvationists (including Roman Catholics, Mormons and Campbellites) cite John 3:36 in the NASB and "stress" the word "obey" to imply that we are saved "by" obedience/works in addition to believing in the Son. In regard to "does not obey the Son" in the New American Standard translation of the Bible, this does not mean that receiving eternal life is received based on the merits of our obedience/works which "follow" believing in the Son, but obey by choosing to believe in the Son. If John wanted to make obedience the central theme in salvation here, he would have said: "He who believes and obeys the Son has eternal life," but that is not what John said. To obey the Son here is to choose to believe in the Son.

The King James Version renders this same verse as: He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that "believeth not the Son" shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. The NIV says "rejects the Son" and the CSB says, "refuses to believe in the Son." To refuse to believe in the Son is to disobey, rebel, be disloyal and refuse conformity. Strong’s definition of apeitheo is "to disbelieve willfully and perversely." *In the context of 3:36, to "not obey the Son" means to reject the Son by refusing to believe in the Son.

I do not believe that the merit of the actions we must take has any basis for our salvation. That is your hangup, not mine.

And this is not the only place where obedience to God is stated as a condition to receiving salvation. In Heb 5:9, we see that Jesus is the author of salvation to everyone who OBEYS Him. Not just to those who have intellectual assent, or to those who say a prayer in private, or "ask Jesus into their heart". He is the author of salvation to those who do what He says. You want to put all obedience after He gives salvation; you want the reward before you demonstrate faith. But that is not how Scripture explains it.

Now, we could keep going back and forth here forever. But you are not going to convince me to water down my understanding of the Truth of God's Word. You have all these ways of explaining away what God says, but none of them harmonize with ALL Scripture.

 

[Doug Brents]

So why didn't water change you before this "baptism" you say converted you?

Is there a difference between falling in a puddle and getting your hands wet, and deliberately and consciously washing your hands?
That is the difference. When you bath or go swimming, your mind and your heart are focused in one direction. But when you submit to being baptized in Jesus' name your heart is focused in a completely different direction. It is not the water that brings about salvation. It is the working of God who sees your act of faith and responds to fulfill His promise.

Then you have changed? You're not done changing.

I am constantly growing and changing. I know I have not "arrived".

I can help if you like. I can certainly challenge your perceived notions.

You have challenged a lot of what I have said, but I have seen nothing in what you have said yet that would steer me in a more Godly direction.

 

[Doug Brents]

Sorry you have evidence of that.

They received the Spirit

John 7:38–39 (LEB) — 38 the one who believes in me. Just as the scripture said, ‘Out of his belly will flow rivers of living water.’ ” 39 (Now he said this concerning the Spirit, whom those who believed in him were about to receive. For the Spirit was not yet given, because Jesus had not yet been glorified.)

Sure they received the Spirit UPON them, but nowhere does it say anything about the indwelling.

Receiving the Spirit is clearly associated with indwelling

No. This is where you are reading your preconception into Scripture. There are many ways of "receiving the Spirit". It is clear that many from the OT had the Spirit, but it is also clear that He did not live in the hearts (indwell) of the people then, because we see in John 7:39 says that the Spirit had not yet been given (until Jesus was glorified). So if they in the OT had the Spirit but He did not indwell them, why do you insist that the Spirit indwelt everyone upon whom He fell in the NT?

And you are still avoiding the point

They were baptized en the Holy Ghostb

Again, this is your eisegesis, but it is not truth.

Nothing states one must have miraculous empowerment to perform the signs of an apostle having been baptized en the spirit

this is another assumption you make.

What do you think "miraculous empowerment" is? It is the Holy Spirit working through a person to do signs and wonders. Humans do not have the power to do miracles without the Holy Spirit (except possibly for those who do things through Satan's power, is that what you are claiming these people had?).

They were in fact baptized en the Spirit, and baptized into Christ

One in Christ is obviously saved

They were not baptized into Christ until they were baptized in water shortly after the Holy Spirit fell on them in power.

Sorry it is more than a mental thing

It is a matter of the heart, trust

Your problem is you assume much

Yes, it is more than a mental thing. It requires action. If there is no action, then there is no trust, no faith (James 2:20, 22, 24, 26).

 

[TomL]

I think a problem here is semantics.

The Holy spirit coming on a person is the anointing of the spirit. think in the OT when the priest was anointed with the Holy Oil.

