God's ONE Baptism For His Body!

  • 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.
Sep 23, 2023
847
76
28
#61
Cornelius is not a good example. Acts 2 and 10 were unique instances where the Spirit fell unilaterally without the laying on ofvthe apostle's hands, and in both cases it was to validate what was occurring, and in both cases, the church began, 1st in Jerusalem and then in Caesarea amongst the Gentiles.
I think this whole argument really goes to "are we saved by faith or works" am I right?
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
61,149
30,299
113
#62

Jesus' words from John 7:37-38 and John 4:14
Jesus clearly makes a distinction between earthly H2O and the water that saves .:)
 
Sep 23, 2023
847
76
28
#63

Jesus' words from John 7:37-38 and John 4:14
Jesus clearly makes a distinction between earthly H2O and the water that saves .:)
I am shamed by how busy you are with God's grace.
It's a shining light to help me see my failure and know my need to improve.
 

GRACE_ambassador

Well-known member
Feb 22, 2021
3,242
1,642
113
Midwest
#64
Also, keep in mind that all Protestants practice water baptism, they only disagree with you on what exactly it does... but, again, at the end of the day, they practice it.
Correct, practicing an OT ritual that is not even for The Body Of Christ, Today.

And, there are at least 14 ( that I know of ) Totally Confusing 'denominational traditions' being practiced, causing Severe Division, and the enemy of our spiritual warfare must be laughing his head off at this "falling house, divided against itself," eh?

ONE Baptism, from God to me, has certainly solved all the confusion I used
to have. Praise His Holy Name!!

Amen.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
61,149
30,299
113
#65
I am shamed by how busy you are with God's grace.
It's a shining light to help me see my failure and know my need to improve.
We all have our gifts and calling. It is touching that you see such value in what I do because some try
to tell me my work is of the devil. Yeah. Imagine that. I would rather instead of shame, you find inspiration
.:)
 
Sep 23, 2023
847
76
28
#66
Correct, practicing an OT ritual that is not even for The Body Of Christ, Today.

And, there are at least 14 ( that I know of ) Totally Confusing 'denominational traditions' being practiced, causing Severe Division, and the enemy of our spiritual warfare must be laughing his head off at this "falling house, divided against itself," eh?

ONE Baptism, from God to me, has certainly solved all the confusion I used
to have. Praise His Holy Name!!

Amen.
I'm uncertain about classifying NT water baptism as an OT ritual.

If merely getting into water constitutes an OT ritual, then practically everyone on earth has practiced an OT ritual. What constitutes the OT ritual is mentally following along the terms of the baptism and carrying through. There is no OT ritual that says "repent of your sins, and be baptized". That was John the Baptist's message. Jesus submitted to John's authority, then began practicing the same, ordering His disciples to have others be baptized and confess their sins.

Maybe it is an "intertestamental" practice, but it is definitely a New Testament practice.
 
Sep 23, 2023
847
76
28
#67
We all have our gifts and calling. It is touching that you see such value in what I do because some try
to tell me my work is of the devil. Yeah. Imagine that. I would rather instead of shame, you find inspiration
.:)
Yes, first the shame, then the inspiration. LOL
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
61,149
30,299
113
#69
I'm uncertain about classifying NT water baptism as an OT ritual.

If merely getting into water constitutes an OT ritual, then practically everyone on earth has practiced an OT ritual. What constitutes the OT ritual is mentally following along the terms of the baptism and carrying through. There is no OT ritual that says "repent of your sins, and be baptized". That was John the Baptist's message. Jesus picked his practice up, and ordered his disciples to baptize and confess sins.

Maybe it is an "intertestamental" practice, but it is definitely a New Testament practice.
Water baptism was required of priests before performing their service to God.

Mikveh or mikvah is a bath used for the purpose of ritual immersion in Judaism to achieve ritual purity.
 
Sep 23, 2023
847
76
28
#70
There are some vital elements I have left out of my understanding of the Scriptures, and this is one of them--God's kindness. I have to write this, and other verses, down and keep them in mind.
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
61,149
30,299
113
#71
There are some vital elements I have left out of my understanding of the Scriptures, and this is
one of them--God's kindness. I have to write this, and other verses, down and keep them in mind.

Micah 6:8 + 1 Corinthians 5:12
:)
 
Sep 23, 2023
847
76
28
#72
Water baptism was required of priests before performing their service to God.

Mikveh or mikvah is a bath used for the purpose of ritual immersion in Judaism to achieve ritual purity.
Yes, but if merely submerging in water constitutes an OT ritual, then ALL people have done an OT ritual. No, you have to be the right person, and for the right (mentally understood) reason, to have gone through with "an OT ritual".

Women also are to baptize, but their baptism doesn't make them priests.

