water baptism in Jesus' Name.

[heartwashed]

All I know is that when I was baptized by a Calvary Chapel pastor, he didn't speak the titles over me; and neither did he speak the name.

And you really do seem to hate me. Why else would you speak such hateful things as "the truth is just not in you, DUDE"?

What exactly are you disagreeing with, @Niki7?

My experience or my assessment of your hatred of me?

If the latter, why the "x"? which to me, is an expression of hatred?

 

[Niki7]

The thing that I said was taught by pastor Chuck was, not everything that I teach; but specifically the doctrine of the Holy Spirit as being with, in, and upon. That is a basic teaching of the Calvary Chapel Movement. Ask your Bible Study teacher.

And it hurts my feelings that you keep calling me a heretic, even though it means that I am in good company with Paul (Acts 24:14 (kjv)).

I said your so called teaching is heretical, but if you want to accept heretic as your label I'll allow it.

 

[Niki7]

All I know is that when I was baptized by a Calvary Chapel pastor, he didn't speak the titles over me; and neither did he speak the name.

You said you were baptized in a Oneness church. No Calvary Chapel pastor baptized you. You know, there is an expression that goes like this: If you tell the truth, you don't need to remember what you said. Apparently, you keep forgetting what you said.

No, I was baptized in a Oneness church.

Chuck and his folk do not mention a name when they baptize.

So, you were NOT baptized in a Calvary Chapel church; you were baptized in a Oneness church. There was not Calvary Chapel pastor baptizing you in your Oneness church, from where you get your Oneness Pentecostal teachings from which you have created, pretty much, your own gospel.

Caught yet again in yet another mistruth. This is becoming quite the habit for you.

 

[Niki7]

I wonder if the op is a fan of TD Jakes. He was a Oneness preacher but in 2012 he repented of this view and embraced the Trinity

AURORA, Ill. (BP) – Bishop T.D. Jakes says he has moved away from a "Oneness" view of the Godhead to embrace an orthodox definition of the Trinity – and that some in the Oneness Pentecostal movement now consider him a heretic. source

 

[Niki7]

John 3:16 is indeed "iffy"...other verses contain more absolute promises.

Maybe the Jesus "you know" is in those verses and not in John 3:16.

And he questions the use of my word heretical in reference to his what he calls 'his teachings'

Are we dealing with a troll here? smh

 

[heartwashed]

I said your so called teaching is heretical, but if you want to accept heretic as your label I'll allow it.

God bless you, @Niki7.

 

[heartwashed]

You said you were baptized in a Oneness church. No Calvary Chapel pastor baptized you. You know, there is an expression that goes like this: If you tell the truth, you don't need to remember what you said. Apparently, you keep forgetting what you said.

Don't be ridiculous. I have been baptized more than once.

Apparent contradiction, reconciled.

 

[heartwashed]

So, you were NOT baptized in a Calvary Chapel church; you were baptized in a Oneness church. There was not Calvary Chapel pastor baptizing you in your Oneness church, from where you get your Oneness Pentecostal teachings from which you have created, pretty much, your own gospel.

Caught yet again in yet another mistruth. This is becoming quite the habit for you.

Really grasping at straws to make me look like a bad guy.

And you say that you don't really hate me?

 

[heartwashed]

I wonder if the op is a fan of TD Jakes. He was a Oneness preacher but in 2012 he repented of this view and embraced the Trinity

AURORA, Ill. (BP) – Bishop T.D. Jakes says he has moved away from a "Oneness" view of the Godhead to embrace an orthodox definition of the Trinity – and that some in the Oneness Pentecostal movement now consider him a heretic. source

I, having been baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, do also hold to an orthodox view of the Trinity.

Some may disagree with that assessment.

Those who do have gone to the opposite extreme to the point of being even tritheistic in their theology.

My emphasis on the Oneness of the Lord in the Trinity is intended to combat the tritheism that has infiltrated the minds of some who call themselves "Trinitarian".

 

[heartwashed]

And he questions the use of my word heretical in reference to his what he calls 'his teachings'

Are we dealing with a troll here? smh

You are the troll.

However, may the Lord abundantly bless you, @Niki7.

 

[Lamar]

At what moment in time do we come in contact with the blood of Christ?
At what moment in time are we washed in His blood?
If you can not answer these questions with scripture, suspect your thinking is flawed.

As far as I know there is no scriptures that references your questions.

I suspect you can not answer your own questions with scripture.

But I look forward to your reply.

 

[Nehemiah6]

My emphasis on the Oneness of the Lord in the Trinity is intended to combat the tritheism that has infiltrated the minds of some who call themselves "Trinitarian".

This is just a nonsensical statement to justify your false beliefs. There are no Christians who hold to the silly view of three Gods (which would be Tritheism).

 

[heartwashed]

This is just a nonsensical statement to justify your false beliefs. There are no Christians who hold to the silly view of three Gods (which would be Tritheism).

There is a heretical diagram circulating through the body of Christ on the internet, that teaches that,

"the Father IS NOT the Son IS NOT the Holy Ghost",

Making the members in the Godhead separate rather than distinct,

effectively separating them into three beings who are God (as the mormons teach);

thus three Gods from the perspective of anyone who can see clearly and understand the implications of what is actually preached.

And certain gullible Christians who don't know the scriptures nor the creeds accept this as orthodox doctrine.

It is really and truly a travesty;

Because some who accept this doctrine will actually fight for it as if they are defending the truth in genuine Apologetics.

 

[heartwashed]

As far as I know there is no scriptures that references your questions.

