Saved by Water

  • 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.
Jul 28, 2021
1,226
406
83
As was shown earlier, and is surprising to find out...

That same thief on the cross (who indeed made it into heaven) also didn't believe the Gospel that includes that God raised Jesus from the dead (because that hadn't happened yet) and also didn't receive the Holy Ghost (because it hadn't been poured out yet, because Jesus hadn't gone to the Father yet.) The Thief on the cross was still under the OLD covenant, not the new.

Kind of amazing to think about.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Really? What about all those people who were baptized before Jesus was crucified? A waste of water?
 
S

SophieT

Guest
There is a false teaching that anyone who calls Jesus "Lord" automatically has the Holy Ghost and is ultimately and permanently "Saved"
uh...no. that is a false statement. I am not a lordship salvation practionner, but that is not what those who follow that adhere to...they believe you must understand that Christ IS Lord and make Him so in your life

Thank God that Jesus boldly and directly stated that there will be those who call him Lord and then are REJECTED by Jesus. (Matt 7:21-23)
that's good news to you? people being rejected by Christ who thought He would accept them? that's a 'thank you Jesus' moment to you?

now explain you don't mean it that way blah blah blah

I begin to understand you a little better and note you are prone to flattery.
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
Well said.!

There is a false teaching that anyone who calls Jesus "Lord" automatically has the Holy Ghost and is ultimately and permanently "Saved" because of a misunderstanding of 1 Corinthians 12:3. Thank God that Jesus boldly and directly stated that there will be those who call him Lord and then are REJECTED by Jesus. (Matt 7:21-23). Thank God Jesus himself said it. If anyone said the same words regarding those that call Jesus Lord (but fail to submit to His word) it would have been JUST as much TRUE, but would be rejected by those who look at the person (man/flesh) rather than the word.

I don't expect this post to be popularly accepted. But truth is not defined by popularity. (straight, narrow, few)

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
First, salvation is permanent. Jesus made that clear. In John 5:24, He made the point that those who believe possess eternal life. Then, in John 10:28 He said that recipients of eternal life shall never perish.

Therefore, from the moment one puts their faith in Christ for salvation, they possess eternal life and shall never perish.

Second, the reason the crowd in Matt 7:21-23 was rejected was that they were trusting in what THEY DID for entering the kingdom rather than trusting in what CHRIST DID for them. They thought they could earn a place in heaven. They will be sadly mistaken at the Great White Throne judgment.
 

JBTN

Active member
Feb 11, 2020
220
79
28
As was shown earlier, and is surprising to find out...

That same thief on the cross (who indeed made it into heaven) also didn't believe the Gospel that includes that God raised Jesus from the dead (because that hadn't happened yet) and also didn't receive the Holy Ghost (because it hadn't been poured out yet, because Jesus hadn't gone to the Father yet.) The Thief on the cross was still under the OLD covenant, not the new.

Kind of amazing to think about.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
““The Law and the Prophets were until John; since then the good news of the kingdom of God is preached, and everyone forces his way into it.”
‭‭Luke‬ ‭16:16‬ ‭ESV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/59/luk.16.16.ESV

“The beginning of the gospel of Jesus Christ, the Son of God. As it is written in Isaiah the prophet, “Behold, I send my messenger before your face, who will prepare your way, the voice of one crying in the wilderness: ‘Prepare the way of the Lord, make his paths straight,’” John appeared, baptizing in the wilderness and proclaiming a baptism of repentance for the forgiveness of sins.”
‭‭Mark‬ ‭1:1-4‬ ‭ESV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/59/mrk.1.1-4.ESV
 

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,247
1,104
113
@HisKid
John the baptist was SENT OF GOD to baptize. That means he truly had the authority to baptize. Someone who tries to baptize but was NOT sent BY GOD, that person is effectively a wolf in sheep's clothing. ANY baptism by that person would NOT have the intended effect of baptism. (if the blind lead the blind, both fall into the ditch).

