Acts 2:38 Comparison: Evangelical vs. Oneness / Baptismal-Regeneration View

[LightBearer316]

Blue155 said:
They received the remission of sins when they repented and were baptized for the remission of sins. That is how we know they believed Peter’s message.

That’s a classic conflation — reading the conclusion back into the premise.
Acts 2:38 doesn’t say they were forgiven because of baptism; it says they were baptized in response to the gospel message.
Repentance brought the remission Peter spoke of, and baptism followed as the outward confession of that faith — just as Peter himself later clarified in Acts 10:43 KJV.

That statement actually reads more into the verse than from it.
Acts 2:38 doesn’t say “so that your sins will be forgiven by baptism,” but “Repent… and be baptized… for the remission of sins.”

If remission follows repentance, then baptism expresses that repentance — it doesn’t cause the forgiveness.
Luke himself makes that order clear in the very next sermon:

“Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” — Acts 3:19 KJV​

Notice — no mention of water there. Forgiveness is tied to repentance, not the ritual.
And later Peter preaches again:

“To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.” — Acts 10:43 KJV​

That’s the same apostle explaining his own meaning.
They believed the message, repented in heart, and were baptized as the outward confession of that faith — not as the mechanism that produced forgiveness.

Grace and peace.

 

[Blue155]

@LightBearer316
When someone resorts to mockery and false accusations instead of Scripture, it reveals the spirit behind their words.
A believer is called to speak what builds up — not what tears down.

As Paul wrote,

“Let no corrupt communication proceed out of your mouth, but that which is good to the use of edifying, that it may minister grace unto the hearers.” — Ephesians 4:29 KJV

That’s the standard I try to live by — to let everything from my mouth be good, gracious, and true.
I hope we can all remember that when discussing the Word of God.

 

[LightBearer316]

The only pattern that is the same is your error that you continue in. Since you cannot refute scripture or history, the next move for you is to accuse others of not being able to refute your error and repeat the same error in your responses. The only pattern that is the same for me is answering your error, as I answered nearly every one of them in my response, and you just simply repeat your errors after being corrected. I’ve shown where you are wrong, and everyone here knows it. Dismissing my comment by saying I haven’t refuted yours does not change the facts that I have — it just shows you’re not willing to engage with them.

If you’ve truly refuted what I said, then simply quote the part you corrected and show where Scripture or the Greek text supports your interpretation. So far, you’ve only claimed victory without demonstrating it.

Repeating “you’re wrong” isn’t refutation — it’s rhetoric.
The record in Acts still shows the same sequence Peter himself explained later: faith and repentance first, forgiveness next, baptism afterward (Acts 10:43–48; 3:19).

Until that order changes, the text speaks for itself.

Grace and peace.

 

[Blue155]

That’s a classic conflation — reading the conclusion back into the premise.
Acts 2:38 doesn’t say they were forgiven because of baptism; it says they were baptized in response to the gospel message.
Repentance brought the remission Peter spoke of, and baptism followed as the outward confession of that faith — just as Peter himself later clarified in Acts 10:43 KJV.

That statement actually reads more into the verse than from it.
Acts 2:38 doesn’t say “so that your sins will be forgiven by baptism,” but “Repent… and be baptized… for the remission of sins.”

If remission follows repentance, then baptism expresses that repentance — it doesn’t cause the forgiveness.
Luke himself makes that order clear in the very next sermon:

“Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” — Acts 3:19 KJV​

Notice — no mention of water there. Forgiveness is tied to repentance, not the ritual.
And later Peter preaches again:

“To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.” — Acts 10:43 KJV​

That’s the same apostle explaining his own meaning.
They believed the message, repented in heart, and were baptized as the outward confession of that faith — not as the mechanism that produced forgiveness.

Grace and peace.

See? You are repeating the same error that I corrected by using the very same verses.

 

[LightBearer316]

The only pattern that is the same is your error that you continue in. Since you cannot refute scripture or history, the next move for you is to accuse others of not being able to refute your error and repeat the same error in your responses. The only pattern that is the same for me is answering your error, as I answered nearly every one of them in my response, and you just simply repeat your errors after being corrected. I’ve shown where you are wrong, and everyone here knows it. Dismissing my comment by saying I haven’t refuted yours does not change the facts that I have — it just shows you’re not willing to engage with them.