No OT command "confess your sins and be baptized" exists does it?
 

Magenta

Senior Member
Jul 3, 2015
61,149
30,299
113
#73
Yes, but if merely submerging in water constitutes an OT ritual, then ALL people have done an OT ritual. No, you have to be the right person, and for the right (mentally understood) reason, to have gone through with "an OT ritual".

Women also are to baptize, but their baptism doesn't make them priests.

No OT command "confess your sins and be baptized" exists does it?
Yes, we do all use water to cleanse us, and it was commanded in OT times as well, but water baptism is not the removal
of dirt from the body but the pledge of a clear conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ...


Interesting too that in the first recorded miracle of John's Gospel, it is water set aside for ritual cleansing that Jesus turns
into wine, which is symbolic of His blood. We are washed in the blood of the Lamb, but this too is not a literal washing.


Revelation 1:5 And from Jesus Christ, who is the faithful witness, and the first begotten of the dead, and
the prince of the kings of the earth. Unto him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his own blood,


Though the shedding of His blood was literal... .:)
 

DJT_47

Well-known member
Oct 20, 2022
1,074
190
63
#74
On one hand, it's a good argument you make, but are you saying God gave the gift of His Holy Spirit into spiritually dead, defiled, persons?

Paul also says the Galatians received the Spirit by "hearing with faith". LOL
As stated and if read slowly with understanding, and when you look at all the other instances of the miraculous manifestations of the Spirit, you come to this conclusion.

Luke 24:49, the Lord told his 11 apostles to tarry in Jerusalem until they received power from on high.

They did just that. Read Acts 1:4-8

Then read Acts 2:1-4. The apostles were filled with the Holy Ghost which fell on them, they spoke in tongues, the audience if Jews was moved, and eventually believed, was converted, baptized, and added to the church by the Lord per Acts 2:47. That was the beginning of the church amongst the Jews at Jerusalem, and that is one of 2 times tge Holy Ghost fell unilaterally without the laying on of the apostle's hands first.

Then go to Acts 10. Once again, the Holy Ghost falls on individuals without the laying on of the apostle's hands, but this time it was on the Gentiles, as a sign from above, to validate what was occurring. This ultimately brought the Gentiles into the fold. But notice the Gentiles still had to be baptized and were. Why? Acts 2:38-47 tells you why; firvthe forgiveness of sins, to receive the gift (the indwelling) of the Holy Ghost, and to become part of the body of Christ, no different than today.

As stated, these two instances of the Holy Ghost falling in this manner were unique and for good reason. To start the church.

All other instances where the manifestation of the Spirit occurred were the result of the laying on of the apostle's hands. Ref. the below repost on this which captures that the apostles were given unique power from on high as well as by which they were able to make manifest the Holy Ghost (the gifts listed in 1 Cor 12:8-10) by the laying on of their hands.


REPOST

Stephen was already a baptized believer, so according to Acts 2:38, he had already received the gift not gifts, which are the miraculous manifestation of the Spirit. It wasn't until they (the apostles) laid their hands on him, verse 6, that he was able to do the wonders as noted in verse 8

"5And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch: 6Whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them.

7And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.

8And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people."

Also to corroborate the fact that it was the laying on of the apostle's hands that enabled the gifts (manifestations of the Spirit, those listed in 1Cor 12:8-10), see the below scriptures.

Acts 5:12

12And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomon's porch.

Acts 8:14-17

14Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: 15Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: 16(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) 17Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

Acts 8:18-19

18And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, 19Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.

Acts 19:6

6And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

2 Tim 1:6-7

6Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands. 7For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

Pretty clear when you look at ALL the pertinent scriptures, the MANIFISTATION of the Spirit, which Spirit was within the baptized believers in biblical times per Acts 2:38, was the result of the laying on of the apostle's hands.
 
Sep 23, 2023
847
76
28
#76
As stated and if read slowly with understanding, and when you look at all the other instances of the miraculous manifestations of the Spirit, you come to this conclusion.

Luke 24:49, the Lord told his 11 apostles to tarry in Jerusalem until they received power from on high.

They did just that. Read Acts 1:4-8

Then read Acts 2:1-4. The apostles were filled with the Holy Ghost which fell on them, they spoke in tongues, the audience if Jews was moved, and eventually believed, was converted, baptized, and added to the church by the Lord per Acts 2:47. That was the beginning of the church amongst the Jews at Jerusalem, and that is one of 2 times tge Holy Ghost fell unilaterally without the laying on of the apostle's hands first.

Then go to Acts 10. Once again, the Holy Ghost falls on individuals without the laying on of the apostle's hands, but this time it was on the Gentiles, as a sign from above, to validate what was occurring. This ultimately brought the Gentiles into the fold. But notice the Gentiles still had to be baptized and were. Why? Acts 2:38-47 tells you why; firvthe forgiveness of sins, to receive the gift (the indwelling) of the Holy Ghost, and to become part of the body of Christ, no different than today.