But my guess about a baptism of a NON-repentive person by a man SENT OF GOD to baptize....My thought is that the baptism would indeed work as it should, producing remission of sins. Then the person would experience something similar to what Jesus warned of in Matthew 12:43-45 KJV:

"When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh through dry places, seeking rest, and findeth none. [44] Then he saith, I will return into my house from whence I came out; and when he is come, he findeth it empty, swept, and garnished. [45] Then goeth he, and taketh with himself seven other spirits more wicked than himself, and they enter in and dwell there: and the last state of that man is worse than the first. Even so shall it be also unto this wicked generation."​

I hope that helps.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
Notice what Matthew 3:7-8 conveys, John was not willing to baptize those who did not repent. Also notice verse 9. It speaks to the fact that even though the Jews were God's chosen people they were not exempt from the need to repent and obey the command. The verse goes on to say that God is able to raise up "children" unto Abraham if they refuse to accept his message.

Matt 3:7-9
7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

Any thoughts?
 

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,247
1,104
113
Only during the beginning of the church was there a time difference noted. By 49-55 AD the Spirit was given BY BELIEVING the gospel.


You previously charged me with stating a personal opinion, and here you are, stating your own personal opinion. No Scripture whatsoever.
I provided you with scriptures numerous times. I did not think if necessary to include them once again. But here goes: (Acts 2:38-41, 8:12-18, 10:44-48, 19:1-6, 22:16)

Also, in answer to your other comment there is but one gospel message. And as proven by scripture the Spirit is not automatically given upon belief. Jude 3 clarifies this. It states there is a common salvation that pertains to all. It can be known by earnestly contending for the faith that was ONCE FOR ALL delivered to the saints. (apostles) Peter presented it on the Day of Pentecost and that same message is carried by others such as, Philip, Paul, Ananias, etc.
 
E

eternally-gratefull

Guest
Did you forget that the entire bible was written BY MAN, not God?
And?

so because of this your going to rely on a baptism performed by man over the baptism performed by God to make you born again?

Thats sad man. Sad!

Again, Get wet. Thats fine
My savior washed me and made me clean by his spirit
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
I provided you with scriptures numerous times. I did not think if necessary to include them once again. But here goes: (Acts 2:38-41, 8:12-18, 10:44-48, 19:1-6, 22:16)
Why don't you just read my explanation of each of these passages?

Also, in answer to your other comment there is but one gospel message. And as proven by scripture the Spirit is not automatically given upon belief
Scripture itself refutes your claim.

If water baptism was a requirement for salvation, the greatest evangelist EVER would NOT have written what he did in 1 Cor 1.

14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius,
15 so no one can say that you were baptized in my name.
16 (Yes, I also baptized the household of Stephanas; beyond that, I don’t remember if I baptized anyone else.)
17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel—not with wisdom and eloquence, lest the cross of Christ be emptied of its power.

Paul made a point to say he thanked God that he DIDN'T baptize any of the Corinthians other than a very small number.

Then he explained ehat Christ DID send him to do: to preach the gospel NOT to baptize.

If that doesn't sink in, your mind is too closed for the truth.
 

Wansvic

Well-known member
Nov 27, 2018
5,247
1,104
113
“The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider this matter. And after there had been much debate, Peter stood up and said to them, “Brothers, you know that in the early days God made a choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles should hear the word of the gospel and believe. And God, who knows the heart, bore witness to them, by giving them the Holy Spirit just as he did to us, and he made no distinction between us and them, having cleansed their hearts by faith.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭15:6-9‬ ‭ESV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/59/act.15.6-9.ESV

Read through this carefully, doesn’t it say that the Apostles, the elders present, and those of the house of Cornelius received the Holy Spirit in the same way. The Greek word no in “no distinction” is a compound word, not a simple no. It means not one. So he made not one distinction between us and them. If some had received the Holy Spirit before water baptism and some after wouldn’t that have been a distinction. Also, the word translated ”just as” indicates that the manner in which they received the Holy Spirit was the same. If you go back to Acts 10:47 and 11:15-18 and read through them carefully you will see that Peter said something similar of those who accompanied him to see Cornelius and also those of the house of the circumcision.
Thank you for sharing. Please consider the following points in answer to your post.