Whose questions?

 

[Lamar]

Actually the Bible is perfectly clear -- starting with the words of Christ -- that it is REPENTANCE which is necessary for the remission of sins. Not baptism.

And [Christ] said unto them, Thus it is written, and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise from the dead the third day: And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. And ye are witnesses of these things. (Luke 24:46-48)

And that is exactly what Peter did: But those things, which God before had shewed by the mouth of all his prophets, that Christ should suffer, he hath so fulfilled. Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out, when the times of refreshing shall come from the presence of the Lord (Acts 3:18,19)

So why did Peter include baptism in Acts 2:38? It was probably in anticipation of all the false teachings which would come later. What he was doing there is simply showing the very close connection between salvation and baptism. just as Christ did in Mark 16:16. So once again it is our solemn duty to examine all the Scriptures, and then show what is the true Gospel.

Your two verses are perfectly clear and straight forward.
We must repent for the remission of sins.
but
These verses do not negate the same perfectly clear and straight forward message of Acts 2:38 and others.
Since you agree that Luke 24:46-48 & Acts 3:18,19 are clear, why can you not see the same for Acts 2:38.
Were they not all written by the same author? Why can you not accept Luke's simple words:

‘Turn back!’ replied Peter. ‘Be baptized – every single one of you – in the name of Jesus the Messiah, so that your sins can be forgiven, and you will receive the gift of the holy spirit.

Luke 24:46-48, Acts 2:38 and Acts3:18,19 are in harmony.

Repentance and baptism are needed for the remission of sins.

 

[heartwashed]

This is just a nonsensical statement to justify your false beliefs.

And I can say just as easily that your beliefs are false. And even though they are, my saying that they are would not make that true.

And because my beliefs are not false, your saying that they are false is merely a false statement; and an accusation without evidence.

 

[Lamar]

Whose questions?

This was a reply to niki7 from post#417.
I may have hit the wrong key or something. Please overlook, I am new.

 

[heartwashed]

This was a reply to niki7 from post#417.
I may have hit the wrong key or something. Please overlook, I am new.

Hey, we should be all about grace and mercy here.

 

[GaryA]

First I want to show that scripturally baptism has the power to save.

1Pe 3:20, Which sometime were disobedient, when once the longsuffering of God waited in the days of Noah, while the ark was a preparing, wherein few, that is, eight souls were saved by water.
1Pe 3:21, The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

I have not read anything beyond the first page. And, I am not so sure that I really care to. Because, I do not wish to waste time arguing with you.

In 50 pages - has no one told you that the phrase "not the putting away of the filth of the flesh" tells us explicitly that it is not talking about 'soul-salvation'...?!?!?!

I am guessing someone has but you are not listening.

You need to exit 'teaching' mode and enter 'learning' mode on this topic. Go back and study it again in the context of the chapter and the book.

 

[WayneKCobb]

Waster baptism is merely the picture. Spirit baptism is the reality.

Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament. See Romans 6:3-5
Romans 6 - Robertson's Word Pictures in the New Testament - Bible Commentaries - StudyLight.org

Descriptive of those who dwelleth in Him. They "keep" (Greek word "tereo" - guard, observe, watch over) His commandments.

Water baptism is merely the picture of this washing with water by the word. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26)

By grace through faith, not works. (Ephesians 2:8,9) Not faith and water baptism. We are justified by faith. (Romans 5:1) Not faith and water baptism. We have access by faith into grace. (Romans 5:2) Not faith and water baptism.

The washing of regeneration is not accomplished by water baptism. The word "washing" in the Strong's Greek Concordance with Vine's Number 3067 - (Loutron) "a bath, a laver" is used *metaphorically of the Word of God, as the instrument of spiritual cleansing,* (Ephesians 5:26; and Titus 3:5), of the "washing of regeneration." Washing refers to spiritual washing or purification of the soul, accomplished by the Holy Spirit at the moment of salvation. Once again, water baptism is merely the picture of the reality.

Hi mailmandan,

In Ephesians 5:26, the word "word" of God according to Strong's G4487,
Strong's g4487

- Lexical: ῥῆμα
- Transliteration: rhéma
- Part of Speech: Noun, Neuter
- Phonetic Spelling: hray'-mah
- Definition: a thing spoken, (a) a word or saying of any kind, as command, report, promise, (b) a thing, matter, business.
- Origin: From rheo; an utterance (individually, collectively or specially); by implication, a matter or topic (especially of narration, command or dispute); with a negative naught whatever.
- Usage: + evil, + nothing, saying, word.
- Translated as (count): words (28), word (25), saying (5), matters (2), a message (1), by word (1), declaration (1), matter (1), of words (1), sayings (1), the word (1), thing (1), things (1).

Ephesians 5:26 - He did this to make the church holy by cleansing it, washing it using water, with the "............" 27 that He might present to Himself the church in all her glory, having no spot or wrinkle or any such thing; but that she would be holy and blameless.

Anyone of the above words could have been used in Ephesians 5:26 for the word "word" like, saying, message, or declaration.

Here is a question for you: There are nine conversion stories in the book of Acts. In every story, they were always baptized the same day they believed. Why? Just maybe as one studies all of the verses on baptism there is a good reason for so doing.

God bless you, mailmandan!
Wayne

I have three different translations that translate this verse using: word, saying, and declaration and it is used in other places in the New Testament with these words and others, too.

Also, it is not "logos"




Young's Living Translation: "that he might sanctify it, having cleansed it with the bathing of the water in the "saying"
God's Word: