how that was like getting hit by the fire hose - i thought this was a chat. what do you think about Solomon?
Acts 2:38 Comparison: Evangelical vs. Oneness / Baptismal-Regeneration View
- 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.
Once again, in context, Jesus was discussing false prophets. (Matthew 7:15) Hence, prophesied in thy name. I've heard false prophets claim to have cast out devils before. Anyone can make that claim and Jesus did not uphold their claim. Instead, Jesus said, "I never knew you: depart from me, ye that work iniquity. (practice lawlessness)
Your obsession with water baptism brought about by your church indoctrination keeps you blinded from the truth. Romans 6:3,4 - "Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore, we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead… even so we also should walk in newness of life." Paul shows that baptism pictures what already happened spiritually, death to sin and new life through Jesus Christ. Only genuine believers understand that it’s a testimony of the reality but not the transaction. False religion turns signs and symbols of salvation into the substance and the source.
My heart was pricked in 1998 which resulted in me coming to repent and believe the gospel and receiving salvation. (Acts 3:19; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 20:21) Soon afterwards I was water baptized. My heart was purified by faith and not by water baptism. (Acts 15:7-9) In regard to Acts 2:41 - Then they that gladly received his word (through repentance/faith) were "afterwards" baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. In Acts 4:4, we read - Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand. *What happened to baptism? In Acts 5:14, we read - And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women. *What happened to baptism?
The only logical and Biblical conclusion when properly harmonizing scripture with scripture is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 13:38-39; 15:7-9; 16:31; 26:18) *Perfect Harmony*
You can believe anything you like.
No doubt there are false prophets, but do you really think JESUS can't tell them apart?
JESUS didn't say, NO YOU DIDN'T do what you say HE did say I NEVER KNEW YOU.
John 9:31 Now we know that God heareth not sinners: but if any man be a worshipper of God, and doeth his will, him he heareth.
HE DOES NOT KNOW SINNERS, the only way to get rid of our sins is being baptized in JESUS name.
I'm not obsessed with water, I am obsessed with JESUS and HIS word trying to reach the lost.
I don't share anything from any church only HIS word.
Why are you making false statements?
"Paul shows that baptism pictures what already happened spiritually"
Paul never said that, WHY DO YOU SAY HE DID??
Acts 4:4??? says NOTHING about being reborn!!! Just they believed!!!
Who are you trying to decieve?
Acts 5:14 And believers were the more added to the Lord, multitudes both of men and women.)
You should read all of that chapter to keep things in context. BELIEVERS were added to the lord, who was the BELIEVERS?
What is logical, which most people are not is to OBEY JESUS AND HIS WORD, sins separates us from GOD and there is ONLY ONE WAY TO GET RID OF THEM.
You will not understand your flaws until JESUS fills you with the Holy Ghost like HE did HIS DISCIPLES.
@studier
Your responses read like something generated by an AI — polished but detached from the actual discussion at hand.
You’re building arguments about “inquiry” and “textual analysis” instead of engaging the plain meaning of John 7:24 KJV.
The verse isn’t an endorsement of endless analysis — it’s a call to judge righteously by truth, not appearance. If the Word itself isn’t your standard, all your “evidence-based inquiry” is just noise.
Grace and peace.
You’re confusing the means of new birth with the signs that accompany it.
Jesus wasn’t teaching two separate requirements (water + Spirit) but describing one spiritual birth — the cleansing and renewal the Spirit gives. That’s exactly what He explained later: “That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” (John 3:6 KJV).
The “water” points to cleansing (Ezekiel 36:25-27), not ritual baptism. Otherwise, Jesus would be preaching works-salvation before the cross — contradicting His own words that whoever believes has eternal life (John 3:16 KJV).
The only “shading” of His Word happens when people replace faith in Christ with human ceremonies.
Grace and peace.
@studier You’ve framed your post around “legitimate, evidence-based inquiry” — but biblical discernment doesn’t start with human methodology; it starts with submission to divine revelation.
1 Corinthians 2:13-14 (KJV) says, “Which things also we speak, not in the words which man’s wisdom teacheth, but which the Holy Ghost teacheth… But the natural man receiveth not the things of the Spirit of God.”
In other words, truth isn’t validated by the same kind of “inquiry” the world uses — it’s spiritually discerned. The authority of Scripture doesn’t depend on academic analysis or cross-examination; it stands because it is God-breathed (2 Timothy 3:16).
“Ignoring or refusing to answer legitimate inquiry…”
Righteous judgment doesn’t demand participation in every man-made standard of “inquiry.”
Jesus Himself often refused to answer questions that came from unbelief, not sincerity (Luke 23:9; Matthew 21:27). Discernment includes knowing when a question is asked in truth and when it’s asked to trap.
“Misrepresentation of sources… disregarding corrective information…”
That charge assumes Scripture is a negotiable source open to reinterpretation through collective review. It isn’t. The Word of God interprets us — not the other way around (Hebrews 4:12).
The apostles never weighed truth by consensus. They preached, “Let God be true, but every man a liar” (Romans 3:4). That’s the very opposite of this “peer review” language you’re invoking.