1. The 120 in the upper room received the infilling of the Holy Ghost DAYS AFTER they believed in Jesus' death, burial and resurrection. (Acts 2:2-4)

2. Everyone gathered on the Day of Pentecost, including the apostles, would have been responsible to get rebaptized in water in the name of the Lord Jesus. How do we know this? Because Jesus said that repentance and remission of sin would be preached in his name BEGINNING in Jerusalem. (Luke 24:47) And this did occur on the Day of Pentecost when Peter gave the command for EVERYONE to repent, and be baptized IN THE NAME of the Lord Jesus FOR THE REMISSION OF SIN. (Acts 2:38) The biblical record also shows Paul telling others that had been water baptized by John that they needed to be rebaptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. (Acts 19:1-6)

3. My understanding of what was meant about no distinction between Jew and Gentile is salvation is open to all. God is no respecter of persons. Even so, there was no distinction in the sequence of the Jews and Gentiles receiving the Holy Ghost and being water baptized. Even though there are no records that specifically say all of the 120 got rebaptized. The other scriptures as presented indicate it had to have taken place. To suggest Jesus did not tell the truth is not even a possibility. And Paul's encounter proves that being water baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus is a requirement All must obey. This truth is paralleled in Peter initial instructions in Acts 2:38.
 

KelbyofGod

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2017
1,881
720
113
uh...no. that is a false statement. I am not a lordship salvation practionner, but that is not what those who follow that adhere to...they believe you must understand that Christ IS Lord and make Him so in your life
I'm thankful that you are able to see something you disagree with, and instead of getting personally offended you address the concept that you found faulty. And I said that on purpose and will not retract it as if it were flattery. (and I'll explain why in a little bit). But back to the doctrinal issue:

Perhaps what you described is what is meant by some... But those I've ran into claim that "nobody can say that Jesus is Lord unless they have the Holy Ghost" then they say "Jesus is Lord. See, that proves I have the Holy Ghost". <--THAT is a false belief; a false confidence; an errant doctrine.

that's good news to you? people being rejected by Christ who thought He would accept them? that's a 'thank you Jesus' moment to you?

now explain you don't mean it that way blah blah blah
Nope. I STAND on what I said. Thank God that Jesus was that straightforward... speaking what he knew was true... risking being stoned as a heretic... to show them the TRUTH about a situation... not willing to allow the people to be subtily deceived by a wrong perception about calling Him "Lord". He probably saved a lot of people from destruction by speaking that truth. He too was FEISTY, bold, unwavering in his commitment to speak CLEARLY no matter who didn't like it. I'm actually surprised that you don't cheer him on in that respect. I'm not rejoicing in those that will die (on the wrong side of what he said), I'm rejoicing for those who will escape destruction because they heard what Jesus said.

I begin to understand you a little better and note you are prone to flattery.
Let me give you yet another compliment before I dismantle that perception. :) Praise God that you are critical of praise from the mouth of men!... that you question the motives behind the words!... that you question whether the intent is to encourage or to deceive!... To me that implies humility and wisdom. NOW I'll explain some of why I am unrepentant of my positive words towards you and/or others in the forum.

Flattery... is the flip-side of the "unnecessary inflammatory wording" I was discrediting in my Post #396.
Flattery... (like those over-the-top accusations) is "geared toward provoking the flesh, not conveying truth. People do it because it can be persuasive to an audience of men"
Flattery... is insincere; comes from the lips, not the heart.
Flattery... is not clearly explained. ...does not clearly show how/why those words are applicable.
Flattery... should be eschewed, shunned, disdained, declined, avoided, refused, rejected, etc. (Yes, I used a thesaurus, lol)
Flattery... is not what I was giving you.

I was COMPLIMENTING you (and others).

Compliments... are geared toward encouragement BY conveying truth. People SHOULD do it because it can provoke the hearer towards additional praiseworthy behavior.
Compliments... are sincere... must come from deep within.
Compliments... are backed by examples proving the relevance of the words.
Compliments... should be accepted, examined, proven to be true, pondered, treasured, recalled in times of weakness, remembered as a source of strength, etc. (No need of a thesaurus on this one. :) )
Complements.. ARE what I was giving you (and others).

I try to remember to give compliments generally because it's too easy for people to interpret "Your doctrine may be incomplete" as "You're stupid". (Tell me you haven't seen that happen?) A well-timed, sincere compliment can help the person regain a more positive view of themself and return their focus to the actual topic at hand.

Please notice that one of my compliments to you was to the fact that you DIDN'T get offended but instead remained focused on the doctrine. That's rare and deserved to be mentioned positively.

SUMMARY: Flattery is bad... Compliments are awesome!