Not sure I am understanding your meaning here but

The spirit coming upon or falling upon is the baptism en the Holy Ghost

Acts 11:15–16 (NASB95) — 15 “And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them just as He did upon us at the beginning. 16 “And I remembered the word of the Lord, how He used to say, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’

It is the means by which the gentiles received the spirit

Acts 10:44–47 (NASB95) — 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. 45 All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?”

being given the Hoy Spirit

Acts 15:8 (NASB95) — 8 “And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us;

The problem is the sacrifice came first, as well as the washing, where he is the baptism of the spirit, he baptizes us into the death and burial of Christ (romans 6) where our sins are washed away, he then baptizes us into Christ (gal 3) and then baptized us into the body (1 cor 12)

it is only after this, that we are justified or made righteous, and then the HS is free to come in or upon us. as Peter witnessed.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Is there a difference between falling in a puddle and getting your hands wet, and deliberately and consciously washing your hands?
That is the difference. When you bath or go swimming, your mind and your heart are focused in one direction. But when you submit to being baptized in Jesus' name your heart is focused in a completely different direction. It is not the water that brings about salvation. It is the working of God who sees your act of faith and responds to fulfill His promise.

So your "heart has the focused" proper or the water will not work? I believe some detail needs to be given to this. I don't see much detail relative to how this works. You seem to believe the "ceremony" works every time.....

In this instance, there are scenarios where the water wouldn't work according to your response above. This is exactly where the context of the discussion should take place.

I've never meet a "water baptism regeneration" believer that would get into such detail. They always take the position the "water works" every time.

I am constantly growing and changing. I know I have not "arrived".

You have challenged a lot of what I have said, but I have seen nothing in what you have said yet that would steer me in a more Godly direction.

My goal is to force you to abandon everything for Christ. Put everything behind and for you to press forward to embrace Him fully. That should always be our goal. That is why I don't mind having difficult arguments when they are necessary. I'm look at a Him. He is my goal. He is my pleasure. Freely He has given, Freely I must give myself to Him.

 

[praise_yeshua]

Not sure I am understanding your meaning here but

The spirit coming upon or falling upon is the baptism en the Holy Ghost

Acts 11:15–16 (NASB95) — 15 “And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them just as He did upon us at the beginning. 16 “And I remembered the word of the Lord, how He used to say, ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’

It is the means by which the gentiles received the spirit

Acts 10:44–47 (NASB95) — 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who were listening to the message. 45 All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, 47 “Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?”

being given the Hoy Spirit

Acts 15:8 (NASB95) — 8 “And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us;

Most of this is revolves around rituals done with "human hands". Such does mimic some sense of heavenly things but what God does Himself has nothing to do with "ritual" of human hands.

People need to stop practicing the "ideal" that if "I do this, God will do this".....This is not always true. Intent is everything. Intent goes beyond words. It is wrapped in the necessity of will and the acknowledgement of innocence to understand. It an abandonment of what we think we know to freely (no strings attached) accept Him.

Such often begins with "God I know I don't know you"......."but I want to know you"......

 

[dwight92070]

Sure they received the Spirit UPON them, but nowhere does it say anything about the indwelling.

No. This is where you are reading your preconception into Scripture. There are many ways of "receiving the Spirit". It is clear that many from the OT had the Spirit, but it is also clear that He did not live in the hearts (indwell) of the people then, because we see in John 7:39 says that the Spirit had not yet been given (until Jesus was glorified). So if they in the OT had the Spirit but He did not indwell them, why do you insist that the Spirit indwelt everyone upon whom He fell in the NT?

Again, this is your eisegesis, but it is not truth.

What do you think "miraculous empowerment" is? It is the Holy Spirit working through a person to do signs and wonders. Humans do not have the power to do miracles without the Holy Spirit (except possibly for those who do things through Satan's power, is that what you are claiming these people had?).

They were not baptized into Christ until they were baptized in water shortly after the Holy Spirit fell on them in power.

Yes, it is more than a mental thing. It requires action. If there is no action, then there is no trust, no faith (James 2:20, 22, 24, 26).

The verses in James DO NOT require the specific action of water baptism, but you DO. In fact, the whole of Scripture requires only ONE specific action: THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH.

Romans 1:5 "through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the OBEDIENCE OF FAITH among all the Gentiles for His names sake,"

In fact, THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH is what PRECEDES any and all OTHER OBEDIENCE to do good works - including water baptism. You can baptize people in water all day long. If they don't have faith in Jesus already, which means salvation, then water baptism accomplishes NOTHING.

