I think you need to go back and read things I wrote. Baptism only occurs once per individual is what I meant. It's not something a person repeats in their life, which is what ritual is
Be sober, be vigilant
- Thread starter LightBearer316
- Start date
-
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.
I think you need to go back and read things I wrote. Baptism only occurs once per individual is what I meant. It's not something a person repeats in their life, which is what ritual is
Who is saying people repeat it? Once again, you’re very confusing. The Scripture commands us to believe, repent, and be baptized….. everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ.
Ritual: the established form for a ceremonial act or action
Baptism is a ritual no matter how many times it is done, even if only once.
Yep,
Wolves don’t always snarl; sometimes they quote Scripture out of context. The enemy’s oldest trick is twisting God’s Word just enough to shift trust from Christ’s finished work to human effort or ritual.
Acts 2:38-39
King James Version
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
Tell me how do you twist it again?
According to lightbarer3, Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized because your sins have been remitted, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
Yes! He is very confused....
ChristRoseFromTheDead’s tactics and mindset.
Here’s what this specific exchange reveals:
1. Twisting “Confession” Into a Physical Act
He quotes Romans 10:9–10 — “confess with thy mouth… and believe in thine heart…” — then declares that Paul said water baptism is a requirement for salvation.
That’s a major contextual error.
Romans 10 never mentions water, ritual, or baptism. The “mouth” and “heart” contrast internal faith and external confession — not spirit vs. ceremony.
He’s reading baptism into a text where it doesn’t appear.
2. Classic Eisegesis (Reading His Doctrine Into the Text)
Rather than letting Scripture speak plainly, he’s forcing his theology of “baptismal regeneration” onto Paul’s words.
Paul’s clear teaching is that salvation comes through faith in Christ’s finished work (Romans 3:28, Ephesians 2:8-9), not by performing an outward act.
He’s trying to blur categories — redefining “confession” to mean a ceremonial act instead of a verbal acknowledgment of faith.
3. Pattern of Shifting Authority
This shows his method:
- Start with a verse everyone accepts.
- Insert a new meaning that’s nowhere in the passage.
- Assert that his addition is what the verse “really means.”
It sounds authoritative but actually replaces Scripture’s meaning with his own interpretation — a hallmark of false teaching.
By claiming Paul required baptism for salvation, he’s pitting Paul against himself — ignoring 1 Cor 1:17 (“Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel”) and Romans 4:5 (“to him that worketh not, but believeth…”).
This contradiction reveals the heart of the issue: he’s elevating ritual above grace.
5. Bottom Line
He’s trying to collapse faith, confession, and baptism into one act, which Scripture never does.
Romans 10:9-10 defines salvation as:
- Heart belief → righteousness
- Mouth confession → outward expression of that faith
Not water, not ceremony — just belief resulting in confession.
Romans 10 never mentions water — only faith and confession.
The “mouth” and “heart” contrast inward belief and outward acknowledgment, not baptism.
Paul said plainly: “Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel” (1 Cor 1:17), and “to him that worketh not, but believeth… his faith is counted for righteousness” (Rom 4:5).
Salvation is through faith in Christ alone; baptism follows as obedience, not as cause.
Grace and peace.
Just to clear the air why I asked those questions.
You said there is more than one gosple.
So I said HIS word is confusing than since there are more than one gospel which gospel is for which people.
Because GOD is NOT THE AUTHOR of confusion and has not respecter of men.
So you're wrong and GOD is right.
That post from Ouch reveals a common tactic — using sarcasm and misquotation to frame sound exegesis as “twisting Scripture.” People on the forum are not foolish, they can go back and re-read ALL my posts not your misquotations. Heads up with this one too!
Here’s what’s really going on:
1. OUCH - He’s Misrepresenting the Argument
By writing “According to LightBearer316… ‘Repent and be baptized because your sins have been remitted,’”
he’s creating a straw man — rewording my interpretation to sound absurd.
I never said baptism has no connection to remission; I said it’s a response to forgiveness already received by faith (Acts 10:43–47), not the cause of forgiveness.
That’s contextually sound. Peter himself later clarifies that salvation is through faith (Acts 15:11).