Are you ready to receive your next batch of compliments now? :) Plus, I think you really should reconsider those compliments that were already given.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
 

GRACE_ambassador

Well-known member
Feb 22, 2021
3,197
1,601
113
Midwest
Someone should have told Jesus that dude [on Another cross] didn't get dunked.
Getting dunked ... in water... by a man of God... as a function of repentance ... in the name of Jesus... for remission of sins... is simply the word that is written. (Acts 2:38 ...again and still.)
God's Word Is Very Clear to a few, Rightly Dividing His Word Of Truth!
For Most "what is NECESSARY" Discussions, TODAY, Under God's PURE GRACE,
they usually can go like this:

(1) Sabbath keeping? Is it necessary or NOT? Some law-keepers = Yes, it is
NECESSARY for salvation! Others, say: Well, it is NOT necessary for salvation, BUT, it IS Necessary for obedience, or you are a Law-Breaker, and judgers then accuse others of disobeying Jesus' Commands, NOT "loving Him" [and, NOT saved?]
Also, THE SAME here:

(2) Dunking? Is water baptism necessary? Yes, say some, AND they Are in fact Scriptural, But, UNdispensational = it WAS "for ISRAEL, For The Remission of sins." Well, say some, who SOMEWHAT understand GRACE, NO, it WON'T save you, BUT it IS NECESSARY for obedience.

Well, we still ask: Is it necessary or not? God's SCRIPTURAL Answer?:

Precious friend(s), Scriptural findings; in Summary:
Prophecy/Law for ISRAEL:
►►► The Twelve Were Sent to {water} baptize! ◄◄◄
The TWO Main (of 12) baptismS =

A) water, For remission of sins/induction into Israeli "priesthood!":
(Matthew_3:5-6; Mark_1:4; Luke_3:3; John_1:31; Luke_7:29-30; Acts_10:37)
(Matthew_28:19; Mark_16:16; Acts_2:38, 22:16; Ezekiel_36:25)
+
B) WITH The Holy Spirit, Poured Out By CHRIST, for power, signs And wonders!
(Isaiah_44:3; Matthew_3:11; Mark_1:8, 16:17-18;
Luke_24:49; Acts_2:17-18, 38, 8:15-17, 11:16)
Prophecy/Law

Rightly Divided (2 Timothy 2:15 KJB!) From Things That Differ!:

Mystery/GRACE! =
our "apostle to the Gentiles" for The Body Of CHRIST:

►►► Paul Was Not Sent to {water} baptize! Why Not?: ◄◄◄

Today: Only ONE Baptism = "BY" The ONE Spirit = God's OPERATION,
Spiritually
Identifying members In (The ONE Body Of) CHRIST!!
► (Ephesians 4:5; ◄ Colossians_2:12; Galatians_3:27;
Romans_6:3-4; ►►► 1 Corinthians 12:13 KJB! ◄◄◄)
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Conclusion: God's ONE Baptism Today? = ONE
OR, EQUALS TWO? {NO "critic" has Explained this WITH {ADDED} WATER, ...
...yet... STILL waiting 😢}

Is it not Possible That God's Answer Of "No water baptism, for
us Today," Under HIS Pure GRACE, absolutely vanquishes Satan's
{Many Severely DIVIDED denominations?} Confusion into oblivion!?
-------------------------
FULL "studies" here:
12 baptisms Rightly Divided From: ONE Baptism
----------------------------------------
Please be Richly Encouraged, enlightened, exhorted, and edified!
God's Simple Will!
 
Jul 28, 2021
1,226
406
83
I'm thankful that you are able to see something you disagree with, and instead of getting personally offended you address the concept that you found faulty. And I said that on purpose and will not retract it as if it were flattery. (and I'll explain why in a little bit). But back to the doctrinal issue:

Perhaps what you described is what is meant by some... But those I've ran into claim that "nobody can say that Jesus is Lord unless they have the Holy Ghost" then they say "Jesus is Lord. See, that proves I have the Holy Ghost". <--THAT is a false belief; a false confidence; an errant doctrine.

Nope. I STAND on what I said. Thank God that Jesus was that straightforward... speaking what he knew was true... risking being stoned as a heretic... to show them the TRUTH about a situation... not willing to allow the people to be subtily deceived by a wrong perception about calling Him "Lord". He probably saved a lot of people from destruction by speaking that truth. He too was FEISTY, bold, unwavering in his commitment to speak CLEARLY no matter who didn't like it. I'm actually surprised that you don't cheer him on in that respect. I'm not rejoicing in those that will die (on the wrong side of what he said), I'm rejoicing for those who will escape destruction because they heard what Jesus said.