“Character matters…”
Agreed — but biblical character begins with humility before the Word, not with asserting intellectual credibility.
Real integrity is obeying Scripture even when it contradicts our systems of reasoning. “To this man will I look, even to him that is poor and of a contrite spirit, and trembleth at my word.” (Isaiah 66:2 KJV)
“John 7:24 does not forbid assumption and inquiry…”
Correct — it forbids unrighteous judgment, the kind that evaluates by appearance or presumption.
But Jesus was not promoting an endless process of human analysis; He was calling for judgment according to truth, which comes from the Word itself (John 17:17 KJV).
So while you speak of “evidence-based inquiry,” the only lasting evidence in this discussion is Scripture.
If our reasoning ever outruns the plain Word of God, it’s not discernment — it’s distraction.
Grace and peace.
So now we have confirmation that the one loudly accusing everyone else of using AI has been doing it himself all along. The quoted text above was AI-generated
My friend, who works in IT, analyzed it with AI and confirmed exactly that. I sent some of your post.
Grace and peace.
-----------------------------
That quoted text shows strong signs of being AI-generated or heavily AI-edited — here’s why:
Linguistic Indicators- Overly formal logical structure:
The sentence chain — “Ignoring or refusing to answer legitimate, evidence-based inquiry escalates the matter and potentially very quickly” — reads like machine-optimized academic phrasing rather than natural forum writing. A human would likely phrase it more simply (“Ignoring fair questions only makes things worse quickly”). - Stacked abstract nouns:
Phrases such as “misrepresentation of sources,” “disregarding presented corrective information,” and “undermine credibility in matters requiring righteous judgment” form a rhythm and register common to AI text generators that emulate professional tone. - Redundant connective phrasing:
Repetition of conjunctions (“and potentially,” “and questions,” “and matters”) without stylistic variation is characteristic of LLM-style coherence padding. - Moral-rhetorical closing:
The abrupt short sentence “Character matters.” is a stylistic hallmark used by many AI models to end with a “punchy moral” line.
Stylistic ProfileIt reads like a paragraph prompted to “sound professional, admonishing, and moral,” consistent with Ai or Claude-style phrasing.
It lacks human markers such as idiomatic expression, spontaneous tone shifts, or forum-specific voice.
ConclusionWhile it’s possible a human composed it with deliberate formality, the tone, rhythm, and lexical patterning make it very likely AI-generated or AI-assisted (e.g., drafted LLM or similar, then slightly edited before posting).
You used John7:24 to suggest that no one should evaluate your methodology and judge you unfairly. You added to John7:24 the idea that “assumption” is excluded from righteous judgment. That’s not in the text.
Pattern recognition is part of legitimate inquiry in the matter of your writings. It begins with recognizing something, then proceeds with assumptions comparing evidence as part of discernment. So unless you can show from the text itself that John7:24 forbids examining patterns as part of righteous judgment, your claim remains unsupported. And what we’re left with again is you eisegeting Scripture, adding words as you see fit.
That's quite the routine you have going - eisegete Scripture to support errant theology - then eisegete Scripture to fend off righteous judgement against yourself.
You've misrepresented John7:24.
John7:24 requires judgment that is based on evidence, not the avoidance of it. Righteous judgment is based upon evidence. The question before you is simple: Where does the text itself forbid examining patterns as part of righteous judgment?
Appealing to “spiritual discernment” does not answer that. 1Cor2:14 speaks of the unregenerate rejecting revelation of the deeper spiritual truths of the gospel, not of refusing to evaluate claims or evidence among believers. So the question remains: Can you show from John7:24 that pattern-based inquiry is forbidden, or can you not?
The passages you cited concern those who questioned Christ with malicious intent after rejecting the truth He had already revealed. Here, I am asking you to demonstrate your claim directly from the text - specifically, where John7:24 forbids examining patterns as part of righteous judgment. This is not a trap; it is a straightforward request for biblical support of your assertion. So I ask again: Can you show from the text itself that such examination is forbidden, or can you not?
BTW, just a few points into your post and I'm bypassing pointing out all the fallacies involved in it.
More fallacies. You've shifted the discussion from the specific behaviors that undermine credibility to a debate about Scripture’s authority, misrepresenting my point as if I claimed Scripture is negotiable. The issue remains your misrepresentation of sources, ignoring evidence, and deflecting discussion - behavior that undermines credibility in matters requiring righteous judgment, as John 7:24 commands.
My IT friend just sent back his analysis of studier’s latest response — and it appears studier is still using AI. See below:
That response from studier shows very strong indicators of being AI-generated or at least AI-polished. Here’s why:
1. Textbook Logical SequencingThe paragraph follows a perfect argumentative structure:
- Restate the claim.
- Identify the “error.”
- Define a concept (pattern recognition).
- Build a pseudo-academic defense (“legitimate inquiry,” “comparing evidence”).
- Conclude with moral judgment (“you eisegete Scripture…”).