 

[Doug Brents]

So your "heart has the focused" proper or the water will not work? I believe some detail needs to be given to this. I don't see much detail relative to how this works. You seem to believe the "ceremony" works every time.....

No, there is nothing special about the water, or the ceremony. What is important is the heart of the person being baptized. As we see in Acts 2:37, the men there were "pricked in the heart", they were convicted of their sin. And Peter commanded them to "repent" (turn away from the sin they had committed) and be baptized in the name of Jesus. This is the closest scripture we have to having all of the parts of what is required for salvation: they heard the Gospel, they were convicted of it (they believed it), and they were baptized (in water) where they confessed Jesus as Lord (in His name), which is where they received forgiveness and adoption into Christ.

In this instance, there are scenarios where the water wouldn't work according to your response above. This is exactly where the context of the discussion should take place.

I've never meet a "water baptism regeneration" believer that would get into such detail. They always take the position the "water works" every time.

If a person goes to ANY water (sufficient to immerse them)(salt water, fresh water, running water, stagnant water, a pool, a tub, a pond, the ocean, anything), and they repent of sin, confess Jesus as their Lord, and someone baptizes (immerses) them in the water, they are saved.

My goal is to force you to abandon everything for Christ. Put everything behind and for you to press forward to embrace Him fully. That should always be our goal. That is why I don't mind having difficult arguments when they are necessary. I'm look at a Him. He is my goal. He is my pleasure. Freely He has given, Freely I must give myself to Him.

If I had not abandoned everything for Christ, I would not be participating in this discussion. I get nothing out of this discussion personally. My only goal is to bring others (especially the teachers of the Word) to a better understanding of what is required to receive salvation. So many of the "teachers" of the Word today teach this watered down, "easy believism" nonsense. They don't want to offend people, and they want to prevent people from being embarrassed to stand up in front of people, so they offer this, "heads bowed and eyes closed" invitation and have people "just raise your hands" and "say this prayer" (none of which is found in Scripture). And then they explain away all the passages that show their error.

 

[Doug Brents]

The verses in James DO NOT require the specific action of water baptism, but you DO.

You are correct that James does not require a specific action of faith. He just make the blanket statement that faith without action is dead and worthless.
It is other passages of Scripture that indicate the necessity of baptism for salvation. Among them are, Acts 2:38, 1 Pet 3:21, Mark 16:16, Matt 28:19, John 3:5, Gal 3:26-27, Eph 5:26-27, Rom 6:1-7, and Col 2:11-14.

In fact, the whole of Scripture requires only ONE specific action: THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH.

Not true. Rom 10:9-10 says specifically, clearly, and emphatically that the verbal confession of Jesus as Lord RESULTS IN receiving salvation. This is one of the specific things that is encompassed in the "OBEDIENCE OF FAITH".

Romans 1:5 "through whom we have received grace and apostleship to bring about the OBEDIENCE OF FAITH among all the Gentiles for His names sake,"

Indeed, this is another passage that points to the ACTIVENESS of faith, rather than it being just a mental, internal exercise.

In fact, THE OBEDIENCE OF FAITH is what PRECEDES any and all OTHER OBEDIENCE to do good works - including water baptism. You can baptize people in water all day long. If they don't have faith in Jesus already, which means salvation, then water baptism accomplishes NOTHING.

You are correct here in everything except stating that people are saved by some internal "faith" before it results in action. If people don't have faith, if they don't understand and accept the Gospel (infants for instance), then they cannot be affected by baptism. But 1 Pet 3:21 is very clear that it is in baptism that we are saved, as is Acts 2:38, Rom 6:1-7, Col 2:11-14, and others. The obedience of faith includes those "other obedience" things you mention that Scripture says LEAD TO/RESULT IN receiving salvation.

This is too simple, Dwight. If you believe in the perfection of God, and the inerrancy of His Word, then you must agree that all Scripture is true and correct all at the same time. This means that these passages have to work together without conflict, and the only way that is possible is for the more detailed passages (like 1 Pet 3:21) to be seen as fleshing out and giving more information to the more general, vague passages (like John 3:16). In doing so, we see that these certain actions are part of the faith that leads to receiving salvation. And then the other actions, like walking in the Spirit, giving to the poor, etc. are all actions that follow salvation and are the result of having been saved.

