pleaseforgiveme
Member
Now that you have gotten that off your chest, I hope you feel hole again
(:-
Christians and Jews are both anti Acts 2:38.
- Thread starter Truther
- Start date
-
Welcome to Christian Forums, a Christian Forum that recognizes that all Christians are a work in progress.
You will need to register to be able to join in fellowship with Christians all over the world.
We hope to see you as a part of our community soon and God Bless!
(:-
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
Wait, Acts 2:38 is not carnal.
Your law made for it is.
It's called the carnal law of 2:38.
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
The main problem with those that reject Peter’s very first command is simple… They think that remission of sins is prior to baptism. This renders the sacrifice of Jesus as moot. For without the shedding of blood is no remission of sins. Peter said Acts 2:38 was specifically for the remission of sins. These anti-baptismalists are anti- sacrifice by default.
And here we are. First they are oh so careful with loving desire to ask a simple question about one's baptism, hopefully without imposing, and then if unable to proselytize someone to their special baptism, there are no more worries about imposition, because that someone is obviously an unsaved sacrifice hating devil.
It's like them that preach enterally unconditionally secured salvation by grace, that call them that disagree: grace-haters.
It is also obvious that the 2:38 lawyers have somewhat to boast of, even as the Judaizing circumcision folks.
And here we are. First they are oh so careful with loving desire to ask a simple question about one's baptism, hopefully without imposing, and then if unable to proselytize someone to their special baptism, there are no more worries about imposition, because that someone is obviously an unsaved sacrifice hating devil.
It's like them that preach enterally unconditionally secured salvation by grace, that call them that disagree: grace-haters.
It is also obvious that the 2:38 lawyers have somewhat to boast of, even as the Judaizing circumcision folks.
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
John's baptism was called the baptism of repentance, not Jesus'.
The baptism for repentance was the baptism that John preached, not Jesus.
Christians aren't baptized to repent, but are baptized because of repentance.
Same for remission of sins. We are baptized because of remission of sins, which is only by faith in the blood of Jesus:
And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
No baptism in there, but only faith.
The baptism for repentance was the baptism that John preached, not Jesus.
Christians aren't baptized to repent, but are baptized because of repentance.
Same for remission of sins. We are baptized because of remission of sins, which is only by faith in the blood of Jesus:
And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem.
To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
No baptism in there, but only faith.
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
What was the end result of the believing disciples in Acts 19 being taught about the Holy Ghost baptism?
The Holy Ghost baptism. After water baptism.
Therefore, the Holy Ghost baptism is the end result of the faith of Jesus.
Cornelius' house received the end result of Jesus' faith: the Holy Ghost Baptism. Before water baptism.
In Acts 2, it was necessary for the newly believing Jews to be baptized in water for the remission of sins and to receive the gift of the Spirit.
Not in Acts 10.
I suppose, if someone wants to count themselves a newly believing Jew, then Acts 2:38 would still be appropriate.
The Holy Ghost baptism. After water baptism.
Therefore, the Holy Ghost baptism is the end result of the faith of Jesus.
Cornelius' house received the end result of Jesus' faith: the Holy Ghost Baptism. Before water baptism.
In Acts 2, it was necessary for the newly believing Jews to be baptized in water for the remission of sins and to receive the gift of the Spirit.
Not in Acts 10.
I suppose, if someone wants to count themselves a newly believing Jew, then Acts 2:38 would still be appropriate.
Again, you think that obeying Acts 2:38 like the 3000 at Pentecost did via Peter’s very first command was a carnal command. That is just bizarre.
If modernists were there at the time in Acts 2, they would’ve shouted down Peter and called him carnal.
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
We would have done as God said at the time, and we also are able to know what He said later by Peter, that water baptism is a figure of salvation, not the salvation that washes away the filthiness of the flesh.
You don't bury someone alive.
True. If the old man of sin is still alive, then he must be forbidden water to be baptised as a Christian. Only confessing Christians are baptised in water.
The new man alive in Christ is not buried in baptism of water, but rather the old man of sin crucified with Christ is buried bodily in water, which is by a good confession of faith in Jesus.
No man may be baptised in water as a Christian, except he first be a true confessing Christian born again of God, as was the Ethiopian Eunuch:
See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.
He wasn't believing in water baptism, but in Jesus as Lord, by which confession made from the heart we are saved.
If the old man of sin is still alive, then his body is refused baptism in water, even as the Spirit will not circumcise the heart of a sinner.
Only if the old man is dead, may the body be baptised in water.
You don't bury the old man alive.
And of course, the Spirit is recieved by hearing of faith, but the unbelieving and unsaved sinner cannot receive the Spirit, even as the carnal mind cannot receive the things of the Spirit, such as new birth and circumcision of heart:
The uncircumcised are not baptised as Christians in water.
Would you have said exactly what Peter said to the 300 per Acts 2:38 if you were Peter?
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
If not, what would you have said?
