Ritajanice
Born-Again
Eh!!....?What the heck is wrong with you? Why do you get it and so many others on here don't?
I get what?
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!
Eh!!....?What the heck is wrong with you? Why do you get it and so many others on here don't?
That is a good point. However, John introduced Jesus as the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Jesus was baptized but what accomplied that baptism? The Holy Spirit appeared and the Father spoke from Heaven. Just a water baptism by itself wouldn't mean much, wouldn't prove much to all the onlookers. Just as His talk was backed up by miracles. If He just came with talk, who would be convinced. That was an event, "God is with us" ... "Did you see and hear that?" " That has to be the Messiah, the Christ". They went out and spread the news. There were no doubts at that scene.Why did the Lord submit to being baptized in water? Was He not setting an example for His disciples (Church) to follow?
My apologies St Steven. I don't mean to highjack your thread!
Seriously?Matthew, Mark, Luke and John are not the "New Testament" since God did not put a paper in the Bible between Malachi and Matthew that says New Testament. Men did that... probably Catholics.
Just remember
this is spirit baptism not water..
God baptized us into the death of Christ, And he raised us to new life
I think this shows the connection between water baptism and Holy Spirit Baptism in the early church.That is a good point. However, John introduced Jesus as the Lamb of God who takes away the sins of the world. Jesus was baptized but what accomplied that baptism? The Holy Spirit appeared and the Father spoke from Heaven. Just a water baptism by itself wouldn't mean much, wouldn't prove much to all the onlookers. Just as His talk was backed up by miracles. If He just came with talk, who would be convinced. That was an event, "God is with us" ... "Did you see that?" " That has yo be the Messiah, the Christ". They went out and spread the news. There were no doubts at that scene.
A baptism of repentance is.No water mentioned in Acts 2:41
Galatians 3:21-22
Is the law then against the promises of God? God forbid: for if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily righteousness should have been by the law.
But the scripture hath concluded all under sin, that the promise by faith of Jesus Christ might be given to them that believe.
Galatians 5:1-4
Stand fast therefore in the liberty wherewith Christ hath made us free, and be not entangled again with the yoke of bondage.
Behold, I Paul say unto you, that if ye be circumcised, Christ shall profit you nothing.
For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law.
Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace.
We will fall from the understanding of the grace that is in Christ, and succumb to the doctrines and theories that are dictated by human conception if we seek justification by our own works. The concision was from those who taught circumcision was necessary for salvation. Circumcision is a work of the flesh required by the Old Testament Law, and by the way so is water baptism, which is a carryover from part of the Levitical Law.
It isn't so much a matter of 'common sense' (which isn't very common at all) but through Jesus we were taught to consider God not as a tyrant, hell-bent on condemning and torturing the disobedient evil-doers, but as a loving Father, eager to forgive, accept and restore.Don't you think it is demeaning of God to view him as a cosmic tyrant?
Where's the common sense in that? Don't we know better?
/
The key distinction that John the Baptist made between his water baptism and a more powerful baptism is this:I think this shows the connection between water baptism and Holy Spirit Baptism in the early church.
But the Holy Spirit Baptism was always confirmed with evidence of a manifestation of the Holy Spirit.
In the case of the house of Cornelius, the Baptism with the Holy Spirit came first, followed by water baptism.
/
I agree. People get baptized AFTER they have been touched, sealed, born again, accepted Christ, etc. The ceremony getting dunked under water merely symbolizes the end of the old life and the beginning of the new life, which has, in point of fact, already happened.In the case of the house of Cornelius, the Baptism with the Holy Spirit came first, followed by water baptism.
John baptized those who believed the Messiah was coming--Jesus baptism was for those who believed on him.The key distinction that John the Baptist made between his water baptism and a more powerful baptism is this:
I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. Matt. 3:11
The key distinction that John the Baptist made between his water baptism and a more powerful baptism is this:
I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I, whose sandals I am not worthy to carry. He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire. Matt. 3:11
Who here has argued that water baptism is the means of being justified before God? Just because some denominations wrongly teach that obedience to the Law is necessary to be justified before God, does not mean the ordinances of the Church should be done away with. Rightly taught and practiced water baptism, as I've said serves the purpose of making a distinction between the body of Christ, Church, and the world. That is the reason that Christ left us with the mandate: "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" Matthew 28:19 (KJV)
That with the greater of the spirit that came the lesser of water was done away with.Eh!!....?
I get what?
You must be baptised in the Spirit....by the “ Holy Spirit”That w
That with the greater of the spirit that came the lesser of water was done away with.
The water taught in our Christian circles is Catholic. Not biblical to the New Testament. Water has nothing to do with what Christians have in Christ.
We've all heard the vacuous mantra: "God said it, I believe it, that settles it."
What does this communicate parenthetically?
"It doesn't need to make sense, I just need to accept it." ??? (with a shrug?)
Do we really need to check our brain at the door when we go to church?
There are three subjects that I post a lot about:
1) Universalism (UR)
2) The law, the Law, God's law, Christ's law (four different things)
3) LGBT issues and the church
On the forum, and elsewhere, I run into the common sense roadblock on all three.
Some Christians seem to be incapable of applying common sense to these things.
Perhaps you have subjects that give you similar problems?
If our interpretation of scripture sidesteps common sense, did we get it right?
/
What do you make of this?The water taught in our Christian circles is Catholic. Not biblical to the New Testament. Water has nothing to do with what Christians have in Christ.