 

[praise_yeshua]

No, there is nothing special about the water, or the ceremony. What is important is the heart of the person being baptized. As we see in Acts 2:37, the men there were "pricked in the heart", they were convicted of their sin. And Peter commanded them to "repent" (turn away from the sin they had committed) and be baptized in the name of Jesus. This is the closest scripture we have to having all of the parts of what is required for salvation: they heard the Gospel, they were convicted of it (they believed it), and they were baptized (in water) where they confessed Jesus as Lord (in His name), which is where they received forgiveness and adoption into Christ.

Then WHY do you believe in water baptismal regeneration? You're not connecting to anything meaningful to regeneration. Your response is allowing for regeneration apart from baptism.

If a person goes to ANY water (sufficient to immerse them)(salt water, fresh water, running water, stagnant water, a pool, a tub, a pond, the ocean, anything), and they repent of sin, confess Jesus as their Lord, and someone baptizes (immerses) them in the water, they are saved.

You just made it about water now. You made water + ceremony essential to your requirement above.

If I had not abandoned everything for Christ, I would not be participating in this discussion.

None of us have abandoned everything. We don't even really know what "everything" is. Even the apostles abandoned everything they had ever experienced or earned in life.... but they "CARRIED" with them all the baggage of what they had been taught. There is innocence in this BUT this does not equal = EVERYTHING.

That requires LIVING to know/learn what we do not know in order to please God. It is the "trial of faith". You will keep trying to literally abandon "everything" your entire life. This is where the life of Christ meets reality. In our minds/heart we can abandon everything. (Referenced in the Scriptures as "reckoning ourselves").... but physically, literally, that is a never endling process this side of heaven.

I get nothing out of this discussion personally. My only goal is to bring others (especially the teachers of the Word) to a better understanding of what is required to receive salvation. So many of the "teachers" of the Word today teach this watered down, "easy believism" nonsense. They don't want to offend people, and they want to prevent people from being embarrassed to stand up in front of people, so they offer this, "heads bowed and eyes closed" invitation and have people "just raise your hands" and "say this prayer" (none of which is found in Scripture). And then they explain away all the passages that show their error.

I reject such things myself but I have refined my theology to deal with it. You're including something that has no meaningful practice relative to God's approval. What God has done is MORE important.

I once thought that not having any self interest in anything showed that I was right. I've realized since, that I usually had some type of self interest that I didn't recognize at the time. Lack of self interest is important but it is often difficult for us to judge such. It sometimes takes an extend amount of time to learn that we actually do.

 

[Doug Brents]

Then WHY do you believe in water baptismal regeneration? You're not connecting to anything meaningful to regeneration. Your response is allowing for regeneration apart from baptism.

No, it is not leaving any room for anything else. If I tell you that the only cake in all existence is in a room, and that room has only one door. Then I tell you that to have the cake you must open the door and enter the room, then you can have all the cake you want.
If you never open the door, do you get cake? No.
If you open the door but never enter, do you get cake? No.
If you open the door and can't see the cake, but you hear others eating the cake, do you get cake? No.
If you stick your foot in and do the Hokey Pokey, do you get cake? No.
If you open the door and walk through the door in faith/trust that there is cake inside, do you get cake? YES!!!

Opening the door is like believing. Entering the room is baptism. It is the point at which you are changed from being outside, to being inside. You become a new person inside the room than you were outside the room. God changes you in the water of baptism when you have committed yourself to following Him (made Him Lord over you), and turned away from your sins (which you won't do unless you understand the Gospel and trust in Jesus). The Holy Spirit doesn't change you when you open the door. He doesn't change you when you poke your foot in. He doesn't change you when you walk little old ladies across roads, or feed the poor, or clothe the naked. He changes you IN BAPTISM (Rom 6:3-4, Col 2:11-12).

You just made it about water now. You made water + ceremony essential to your requirement above.

I did not. God did.

None of us have abandoned everything. We don't even know what "everything" things is. Even the apostles abandoned everything they had ever experienced or earned in life.... but they "CARRIED" with them all the baggage of what they had been taught. There is innocence in this BUT this does not equal = EVERYTHING.

That requires LIVING to know/learn what we do not know in order to please God. It is the "trial of faith". You will keep trying to literally abandon "everything" your entire life. This is where the life of Christ meets reality. In our minds/heart we can abandon everything. (Referenced in the Scriptures as "reckoning ourselves").... but physically, literally, that is a never endling process this side of heaven.

Well said, and I stand corrected. Thank you.

I reject such things myself but I have refined my theology to deal with it. You're including something that has no meaningful practice relative to God's approval. What God has done is MORE important.