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
The Scriptural reasoning I gave is not refuted, and so they are confirmed:
1. Only the dead are buried: The dead man of old is buried in water in the figure with that body of flesh.
Only those dead to sins and alive to Christ can be water baptized with the faith of Jesus. He who believeth on the Son hath everlasting life and so dead old man is buried baptism, not the new creature alive in Christ. With confession of Jesus as Lord we are saved according to the Scripture, and even as the Ethiopian Eunuch, believers with everlasting life and saved confessors cannot be forbid water baptism.
Water baptism is not the putting away of the filthy sins of the flesh, but is an open show of a good conscience toward God according to the Scriptures.
2. The apostles were never baptized in the name of Jesus.
No Scripture says the apostles themselves were baptized in water after the resurrection of Jesus, but only were to wait for the baptism of the Holy Ghost, which they recieved before Peter preached. Scripture also says that Jesus Himself did not baptize with water (John 4:2), which would have been necessary for the apostles to be baptized in His name before the cross.
The disciples that came to Jesus were those baptized by John unto repentance, even as Jesus was. Jesus then drew other disciples by having His disciples baptize them unto repentance as with John. Jesus and John were each baptizing with the same baptism of repentance, with disciples coming to John first, and then to Jesus.
Therefore according to Acts 1:5, as with Jesus, so the apostles only had the baptism of John.
A law of Acts 2:38 would have compelled the apostles to be likewise baptized in water after Jesus' resurrection. They were not. Therefore by the judgment of that 'law' of Acts 2:38, they were not saved, though having recieved the Holy Ghost baptism, even as the house of Cornelius.
Therefore, Acts 2:38 cannot be read as a law of baptism for remission of sin and receiving the Holy Ghost.
3. In Acts 3 Scripture says nothing of baptism to repent, be converted, and have sins blotted out. Acts 2:38 therefore is not law of Christ to be preached with every conversion.
4. In Acts 8, the apostles Peter and John went to the Samaritan believers, that they might receive the Holy Ghost, for as yet they were only baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
'Only' baptized does not speak of an all-important act necessary for salvation and the Holy Ghost. If Acts 2:38 is the only true standard of all baptism in water, then they should have already recieved the Holy Ghost, without need for the apostles to later lay hands on them.
Therefore, either Acts 2:38 is not the sole standard for water baptism, otherwise the apostles needed go to baptize them again according to the prescribed exact words of: in the name of Jesus Christ. Which of course is not the case. Acts 2:38 is not an exactly prescribed standard for water baptism upon which being saved and receiving the Holy Ghost is necessary.
5. If 1st Colossians, Paul says he came not to baptize, but to preach the gospel. If 2:38 were necessary law for salvation, then Paul was not fulfilling the ministry of salvation to the Gentiles, which Jesus chose him to do.
Conclusion: Acts 2:38 cannot possibly be required for all believers to have their sins remitted and receive the Holy Ghost.
Acts 2:38 must therefore be read in that light:
1. Acts 2:38 stands alone of all NT teaching of water baptism. No other Scripture says the same thing, and many Scriptures show salvation and receiving the Holy Ghost otherwise.
2. Peter also later taught that water baptism was specifically a figurative act that did not wash away sins and filthiness of the flesh.
3. Water baptism by that time was a ceremonial washing of newborn Christians, after which they were to be openly recieved into the fellowship of the saints.
4. Like as Noah was saved from the wicked of the world as by water, so the Christian is saved from the unbelieving enemies of God as by water baptism: they were no longer to be considered uncircumcised strangers to the Lord by the churches of God. Water baptism saves the newborn believer from the unholy reputation of the world among the Christians.
And so, what about Acts 2:38?
The context: This was the first preaching of the gospel of Christ to the unbelieving Jews from around the world, 43 days after Jesus' crucifixion, with the priests and leaders condemning that man as a blasphemer of the LORD worthy of death.
These Jews were specifically commanded to repent of having Him crucified:
Therefore let all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ. Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do? Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
They were now to believe Jesus as Lord and Saviour, and then be openly baptized in water in that name of Jesus Christ, which was to separate themselves from all other Jews of their nation, in open defiance of the rulers judgment of Him as a blasphemer.
By doing so, by obedience to this one time commandment, their sins would be remitted and they would receive the Holy Ghost.
So, if anyone wants to be baptized in the same manner as those Jews of Acts 2:38, they must repent of being the Jews that had Him physically crucified.
All the world was judged in sin and unbelief, but no Scripture says they all were guilty of rejecting and crucifying Christ in the flesh. The notion of all the world and generations of the world as guilty of having Him crucified, is a spiritualized teaching without Scripture: Abraham would not have had Him crucified. Neither David. Neither Moses. Neither the prophets, for they spoke of Him, and would have known Him, even as John did before baptizing Him in water.
Only the unbelieving Jews of that generation, Jesus' own that He came to first, were guilty of His crucifixion, being greater in condemnation than the Romans that did the deed:
Therefore he that delivered me unto thee hath the greater sin. (John 19)
Acts 2:38 is a one time command for the guilty house of Israel after the flesh, upon whom all the blood of the righteous would come (Matthew 23:35), for personally having the God of Israel put to death on the cross.