Let me give you yet another compliment before I dismantle that perception. :) Praise God that you are critical of praise from the mouth of men!... that you question the motives behind the words!... that you question whether the intent is to encourage or to deceive!... To me that implies humility and wisdom. NOW I'll explain some of why I am unrepentant of my positive words towards you and/or others in the forum.

Flattery... is the flip-side of the "unnecessary inflammatory wording" I was discrediting in my Post #396.
Flattery... (like those over-the-top accusations) is "geared toward provoking the flesh, not conveying truth. People do it because it can be persuasive to an audience of men"
Flattery... is insincere; comes from the lips, not the heart.
Flattery... is not clearly explained. ...does not clearly show how/why those words are applicable.
Flattery... should be eschewed, shunned, disdained, declined, avoided, refused, rejected, etc. (Yes, I used a thesaurus, lol)
Flattery... is not what I was giving you.

I was COMPLIMENTING you (and others).

Compliments... are geared toward encouragement BY conveying truth. People SHOULD do it because it can provoke the hearer towards additional praiseworthy behavior.
Compliments... are sincere... must come from deep within.
Compliments... are backed by examples proving the relevance of the words.
Compliments... should be accepted, examined, proven to be true, pondered, treasured, recalled in times of weakness, remembered as a source of strength, etc. (No need of a thesaurus on this one. :) )
Complements.. ARE what I was giving you (and others).

I try to remember to give compliments generally because it's too easy for people to interpret "Your doctrine may be incomplete" as "You're stupid". (Tell me you haven't seen that happen?) A well-timed, sincere compliment can help the person regain a more positive view of themself and return their focus to the actual topic at hand.

Please notice that one of my compliments to you was to the fact that you DIDN'T get offended but instead remained focused on the doctrine. That's rare and deserved to be mentioned positively.

SUMMARY: Flattery is bad... Compliments are awesome!

Are you ready to receive your next batch of compliments now? :) Plus, I think you really should reconsider those compliments that were already given.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby
I'm still waiting to hear of your judgment of those who were baptized before Jesus was crucified. Were they duped and are now in hell? By your own admission, the baptism is of none effect unless it was after the resurrection.
 
S

SophieT

Guest
there is so much leaven in this thread about water baptism, it's becoming one big yeast palooza
 

GRACE_ambassador

Well-known member
Feb 22, 2021
3,197
1,601
113
Midwest
:)Praise God that you are critical of praise from the mouth of men!...
Excellent! Here are some more about praising water baptism, when God Says it
is NOT for us, today, Under HIS PURE GRACE!:

(1) a mega church that boasts that it has "reached a wonderful milestone" of
50,000 baptisms! I wonder how Many Of them are "Really" saved, or is this just for show And praise from the mouth of men?

(2) speaking of showing, I have an Important question is for immersionists: how is dunking young and middle-aged WOMEN any Different than the UNgodly wet t-shirt contests at UNgodly liquor establishments of the world. I thought God Said: "Be NOT conformed to the world!" (Romans 12:2) Who "praises" this Conformity?

(3) How close are water adherents, IF God Said "NO water, Today, Under GRACE"
{see #451 },
how Perilously CLOSE are they to: blaspheming God's Word Of TRUTH!?

Something for ALL to think about, Correct?

Be well!
 
Jul 28, 2021
1,226
406
83
Excellent! Here are some more about praising water baptism, when God Says it
is NOT for us, today, Under HIS PURE GRACE!:

(1) a mega church that boasts that it has "reached a wonderful milestone" of
50,000 baptisms! I wonder how Many Of them are "Really" saved, or is this just for show And praise from the mouth of men?

(2) speaking of showing, I have an Important question is for immersionists: how is dunking young and middle-aged WOMEN any Different than the UNgodly wet t-shirt contests at UNgodly liquor establishments of the world. I thought God Said: "Be NOT conformed to the world!" (Romans 12:2) Who "praises" this Conformity?

(3) How close are water adherents, IF God Said "NO water, Today, Under GRACE"
{see #451 },
how Perilously CLOSE are they to: blaspheming God's Word Of TRUTH!?

Something for ALL to think about, Correct?

Be well!
Mega churches are just cults very similar to the Catholic cult. Wealth, praise from men and fame are just too tempting... and using the name of Jesus.? Cha-ching!! People who support these heretics are not victims.

