-
Christian Chat is a moderated online Christian community allowing Christians around the world to fellowship with each other in real time chat via webcam, voice, and text, with the Christian Chat app. You can also start or participate in a Bible-based discussion here in the Christian Chat Forums, where members can also share with each other their own videos, pictures, or favorite Christian music.
If you are a Christian and need encouragement and fellowship, we're here for you! If you are not a Christian but interested in knowing more about Jesus our Lord, you're also welcome! Want to know what the Bible says, and how you can apply it to your life? Join us!
To make new Christian friends now around the world, click here to join Christian Chat.
Nehemiah,
Perhaps neither you nor Hornetguy actually went and re-read the examples (as I requested with please)... I only quoted one of the occurences that states the outpouring of the holy ghost at time of laying on of hands..(the Acts 19 account). The other was the Acts 8 account. Acts 8:17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
So if we were were going to go by "norm", it happened at laying on of hands in HALF of the biblical accounts. Only one at time of being preached to...and the other one account after both belief and baptism. I purposefully left out the second quote about time of laying on of hands because I didn't want anyone to falsely assume that I too was going to use the "norm" as the rule.
The rule that is truth fits ALL the examples. Because those examples recorded are just that...examples... not exceptions.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Perhaps neither you nor Hornetguy actually went and re-read the examples (as I requested with please)... I only quoted one of the occurences that states the outpouring of the holy ghost at time of laying on of hands..(the Acts 19 account). The other was the Acts 8 account. Acts 8:17 Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.
So if we were were going to go by "norm", it happened at laying on of hands in HALF of the biblical accounts. Only one at time of being preached to...and the other one account after both belief and baptism. I purposefully left out the second quote about time of laying on of hands because I didn't want anyone to falsely assume that I too was going to use the "norm" as the rule.
The rule that is truth fits ALL the examples. Because those examples recorded are just that...examples... not exceptions.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Hornetguy,
I think you are correct about the Holy Ghost often being given at time of water baptism. Of the baptism's I've witnessed (in a church with both water baptism in Jesus name for remission of sins -and- the baptism of the Holy Ghost) more than half of them come up out of the water with the baptism of the Holy Ghost also. That, or they receive it almost immediately after, because we encourage them to ask and receive.
I think God purposely chose to include in the bible those examples that are less common so people wouldn't overlook them or cast out those who experience it in a less "normal" way... and to include a sufficient array of examples for us to test our beliefs (and our churches’ doctrines) by them.
Thanks for allowing me to comment on your posts.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
I think you are correct about the Holy Ghost often being given at time of water baptism. Of the baptism's I've witnessed (in a church with both water baptism in Jesus name for remission of sins -and- the baptism of the Holy Ghost) more than half of them come up out of the water with the baptism of the Holy Ghost also. That, or they receive it almost immediately after, because we encourage them to ask and receive.
I think God purposely chose to include in the bible those examples that are less common so people wouldn't overlook them or cast out those who experience it in a less "normal" way... and to include a sufficient array of examples for us to test our beliefs (and our churches’ doctrines) by them.
Thanks for allowing me to comment on your posts.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Last edited:
Please forgive the length of this post and its indirect relation to water baptism.
As for the thief on the cross...he too is an example, not an exception. (BTW, I had to pray sincerely/significantly about him before this was opened to me.) The thief on the cross was an example indeed....of what was required under the OLD covenant. (I’m hoping people will at least consider the following before choosing the knee-jerk reaction of disbelief)
Let’s consider it from the aspect of believing the gospel for salvation:
Some suggest that the new testament gospel is “defined” in 1 Corinthians 15. Well, we only need to read the first two verses of that “definition” to understand that the full NT gospel was not even available to be preached to the thief on the cross...because it includes Jesus’ resurrection...which did NOT happen before the thief died.
1 Corinthians 15:3 “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;” 1 Corinthians 15:4 “And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:”
Even the 12 apostles (if Peter and John are any indication) didn’t understand the aspect of his resurrection until after his resurrection…
John 20:8 Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed. John 20:9 For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.
Now....Let’s consider it from the aspect of receiving the Holy Ghost:
The same Paul, who said the gospel includes Jesus’ resurrection, also said “Now if any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his” - Romans 8:9
And the same John said John_7:39 “ (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.” Jesus himself also stating in John_16:7 “Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.”