What God has done is what gives value and importance to what we do in response to His command.
Naaman (just one example I could use) demonstrates this point. God could have told him to jump on one foot for an hour, or get three plums and remove the seed without cutting the skin, or any number of things. But what He told him to do was to dip in Jordan seven times (again, it could have been three, or fifteen, or once, but it was exactly seven in this case).
Was Naaman cured when he walked into the water? No.
Was Naaman cured when he dipped the first time? No.
Was Naaman cured when he dipped the sixth time? No.
But he was cured, skin like a new born baby's skin when he dipped the seventh time.
And that is what happens to us spiritually when we do all the things that God commands of us to receive His gift of spiritual resurrection.

 

[TomL]

Sure they received the Spirit UPON them, but nowhere does it say anything about the indwelling.

Newsflash receiving the Spirit equals to the indwelling'

John 7:38–39 (NASB95) — 38 “He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, ‘From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.’ ” 39 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.

No. This is where you are reading your preconception into Scripture. There are many ways of "receiving the Spirit". It is clear that many from the OT had the Spirit, but it is also clear that He did not live in the hearts (indwell) of the people then, because we see in John 7:39 says that the Spirit had not yet been given (until Jesus was glorified). So if they in the OT had the Spirit but He did not indwell them, why do you insist that the Spirit indwelt everyone upon whom He fell in the NT?

Sorry you have not shown that

Produce a verse from the New Testament which separates receiving the Spirit from the indwelling



There was no indwelling or baptism en the Spirit in the old testament

Again, this is your eisegesis, but it is not truth.

What do you think "miraculous empowerment" is? It is the Holy Spirit working through a person to do signs and wonders. Humans do not have the power to do miracles without the Holy Spirit (except possibly for those who do things through Satan's power, is that what you are claiming these people had?).

They were not baptized into Christ until they were baptized in water shortly after the Holy Spirit fell on them in power.

Yes, it is more than a mental thing. It requires action. If there is no action, then there is no trust, no faith (James 2:20, 22, 24, 26).

Sorry you assuming it is only about signs and wonders

further you ignore verse 16 (Acts 11) where Peter observed their being Baptized en the Spirit and that was before water baptism

Their baptism en the Spirit was convincing evidence that they had repentance unto life and had their heart purified by faith

n

 

[TomL]

Most of this is revolves around rituals done with "human hands". Such does mimic some sense of heavenly things but what God does Himself has nothing to do with "ritual" of human hands.

People need to stop practicing the "ideal" that if "I do this, God will do this".....This is not always true. Intent is everything. Intent goes beyond words. It is wrapped in the necessity of will and the acknowledgement of innocence to understand. It an abandonment of what we think we know to freely (no strings attached) accept Him.

Such often begins with "God I know I don't know you"......."but I want to know you"......

Reception of the Spirit, the baptism en the Holy spirit is not about rituals done with human hands

What it is, is a work of Christ and the Holy Spirit

Christ sends the Spirit by which we are baptized into Christ

 

[Doug Brents]

Newsflash receiving the Spirit equals to the indwelling'

John 7:38–39 (NASB95) — 38 “He who believes in Me, as the Scripture said, ‘From his innermost being will flow rivers of living water.’ ” 39 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.

Sometimes, but not always.

Sorry you have not shown that

Produce a verse from the New Testament which separates receiving the Spirit from the indwelling

Acts 2:4

There was no indwelling

Correct.

or baptism en the Spirit in the old testament

But there were many who were filled with the Holy Spirit. And this is where you problem lies; you think that just because someone "receives the Spirit" that they are indwelt, and thus saved. But He has been falling ON or ONTO people for thousands of years before Christ and none of them were indwelt.

Sorry you assuming it is only about signs and wonders

No assumption. What does the Word say?
Acts 2:4
Acts 10:46
Acts 11:15

further you ignore verse 16 (Acts 11) where Peter observed their being Baptized en the Spirit and that was before water baptism

Again, you are equating being empowered by the Holy Spirit with being indwelt by Him, and they are not the same.

Their baptism en the Spirit was convincing evidence that they had repentance unto life and had their heart purified by faith

Repentance UNTO (leading toward), not "resulting in immediate" new life. There is no water in repentance, but water AND Spirit are required for rebirth. Had Cornelius passed through water when the Spirit fell on him in power? No. Then he had not yet fulfilled all of what Jesus Himself said was required for rebirth.