Blue155, I’ve given Scripture, grammar, and historical context for every point I’ve made.
You keep asserting that you’ve “refuted” it, but you haven’t shown where in the text the contradiction supposedly lies.

At this stage, I think we’ve both made our positions clear.
I’ll leave it with the Word itself:

“But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.​

And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient.”​

— 2 Timothy 2:23-24 KJV​

I’d rather let Scripture speak than keep circling the same ground.

Grace and peace.

 

[Blue155]

If you’ve truly refuted what I said, then simply quote the part you corrected and show where Scripture or the Greek text supports your interpretation. So far, you’ve only claimed victory without demonstrating it.

Repeating “you’re wrong” isn’t refutation — it’s rhetoric.
The record in Acts still shows the same sequence Peter himself explained later: faith and repentance first, forgiveness next, baptism afterward (Acts 10:43–48; 3:19).

Until that order changes, the text speaks for itself.

Grace and peace.

If you’ve truly refuted what I said, then simply quote the part you corrected and show where Scripture or the Greek text supports your interpretation. So far, you’ve only claimed victory without demonstrating it.

Repeating “you’re wrong” isn’t refutation — it’s rhetoric.
The record in Acts still shows the same sequence Peter himself explained later: faith, repentance, baptism for the remission of sins (Acts 10:43–48; 3:19).

Until that order changes, the text speaks for itself.

 

[LightBearer316]

See? You are repeating the same error that I corrected by using the very same verses.

Simply repeating “you’re in error” doesn’t make it so.
If you believe you’ve corrected me, then demonstrate it from the text itself — not by restating the same claim.

The verses stand on their own: repentance and faith bring remission (Acts 3:19; 10:43 KJV). Baptism follows as the outward confession of that inward work. That’s the consistent Lukan pattern, whether you accept it or not.

Grace and peace.

 

[Blue155]

Blue155, I’ve given Scripture, grammar, and historical context for every point I’ve made.
You keep asserting that you’ve “refuted” it, but you haven’t shown where in the text the contradiction supposedly lies.

At this stage, I think we’ve both made our positions clear.
I’ll leave it with the Word itself:

“But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.​

And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient.”​

— 2 Timothy 2:23-24 KJV​

I’d rather let Scripture speak than keep circling the same ground.

Grace and peace.

Lightbearer316, I’ve given Scripture, grammar, and context for every point I’ve made.
You keep asserting that you’ve “refuted” it, but you haven’t shown where in the text the contradiction supposedly lies.

At this stage, I think we’ve both made our positions clear.
I’ll leave it with the Word itself:

“But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.
And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient.”
— 2 Timothy 2:23-24 KJV

I’d rather let Scripture speak than keep circling the same ground.

 

[LightBearer316]

Lightbearer316, I’ve given Scripture, grammar, and context for every point I’ve made.
You keep asserting that you’ve “refuted” it, but you haven’t shown where in the text the contradiction supposedly lies.

At this stage, I think we’ve both made our positions clear.
I’ll leave it with the Word itself:

“But foolish and unlearned questions avoid, knowing that they do gender strifes.
And the servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient.”
— 2 Timothy 2:23-24 KJV

I’d rather let Scripture speak than keep circling the same ground.

When someone has to copy my words instead of addressing Scripture, it only confirms I made the right choice to step back.

The Word still stands on its own:

“The servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient.” — 2 Timothy 2:24 KJV​

Grace and peace.

 

[Blue155]

Simply repeating “you’re in error” doesn’t make it so.
If you believe you’ve corrected me, then demonstrate it from the text itself — not by restating the same claim.

The verses stand on their own: repentance and faith bring remission (Acts 3:19; 10:43 KJV). Baptism follows as the outward confession of that inward work. That’s the consistent Lukan pattern, whether you accept it or not.

Grace and peace.

Simply repeating “you’re in error” doesn’t make it so.
If you believe you’ve corrected me, then demonstrate it from the text itself — not by restating the same claim.

The verses stand on their own: Faith, repentance, and baptism for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38; 3:19; 10:43, 47-48 KJV). Baptism is for the remission of sins. That’s the consistent Lukan pattern, whether you accept it or not.

 

[Blue155]

When someone has to copy my words instead of addressing Scripture, it only confirms I made the right choice to step back.

The Word still stands on its own:

“The servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient.” — 2 Timothy 2:24 KJV​

Grace and peace.

When someone has to copy my words instead of addressing Scripture, it only confirms I made the right choice to step back.