I used to think that Jesus departed from them at the cross… but, again after prayer, God opened the fact that Jesus didn’t depart from them at the cross...He departed from them at his ascension...as supported by Jesus’ words in Acts 1:4-5 (after his death but prior to his ascension)..stating that the outpouring still wasn’t available.
Acts_1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. Acts_ 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
SO... if the full gospel has to be believed for salvation...and the full New testament gospel wasn't even available..then the thief on the cross wasn't under that new testament requirement. Hence, he is still under the OT system.
AND...If it is a new testament requirement to receive the Holy Ghost in order to be one of "His"...and the Holy Ghost wasn't even available until after Jesus' ascension...again, the thief on the cross is still under the Old system.
SO... if THOSE New Testament requirements do not apply to the thief on the cross, neither would a NT baptism be required of the thief on the cross. (regardless if baptism is or isn't a new testament requirement).
Others have already pointed out that the bible doesn't say whether he was...or wasn't...baptized with the baptism available in the OT.
Again, my apologies for the length.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
As for the thief on the cross...he too is an example, not an exception. (BTW, I had to pray sincerely/significantly about him before this was opened to me.) The thief on the cross was an example indeed....of what was required under the OLD covenant. (I’m hoping people will at least consider the following before choosing the knee-jerk reaction of disbelief)
Let’s consider it from the aspect of believing the gospel for salvation:
Some suggest that the new testament gospel is “defined” in 1 Corinthians 15. Well, we only need to read the first two verses of that “definition” to understand that the full NT gospel was not even available to be preached to the thief on the cross...because it includes Jesus’ resurrection...which did NOT happen before the thief died.
1 Corinthians 15:3 “For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures;” 1 Corinthians 15:4 “And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:”
Even the 12 apostles (if Peter and John are any indication) didn’t understand the aspect of his resurrection until after his resurrection…
John 20:8 Then went in also that other disciple, which came first to the sepulchre, and he saw, and believed. John 20:9 For as yet they knew not the scripture, that he must rise again from the dead.
Now....Let’s consider it from the aspect of receiving the Holy Ghost:
The same Paul, who said the gospel includes Jesus’ resurrection, also said “Now if any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his” - Romans 8:9
And the same John said John_7:39 “ (But this spake he of the Spirit, which they that believe on him should receive: for the Holy Ghost was not yet given; because that Jesus was not yet glorified.” Jesus himself also stating in John_16:7 “Nevertheless I tell you the truth; It is expedient for you that I go away: for if I go not away, the Comforter will not come unto you; but if I depart, I will send him unto you.”
I used to think that Jesus departed from them at the cross… but, again after prayer, God opened the fact that Jesus didn’t depart from them at the cross...He departed from them at his ascension...as supported by Jesus’ words in Acts 1:4-5 (after his death but prior to his ascension)..stating that the outpouring still wasn’t available.
Acts_1:4 And, being assembled together with them, commanded them that they should not depart from Jerusalem, but wait for the promise of the Father, which, saith he, ye have heard of me. Acts_ 1:5 For John truly baptized with water; but ye shall be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence.
SO... if the full gospel has to be believed for salvation...and the full New testament gospel wasn't even available..then the thief on the cross wasn't under that new testament requirement. Hence, he is still under the OT system.
AND...If it is a new testament requirement to receive the Holy Ghost in order to be one of "His"...and the Holy Ghost wasn't even available until after Jesus' ascension...again, the thief on the cross is still under the Old system.
SO... if THOSE New Testament requirements do not apply to the thief on the cross, neither would a NT baptism be required of the thief on the cross. (regardless if baptism is or isn't a new testament requirement).
Others have already pointed out that the bible doesn't say whether he was...or wasn't...baptized with the baptism available in the OT.
Again, my apologies for the length.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Last edited:
Didymous,
Oops. I forgot to answer your second question.
Again, we can look to the examples of NT baptism provided in the bible to check whether we have a correct understanding of what was commanded by Jesus regarding baptism. All baptisms that I could find where a name was used, it was the name of Jesus….
Peter baptizes in the name of Jesus. (Acts 2:38)
Philip baptizes in the name of Jesus. (Acts 8:12 & 16)
Paul baptizes in the name of Jesus. (Acts 19:5)
I only see one (singular) name being used in practice...so, yes, I likewise believe that only one name (Jesus) is to be used for baptism.
Please feel free to share any examples I may have missed.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Oops. I forgot to answer your second question.
Again, we can look to the examples of NT baptism provided in the bible to check whether we have a correct understanding of what was commanded by Jesus regarding baptism. All baptisms that I could find where a name was used, it was the name of Jesus….