As for the comparison to a wet tee-shirt contest, I've never heard that before, but.. ugh.. if you are going to be taking a swim in front of your congregation, I hope that you wouldn't wear a tee-shirt that shows every part of your torso when it is wet. lol
 
Jan 31, 2021
8,658
1,064
113
1. The 120 in the upper room received the infilling of the Holy Ghost DAYS AFTER they believed in Jesus' death, burial and resurrection. (Acts 2:2-4)
First, there is no such thing as an "infilling of the Holy Spirit". There is an indwelling and there is the filling, which is different. Which did you mean by the conflated word that you used?

Second, NO believer from Adam on received the Holy Spirit upon believing in the Messiah, UNTIL the Day of Pentecost. It's all in Acts 2. Initially, only Jews received the indwelling of the Holy Spirit upon faith in Christ immediately. In Acts 8 Gentiles had hands laid on them after they believed in order to receive the Holy Spirit.

But in Acts 10, Cornelius and family/friends received the Spirit when they believed. But then, in Acts 19, Paul found 12 disciples who didn't receive the Holy Spirit until Paul laid his hands on them.

But, by the time Paul wrote to the Galatians, which is estimated to be between 49-55 AD, he wrote this:
2 I would like to learn just one thing from you: Did you receive the Spirit by the works of the law, or by believing what you heard?
5 So again I ask, does God give you his Spirit and work miracles among you by the works of the law, or by your believing what you heard?

If anyone still needed hands laid on them before receiving the Spirit by the time Paul wrote that, he would have been wrong to write what he did.
 

KelbyofGod

Senior Member
Oct 8, 2017
1,881
720
113
Yep.. lol :) I changed the order for replies based on what stood out the most.

Also notice verse 9. It speaks to the fact that even though the Jews were God's chosen people they were not exempt from the need to repent and obey the command.
WOW that's powerful. And we know they didn't like hearing stuff like that...Stuff like "even though you believe to some degree, there is more that you need to submit to if you want to escape damnation". (John 8:30-47). Verse 47 is especially interesting because to those whom the bible in verse 31 describes as "those Jews that believed on him" Jesus says "ye are not of God", and in verse 44 "Ye are of your father the devil".

I'm sure you'll also appreciate that this verse about "who you really belong to" is in a chapter highlighting the importance of baptism
Romans 6:16 KJV​
"Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?"​
Notice what Matthew 3:7-8 conveys, John was not willing to baptize those who did not repent.

The verse goes on to say that God is able to raise up "children" unto Abraham if they refuse to accept his message.
I notice that it doesn't state whether he did or didn't baptize them. Plus, if he only said that when MANY of that type were gathered together, that implies that he'd already allowed a few others to pass through. So I'm still of the opinion that he would have gone ahead and baptized them. I THINK he's saying "I can wash you, but if internally you are still a swine, you'll go right back to the behavior of a swine". It seems to me that he is trying very hard to make it very clear that words and thoughts of belief weren't going to be enough if their behavior didn't change.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

Matt 3:7-9
7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
 
Jul 28, 2021
1,226
406
83
Yep.. lol :) I changed the order for replies based on what stood out the most.

WOW that's powerful. And we know they didn't like hearing stuff like that...Stuff like "even though you believe to some degree, there is more that you need to submit to if you want to escape damnation". (John 8:30-47). Verse 47 is especially interesting because to those whom the bible in verse 31 describes as "those Jews that believed on him" Jesus says "ye are not of God", and in verse 44 "Ye are of your father the devil".

I'm sure you'll also appreciate that this verse about "who you really belong to" is in a chapter highlighting the importance of baptism
Romans 6:16 KJV​
"Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?"​
I notice that it doesn't state whether he did or didn't baptize them. Plus, if he only said that when MANY of that type were gathered together, that implies that he'd already allowed a few others to pass through. So I'm still of the opinion that he would have gone ahead and baptized them. I THINK he's saying "I can wash you, but if internally you are still a swine, you'll go right back to the behavior of a swine". It seems to me that he is trying very hard to make it very clear that words and thoughts of belief weren't going to be enough if their behavior didn't change.

Love in Jesus,
Kelby

Matt 3:7-9
7 But when he saw many of the Pharisees and Sadducees come to his baptism, he said unto them, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?
8 Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
9 And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.
I just have to reiterate what Sophie said...how do you put up with your own bull doo doo? Do you think that your "WOW, that's powerful" comes off as genuine? Think again. It's pathetic at this point.

.

.