As stated, these two instances of the Holy Ghost falling in this manner were unique and for good reason. To start the church.

All other instances where the manifestation of the Spirit occurred were the result of the laying on of the apostle's hands. Ref. the below repost on this which captures that the apostles were given unique power from on high as well as by which they were able to make manifest the Holy Ghost (the gifts listed in 1 Cor 12:8-10) by the laying on of their hands.


REPOST

Stephen was already a baptized believer, so according to Acts 2:38, he had already received the gift not gifts, which are the miraculous manifestation of the Spirit. It wasn't until they (the apostles) laid their hands on him, verse 6, that he was able to do the wonders as noted in verse 8

"5And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Ghost, and Philip, and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas a proselyte of Antioch: 6Whom they set before the apostles: and when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them.

7And the word of God increased; and the number of the disciples multiplied in Jerusalem greatly; and a great company of the priests were obedient to the faith.

8And Stephen, full of faith and power, did great wonders and miracles among the people."

Also to corroborate the fact that it was the laying on of the apostle's hands that enabled the gifts (manifestations of the Spirit, those listed in 1Cor 12:8-10), see the below scriptures.

Acts 5:12

12And by the hands of the apostles were many signs and wonders wrought among the people; (and they were all with one accord in Solomon's porch.

Acts 8:14-17

14Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: 15Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: 16(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) 17Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

Acts 8:18-19

18And when Simon saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, 19Saying, Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay hands, he may receive the Holy Ghost.

Acts 19:6

6And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

2 Tim 1:6-7

6Wherefore I put thee in remembrance that thou stir up the gift of God, which is in thee by the putting on of my hands. 7For God hath not given us the spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind.

Pretty clear when you look at ALL the pertinent scriptures, the MANIFISTATION of the Spirit, which Spirit was within the baptized believers in biblical times per Acts 2:38, was the result of the laying on of the apostle's hands.
Actually, Acts 2 and 10 are not comparable: the disciples had all already been water-baptized, whereas Cornelius and his lot hadn't been.
 
Sep 23, 2023
847
76
28
#77
No you're not. Being baptized is not a "work" as some erroneously claim; it's an act of obedience.
LOL I'm saying that the reason it's so passionately disputed is BECAUSE Protestants tend to want to say "works are not FOR salvation, works flow FROM salvation".
 

DJT_47

Well-known member
Oct 20, 2022
1,074
190
63
#78
Actually, Acts 2 and 10 are not comparable: the disciples had all already been water-baptized, whereas Cornelius and his lot hadn't been.
They ARE comparable in that the Holy Ghost fell on both the apostles and Gentiles for a reason: to start the church. Read the entire text in Acts 10.
 

DJT_47

Well-known member
Oct 20, 2022
1,074
190
63
#79
LOL I'm saying that the reason it's so passionately disputed is BECAUSE Protestants tend to want to say "works are not FOR salvation, works flow FROM salvation".
Works aren't for salvation, true. But some people tend to say baptism is a work. It's not. It's a command that must be obeyed.
 
Sep 23, 2023
847
76
28
#80
As stated and if read slowly with understanding, and when you look at all the other instances of the miraculous manifestations of the Spirit, you come to this conclusion.

Luke 24:49, the Lord told his 11 apostles to tarry in Jerusalem until they received power from on high.

They did just that. Read Acts 1:4-8

Then read Acts 2:1-4. The apostles were filled with the Holy Ghost which fell on them, they spoke in tongues, the audience if Jews was moved, and eventually believed, was converted, baptized, and added to the church by the Lord per Acts 2:47. That was the beginning of the church amongst the Jews at Jerusalem, and that is one of 2 times tge Holy Ghost fell unilaterally without the laying on of the apostle's hands first.

Then go to Acts 10. Once again, the Holy Ghost falls on individuals without the laying on of the apostle's hands, but this time it was on the Gentiles, as a sign from above, to validate what was occurring. This ultimately brought the Gentiles into the fold. But notice the Gentiles still had to be baptized and were. Why? Acts 2:38-47 tells you why; firvthe forgiveness of sins, to receive the gift (the indwelling) of the Holy Ghost, and to become part of the body of Christ, no different than today.

As stated, these two instances of the Holy Ghost falling in this manner were unique and for good reason. To start the church.
Actually, Acts 2 and 10 are not comparable: the disciples had all already been water-baptized, whereas Cornelius and his lot hadn't been.
Actually, this is wrong: there was no "start" of a new Church with Cornelius, they were merely added to the existing Church. Are you saying there are two Churches--one for Jews, one for Gentiles?