Peter baptizes in the name of Jesus. (Acts 2:38)
Philip baptizes in the name of Jesus. (Acts 8:12 & 16)
Paul baptizes in the name of Jesus. (Acts 19:5)
I only see one (singular) name being used in practice...so, yes, I likewise believe that only one name (Jesus) is to be used for baptism.
Please feel free to share any examples I may have missed.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Why did you skip Matthew 28:19?
Justin Martyr in the first century wrote: For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water.
The Didache from the 2nd century confirms that Christian baptism is "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" and all Christians have adhered to this.
The name of Jesus is also YHWH or "I AM" so this is consistent with the triune Godhead.
Justin Martyr in the first century wrote: For, in the name of God, the Father and Lord of the universe, and of our Saviour Jesus Christ, and of the Holy Spirit, they then receive the washing with water.
The Didache from the 2nd century confirms that Christian baptism is "In the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost" and all Christians have adhered to this.
The name of Jesus is also YHWH or "I AM" so this is consistent with the triune Godhead.
Do you really believe that in Acts 2 the apostles laid hands on about 3,000 people for them to receive the gift of the Holy Ghost? And that is the NORM. Had it been a requirement, this is where we would have seen it.
And in the household of Cornelius the Jews (including Peter) were amazed that the Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Ghost. Peter did not lay hands on anyone. Indeed he was extremely reluctant to go there. And was surprised at what happened.
And in the household of Cornelius the Jews (including Peter) were amazed that the Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Ghost. Peter did not lay hands on anyone. Indeed he was extremely reluctant to go there. And was surprised at what happened.
IF one had to be water baptized in order to be forgiven (and born again), then he could NEVER get saved unless he could find: (1) enough water to be immersed in and (2) a Christian who was able to baptize him! Unless both were present he could NEVER get saved as would be the case if he was all alone on a deserted island or in a very dry area.
Exactly!
Have you not read... "How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!"...? <---Notice that quote comes immediately after he points out that a person cannot believe without hearing, and cannot fully believe without a preacher.
Note that Mark 16 states "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he the believeth not shall be damned". It takes a God-appointed preacher to fully believe, because it takes a God-appointed preacher to baptize.
So, to re-ask and answer your question..."But then wouldn't EVERY man/woman need to have a minister if they are to get baptized?" Yes, and God makes provision for exactly that...
1Corinthians 3:5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Have you not read... "How beautiful are the feet of them that preach the gospel of peace, and bring glad tidings of good things!"...? <---Notice that quote comes immediately after he points out that a person cannot believe without hearing, and cannot fully believe without a preacher.
Note that Mark 16 states "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he the believeth not shall be damned". It takes a God-appointed preacher to fully believe, because it takes a God-appointed preacher to baptize.
So, to re-ask and answer your question..."But then wouldn't EVERY man/woman need to have a minister if they are to get baptized?" Yes, and God makes provision for exactly that...
1Corinthians 3:5 Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but ministers by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Also note that the idea of needing water is not a new thing...
Act 8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. Act 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
A further note about this account: Jesus is the way...and the way includes both preacher and baptism...or the eunuch wouldn't have needed either Phillip, or water for baptism.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Act 8:35 Then Philip opened his mouth, and began at the same scripture, and preached unto him Jesus. Act 8:36 And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized?
A further note about this account: Jesus is the way...and the way includes both preacher and baptism...or the eunuch wouldn't have needed either Phillip, or water for baptism.
Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Last edited:
J
Yeah I've heard of that too and not sure how to feel because there are some portions of Christianity that only acknowledgement God or likewise only Jesus,scripture says none come to the father except through the so it sounds rather "shaky" because while one still might learn of God or Jesus it still sounds along the lines of "accepting one" entity and not the other,rather perplexing really...
L.....,
Sounds like excuses to me.
I am not aware of a place on earth where water is not available...are you?
Even in the desert there is water...not just everywhere.
Understanding G-d and His intent....He would look at how much water that person passed up..do't you think?
The Bible requires water baptism for...... "completion of (sin) cleansing".
Last edited:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Atacama_Desert
Again, if water baptism was required, then the thief on the cross would have been baptized too. And the Apostle Paul would have added baptism to the Gospel in 1 Corinthians 15.
Again, if water baptism was required, then the thief on the cross would have been baptized too. And the Apostle Paul would have added baptism to the Gospel in 1 Corinthians 15.