The Word still stands on its own:

“The servant of the Lord must not strive; but be gentle unto all men, apt to teach, patient.” — 2 Timothy 2:24 KJV

 

[LightBearer316]

Simply repeating “you’re in error” doesn’t make it so.
If you believe you’ve corrected me, then demonstrate it from the text itself — not by restating the same claim.

The verses stand on their own: Faith, repentance, and baptism for the remission of sins (Acts 2:38; 3:19; 10:43, 47-48 KJV). Baptism is for the remission of sins. That’s the consistent Lukan pattern, whether you accept it or not.

When the discussion turns into repeating each other’s words, it’s no longer about Scripture — it’s about pride.
I’ve said what I believe the text clearly teaches, and the verses speak for themselves.

“Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you… and be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted.”​

— Ephesians 4:31–32 KJV​

I’ll leave it there. Grace and peace.

 

[Blue155]

When the discussion turns into repeating each other’s words, it’s no longer about Scripture — it’s about pride.
I’ve said what I believe the text clearly teaches, and the verses speak for themselves.

“Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you… and be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted.”​

— Ephesians 4:31–32 KJV​

I’ll leave it there. Grace and peace.

When the discussion turns into repeating each other’s words, it’s no longer about Scripture — it’s about pride.
I’ve said what I believe the text clearly teaches, and the verses speak for themselves.


“Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you… and be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted.”
— Ephesians 4:31–32 KJV

 

[LightBearer316]

When the discussion turns into repeating each other’s words, it’s no longer about Scripture — it’s about pride.
I’ve said what I believe the text clearly teaches, and the verses speak for themselves.


“Let all bitterness, and wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking, be put away from you… and be ye kind one to another, tenderhearted.”
— Ephesians 4:31–32 KJV

Blue155 copying my own words yet again only shows the forum who’s operating in pride and who’s standing in truth.

When someone simply mirrors words instead of addressing Scripture, the issue isn’t understanding — it’s unwillingness.
I’ve said what I needed to say, and the Word of God is clear to any honest reader.

“He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” — Matthew 11:15 KJV​

Grace and peace.

 

[Blue155]

Blue155 copying my own words yet again only shows the forum who’s operating in pride and who’s standing in truth.

When someone simply mirrors words instead of addressing Scripture, the issue isn’t understanding — it’s unwillingness.
I’ve said what I needed to say, and the Word of God is clear to any honest reader.

“He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” — Matthew 11:15 KJV​

Grace and peace.

@LightBearer316 copying his own error yet again only shows the forum who’s operating in pride and who’s standing in truth.

When someone simply mirrors words instead of addressing Scripture, the issue isn’t understanding — it’s unwillingness.
I’ve said what I needed to say, and the Word of God is clear to any honest reader.

“He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.” — Matthew 11:15 KJV

 

[LightBearer316]

That comparison sounds clever, but it falls apart when examined closely.

1. False analogy.
A doctor treating cancer isn’t the same as the apostle preaching repentance. The doctor’s words cause healing; Peter’s words describe how forgiveness is received. The sinner isn’t “infected” until he’s cured by baptism — the entire book of Acts shows forgiveness coming through faith in Christ, not through the act of water immersion itself (Acts 10:43; 13:38-39).

2. What Peter actually said.
Peter didn’t command two causes for one effect. The plural “Repent” (metanoēsate) and the singular “be baptized” (baptisthētō) show that forgiveness attaches to repentance, while baptism follows as the sign of that inward change. Luke confirms the same order later:

“Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” — Acts 3:19 KJV​

No water is mentioned there, yet forgiveness is.

3. The “remission of sins” phrase elsewhere.
The identical wording, eis aphesin hamartiōn, occurs in Luke 24:47 — “that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name.” Repentance and faith are the condition; baptism is the confession (Acts 10:48). Scripture interprets Scripture.

4. “Taking man’s word over God’s.”
That accusation ignores that the same God inspired all of Acts. In Acts 10 and 16, forgiveness precedes baptism. If Acts 2:38 were teaching baptismal regeneration, Luke would be contradicting himself within the same book. He isn’t; he’s showing progression: faith → repentance → forgiveness → baptism.

So no one here is “taking man’s word over God’s.” We’re taking all of God’s Word together rather than isolating a single verse.

Grace and peace.