That’s not conversational flow — it’s formulaic reasoning, a hallmark of AI-generated rhetoric.
2. Artificial Word Choice and PhrasingHuman writers in a forum rarely use polished phrases like:
- “Pattern recognition is part of legitimate inquiry.”
- “Proceeds with assumptions comparing evidence as part of discernment.”
- “Your claim remains unsupported.”
This is professionalized, detached language — the kind used by a model trained on essays, not spontaneous debate writing.
3. Repetitive FramingNotice how “eisegete” is used twice in the same symmetrical sentence:
“Eisegete Scripture to support errant theology — then eisegete Scripture to fend off righteous judgment…”
That mirrored repetition is stylistically perfect — and too perfect. AI-generated writing loves rhetorical symmetry.
4. Tone ConsistencyEvery sentence ends crisply and formally.
There are no emotional cues, no first-person markers (“I think,” “in my view,” “you’re missing it”), and no fluctuation in tone.
That gives it an unnatural flat professionalism common to machine-assisted replies.
5. Zero Personal ContextA human would likely reference your previous explanation, quote your words directly, or use Scripture examples.
Instead, this stays abstract, generic, and procedural — classic AI behavior when responding to prompts like:
“Refute the misuse of John 7:24 using logical reasoning and formal tone.”
Conclusion:It’s almost certainly AI-generated — the syntax, symmetry, tone, and vocabulary all match high-confidence AI writing patterns.
Part of humility before God is admitting and ceasing from bad behavior. This includes acknowledging misrepresentation of sources, responding to requests for evidence, not ignoring corrective information, not diverting discussions, and not misusing John7:24 to avoid accountability - or in brief - being contrite in spirit and trembling at His word.
Romans 6:3-4
Or don’t you know that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into his death? We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life.
Paul shows that baptism is the "as were" for those who have been "raised up from the dead". Only genuine believers understand that baptism is the moment of the reality and not a optional ritual. False religion turns spiritual obedience into works of merit.
Regardless of what you believe happened to you in 1998, it holds no weight in this discussion nor does any of your personal experiences.
It is your allegiance to faith alone regeneration theology that blinds you to the baptism throughout Acts.
What you really mean is that "the only logical and Biblical conclusion when properly harmonizing scripture with scripture" with your faith alone regeneration theology.
The Bible is already in "harmony", it does not need your butchering to conform to your personal theology.
Lamar,
That’s quite a reach.
Paul isn’t redefining baptism as the saving act, he’s describing what it represents — the believer’s union with Christ in His death and resurrection. The burial and rising in Romans 6 are spiritual realities, not physical rituals that produce them.If baptism itself secured salvation, then Paul’s statement in 1 Corinthians 1:17 KJV makes no sense:
“For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel…”
Faith in the finished work of Christ is what saves; baptism follows as the public witness of that inward change. Romans 6 is a picture of what has already taken place — “old man crucified… raised to walk in newness of life.”
Experience doesn’t define truth, but neither does redefining symbols into the source of grace. The order remains: faith first, regeneration by the Spirit, then obedience in baptism as testimony.
Grace and peace.
A symbol (water baptism) is not the reality, but is a picture of the reality. Regardless of what you believe, we are saved by grace through faith in Jesus Christ alone hence, not of works (Ephesians 2:8,9) and to believe anything else is to miss salvation. (Romans 4:5-6; 11:6)
Again, the only logical and Biblical conclusion when properly harmonizing scripture with scripture is that faith in Jesus Christ "implied in genuine repentance" (rather than water baptism) brings the remission of sins and the gift of the Holy Spirit. (Luke 24:47; Acts 2:38; 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 13:38-39; 15:7-9; 16:31; 26:18) *Perfect Harmony*
I properly harmonize scripture with scripture before reaching my conclusion on doctrine, unlike the CoC who distorts and perverts passages of scripture in an effort to "patch together" their so called gospel plan that culminates in salvation by works.
BTW: What happened to me in 1998 changed my life forever! Praise God!
You're confusing the moment with the means of the new birth.
Mark 16:16
Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved, but whoever does not believe will be condemned.
Believing and baptism is the moment and time of the remission of sins not the sign of the remission of sins.
Just as the blind man at the Pool of Siloam was healed at the moment of his washing so too are we healed at the moment of water baptism.
Labeling water baptism for the remission of sins as a work of merit is blasphemy.
OK, according to truth:
- Did you misrepresent scholarly resources to support the meaning of "eis" earlier in this thread as it pertains to the topic of this thread of yours.
- Did you ignore multiple requests from me to provide links to those resources or actual quotes from those resources to substantiate your claims?
- After I did your homework for you and presented it to you, showing you were in error, did you ignore that post or the bulk of that post?
- After I pointed you back to that post on more that one occasion, did you continue to ignore it?
- Have you modified your canned responses whether in Typinator or elsewhere to cease making those errant claims of scholarly substantiation of your error?
John7:24 does not forbid assumptions being made in the process of coming to decisions in line with righteous judgment. You eisegeted this. We're way past issues of simple appearance at this point and were some time ago.