Would you have said exactly what Peter said.
Acts 2:38 is exactly what the risen God of Israel said at that one and only time of Scripture tot hat one and only guilty people: repent of crucifying me on that cross, and I will forgive you of your sins and give you the Holy Ghost.
That whole house of Israel in that generation was left unto them desolate, but for the faithful fathers' sake, not for their own, they could by mercy be grafted in again to His green olive tree of the house of Israel: if they abide not in unbelief and remain guilty of His death.
(Bolds mine)
So you say God raised Jesus from the dead?
John 2:19-22
19 Jesus answered them, “Destroy this temple, and I will raise it again in three days.”
20 They replied, “It has taken forty-six years to build this temple, and you are going to raise it in three days?” 21 But the temple he had spoken of was his body. 22 After he was raised from the dead, his disciples recalled what he had said. Then they believed the scripture and the words that Jesus had spoken.
Looks like Jesus raised Himself. And if you say God raised Him, He must be God.
Last edited:
OK, I was just confirming it. You would not have said what Peter said. You have said something completely different to the 3000 at Pentecost per what you just described. Oh boy.
Jesus said He was going to raise Himself. I take it literally. So did the disciples, literally, from the looks of the scripture.
Did God speak AS Jesus or did God speak THROUGH Jesus?...
10 Believest thou not that I am in the Father, and the Father in me? the words that I speak unto you I speak not of myself: but the Father that dwelleth in me,...
24 He that loveth me not keepeth not my sayings: and the word which ye hear is not mine, but the Father's which sent me.
Ok, that makes sense because Jesus and His Father are one. None of that takes away from Him resurrecting Himself. Was He just a mouthpiece?
And if someone else had led a perfect life, would they be elevated to Godhood, too? What do you think was special about Jesus?
And if someone else had led a perfect life, would they be elevated to Godhood, too? What do you think was special about Jesus?
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
Right. Really got me there. Another good job of another non-answer.
And the lie you make in the process is idiot-level childish.
Adios.
Last edited:
Hidden In Him
Well-Known Member
Very good. There is also
Romans 8:11: "11 But if the Spirit of Him who raised Jesus from the dead dwells in you, He who raised Christ from the dead will also give life to your mortal bodies through His Spirit who dwells in you.:
Acts 2:23-24: "Him, being delivered by the determined purpose and foreknowledge of God, you... have crucified and put to death; 24 whom God raised up, having loosed the pains of death, because it was not possible that He should be held by it."
Acts 2:32: "This Jesus has God raised up..."
Acts 3:15: "And they killed the Prince of life, whom God raised from the dead, of which we are witnesses.
I could list several others (ten to fifteen), but the translation is accurate in John 2:19. ἐγερῶ αὐτόν = 1st person singular indicative future active = "I will raise it up," and this reading is not contested in any other manuscripts.
Thanks for the post.
@Cassandra There is indeed plenty of evidence in the NY for the Resurrection and for Father, Son and Holy Spirit.
robert derrick
Well-Known Member
And so, neither Jesus nor His apostles and disciples in Acts 1 were baptised by the 2:38 law.
Because there is no such law in Scripture.
The apostles, except for Paul, were baptised by John only, before they became disciples to Jesus, who then had them also baptise with that of John.
It is possible to be saved and sanctified and inwardly circumcised during baptism in water, but not necessary.
Salvation and receiving of the Spirit is by grace through faith. It is when the faith Jesus is truly held in the heart, and one begins to believe Jesus to keep His Word and do His will, that we are saved.
And God knows with the believer, when that occurs, which can be at any time before, during, or even after water baptism.
We can profess faith and sincerely be water baptised, yet not be saved and sanctified by the Spirit, until a time later when the faith is truly sealed in the heart, and the love to do His will is born in us for the first time:
And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
And so, in the end, believing Jesus from the heart and fulfilling His royal love to love our neighbors as ourselves, is salvation that no water baptism can bring, but only represent as confession of faith before the church.
Because there is no such law in Scripture.
The apostles, except for Paul, were baptised by John only, before they became disciples to Jesus, who then had them also baptise with that of John.
It is possible to be saved and sanctified and inwardly circumcised during baptism in water, but not necessary.
Salvation and receiving of the Spirit is by grace through faith. It is when the faith Jesus is truly held in the heart, and one begins to believe Jesus to keep His Word and do His will, that we are saved.
And God knows with the believer, when that occurs, which can be at any time before, during, or even after water baptism.
We can profess faith and sincerely be water baptised, yet not be saved and sanctified by the Spirit, until a time later when the faith is truly sealed in the heart, and the love to do His will is born in us for the first time:
And though I have the gift of prophecy, and understand all mysteries, and all knowledge; and though I have all faith, so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, I am nothing.
And so, in the end, believing Jesus from the heart and fulfilling His royal love to love our neighbors as ourselves, is salvation that no water baptism can bring, but only represent as confession of faith before the church.
Similar threads