 

[LightBearer316]

Amen — and that’s exactly why we must let all of Scripture speak, not just one verse in isolation.

Peter’s words in Acts 2:38 KJV can’t be divorced from his own later explanation in Acts 10:43 KJV:

“To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.”​

That’s not “changing Scripture”; that’s interpreting it by Scripture — exactly what Paul meant when he said,

“Comparing spiritual things with spiritual.” — 1 Corinthians 2:13 KJV​

If one passage seems to conflict with another, the solution isn’t to ignore the rest of the Word but to harmonize them.
God’s Word never contradicts itself.

Grace and peace.

 

[Blue155]

View attachment 281507

That comparison sounds clever, but it falls apart when examined closely.

1. False analogy.
A doctor treating cancer isn’t the same as the apostle preaching repentance. The doctor’s words cause healing; Peter’s words describe how forgiveness is received. The sinner isn’t “infected” until he’s cured by baptism — the entire book of Acts shows forgiveness coming through faith in Christ, not through the act of water immersion itself (Acts 10:43; 13:38-39).

2. What Peter actually said.
Peter didn’t command two causes for one effect. The plural “Repent” (metanoēsate) and the singular “be baptized” (baptisthētō) show that forgiveness attaches to repentance, while baptism follows as the sign of that inward change. Luke confirms the same order later:

“Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” — Acts 3:19 KJV​

No water is mentioned there, yet forgiveness is.

3. The “remission of sins” phrase elsewhere.
The identical wording, eis aphesin hamartiōn, occurs in Luke 24:47 — “that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in His name.” Repentance and faith are the condition; baptism is the confession (Acts 10:48). Scripture interprets Scripture.

4. “Taking man’s word over God’s.”
That accusation ignores that the same God inspired all of Acts. In Acts 10 and 16, forgiveness precedes baptism. If Acts 2:38 were teaching baptismal regeneration, Luke would be contradicting himself within the same book. He isn’t; he’s showing progression: faith → repentance → forgiveness → baptism.

So no one here is “taking man’s word over God’s.” We’re taking all of God’s Word together rather than isolating a single verse.

Grace and peace.

The doctor analogy doesn’t fail; it illustrates a principle. As for your other points, you’re doing the very same thing as before that I said you would. You are continuing to repeat error with the same verses that I have corrected you on over and over.

 

[LightBearer316]

Face value is "into", not "for", because that's what eis means. In other words, moving out of sin guiltiness into remission of sins.

Actually, εἰς (eis) isn’t locked to “into.” Greek prepositions are context-driven, not one-word equals one-meaning. Eis can mean into, toward, for, with reference to, or even because of depending on syntax.

If we translate every eis as “into,” we end up with nonsense in several verses:

“They repented at (eis) the preaching of Jonah.” — Matthew 12:41​

That clearly means because of Jonah’s preaching, not “into” it.​

Likewise, Romans 10:10 says,

“With the heart man believeth unto (eis) righteousness.”​

It doesn’t mean we believe into righteousness as if entering a location — it describes the result or evidence of faith.​

So “for (eis) the remission of sins” in Acts 2:38 must be read in its grammatical and theological context, not woodenly as “into.” The same Luke later ties remission to faith in Christ (Acts 10:43 KJV), showing the forward result of belief, not a ritual cause.

Grace and peace.

 

[LightBearer316]

The doctor analogy doesn’t fail; it illustrates a principle. As for your other points, you’re doing the very same thing as before that I said you would. You are continuing to repeat error with the same verses that I have corrected you on over and over.

Blue155 is still recycling the same dismissive pattern — claiming you’ve been “corrected” without actually touching any of the grammatical points I've laid out. Repeating “you’ve been corrected” isn’t correction — it’s avoidance.

If the analogy really “illustrated a principle,” then explain it from Scripture, not imagination. Peter wasn’t comparing repentance to medicine; he was proclaiming forgiveness through Christ’s name (Acts 10:43 KJV). The only “principle” Luke repeats across Acts is that repentance and faith bring remission, and baptism follows as confession.

You’ve never shown otherwise — only asserted it. The text still says:

“Repent ye therefore, and be converted, that your sins may be blotted out.” — Acts 3:19 KJV​

“To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.” — Acts 10:43 KJV​

No water, no ritual — just faith and repentance.
Until you can demonstrate from the text that baptism itself removes sin, repeating “you’re wrong” won’t change what Scripture actually says.

Grace and peace.