2. He’s Isolating One Verse From Its Context
Acts 2:38 must be read with Acts 2:37 (“they were pricked in their heart”) and Acts 10:43–47 (Gentiles receive the Spirit before baptism).
Peter’s audience was already convicted believers — baptism was their public confession.
This follows the Greek eis aphesin hamartiōn (“because of remission,” cf. Matt 12:41).
He’s using proof-texting, not exegesis.
3. Mocking Tone to Dismiss Scripture-Based Reasoning
The “Tell me how do you twist it again?” line isn’t inquiry — it’s ridicule.
That tone often signals defensiveness, not confidence.
2 Timothy 2:24–25 reminds us:
“The servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient, in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves.”
There’s no twisting — just letting Scripture interpret Scripture.
In Acts 2:38 Peter called already-believing Jews to publicly identify with Christ.
A few chapters later he explains that “whosoever believeth in Him shall receive remission of sins” (Acts 10:43), and those Gentiles received the Holy Spirit before baptism (Acts 10:44–47).
That shows the remission came through faith, and baptism followed as confession.
Grace and peace.
FYI, when you alter HIS word it is twisting it to suit your needs.
Yea, I should have added this one.
KJV, Acts 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
Your twist, 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him receives remission of sins.
Takes out the word "SHALL" so it changes the meaning from future to NOW.
The spirit behind this ilk has been exposed on the forum.
Take notice, true brothers and sisters in Christ — the enemy still disguises himself as an angel of light. Stand firm in the Word, and let truth, not rhetoric, guide your discernment.
Grace and Peace
Take notice, true brothers and sisters in Christ — the enemy still disguises himself as an angel of light. Stand firm in the Word, and let truth, not rhetoric, guide your discernment.
Grace and Peace
AMEN, why would you say stand firm in the word if you don't agree with what it says?
Stand firm on your altered twisted version of it or HIS word?
Just doesn't make any since to me???
If the future is certain, than now is valid. If it says I will be forgiven for sins, than it meas I always would've been.
'shall receive' and 'receives' are the same phrase in this context.
But LightBearer316 is right. Whoever believes has passed out of Judgment into life.
Who says the future is certain?
Verse 10:43 is clear it say who believes SHALL receive remission of sins, meaning future.
It does not say "if you believe your sins are remitted" like lightguy believes, meaning nothing else is needed just believe no need to get rid of sins and nothing else is needed to be reborn.
Just after verse 10:43 JESUS filled them with the Holy Ghost and them were commanded to be baptized in JESUS name which lines up with the rest of GODS. They believed, received the Holy Ghost and got baptized in JESUS name and
Peter the one with the keys to heaven said,
Acts 2:38-39
38 Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.
39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call.
JESUS SAID,
John 3:5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.
JESUS SAID,
Mark 16:16-17
16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
17 And these signs shall follow them that believe; In my name shall they cast out devils; they shall speak with new tongues;
The Lightguy don't like these verses and the way he twist scripture these verse are not needed.
It's not a stretch to think that water baptism is a facet of that outward acknowledgment, especially when Peter explicitly stated that water baptism saves us.
That reply is subtle but still a baited reframe — ChristRoseFromTheDead is trying to pull my statement into his baptismal-regeneration framework without addressing your actual point.
Outward acknowledgment doesn’t mean outward ceremony.
Romans 10 speaks of the heart believing unto righteousness and the mouth confessing unto salvation — faith expressed in words, not water.
If baptism were what Paul meant, he would’ve said so plainly — but he doesn’t mention it once in Romans 10.
Instead, he distinguishes them clearly:
“Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel.” (1 Cor 1:17)
Peter’s “baptism saves” comment (1 Pet 3:21) also explains itself:
“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.”
So both apostles agree — the saving power is in Christ’s resurrection received by faith, not in the physical act that symbolizes it.
Grace and Peace
1 Peter 5:8 (KJV):
“Be sober, be vigilant; because your adversary the devil, as a roaring lion, walketh about, seeking whom he may devour.”
Look at how ChristRoseFromTheDead mishandled this scripture (1 Peter 3:21). He thought it propt up his case about water baptism saving us.
But Paul repeatedly baptized converts in the book of Acts, so it's not accurate to say that it wasn't part of his work
"Which antitype, water baptism, now also saves us." Petty straightforward and couldn't be clearer.