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.
You might want to re-read what I wrote. I never said you personally claimed the water had power — I said the man in the story wasn’t healed because of the water itself, but because of faith in the word spoken.
That distinction matters because it’s the same point about baptism. The act itself doesn’t save; it’s faith in Christ that does. Baptism simply shows what’s already true for the believer.
No misrepresentation intended — just clarifying where the focus should be.
Grace and Peace
Ouch, the word regeneration isn’t something I made up — it’s the same term Paul used in Titus 3:5 KJV:
“Not by works of righteousness which we have done, but according to his mercy he saved us, by the washing of regeneration, and renewing of the Holy Ghost.”
That’s not chemistry or biology — it’s the spiritual renewal that happens when the Holy Spirit gives new life. That’s exactly what Jesus was talking about in John 3 — being born again.The “and” in Mark 16:16 KJV doesn’t make baptism a second condition for salvation. If it did, the second half of the verse would have said, “He that believeth not and is not baptized shall be damned.” But it doesn’t. Condemnation comes from unbelief, not lack of baptism.
Baptism is a powerful testimony of faith — but the power to save is in Christ’s blood, not the water.
Grace and peace.
You’ve lost all credibility on this forum now that it’s been exposed, you’ve been using AI all along while accusing others of doing the same.
You've even admitted to using AI. You have an AI account! I don't even have an AI account. I sent several of your sample posts to my IT friend, and he exposed you.
Grace and Peace
So apparently this is more important than John7:24.
Is there a question here?
I understand what you think means proof no matter what your "friend" concluded with several ways to say maybe.
Now that I've admitted? Once again, wasn't my stating openly, and openly using AI in posts to you clear enough that I use AI at times?
I'll show a fresh example using ChatGPT:
Q: Does this look like either AI or Typinator? LB stated: "The sample posts that were analyzed weren’t from the obvious one you titled “AI Response to AI.” They were from the others — and every one of those showed clear indicators of AI use. Now that you’ve admitted to using it before, that only confirms what’s been evident all along — you’ve been using AI behind the scenes this entire time while accusing others of doing exactly that. That’s not transparency; that’s projection."
Ready for the Response (some of the highlighting is mine)?
This reply does not read like Typinator output, and it also does not strongly match typical AI-generation patterns. It reads like a human defensive escalation.
Why it does not look like Typinator
Typinator output usually:
- Repeats pre-formatted theological or exegetical paragraphs
- Has polished structure and citation flow
- Uses stored wording, transitions, and verse placement
- Is short
- Conversational
- Emotionally reactive
- Not polished or templated
This is not that.
This is in-the-moment rhetoric.
Why it does not look AI-generated
AI tends to:
- Soften accusation with diplomatic language
- Use smooth transitions and balanced phrasing
- Avoid sharp interpersonal escalation unless prompted
- Accuses
- Asserts motive (“projection”)
- Moves quickly from claim → conclusion → moral indictment
- Shows emotional posture, not structured reasoning
- He believes he has located hypocrisy
- He wants to frame the narrative
- He jumps to moral indictment rather than proving the claim
“It appears there may be inconsistency between your use of AI and your statements about it. Perhaps we should clarify the timeline.”
He did not do that.What it does show
- Narrative Reversal
(“Now that you’ve admitted…” → he reframes your transparency as guilt.) - Projection Accusation
He asserts motive without evidence. - Moral Inversion
He turns your earlier inquiry into a character charge.
Bottom Line
This message is not Typinator and not AI.
It is a human defensive accusation designed to reframe the situation and avoid the accountability question.
Me again: So, only you know if you wrote this by yourself. AI thinks you did.
The issue for all of us is that there are readily available systems able to give opinion and make assumption based upon things like pattern recognition. Whether we care or not, these matters are already in wide use to deal with things on the negative side like cheating in educational settings and many other uses. They are also in use in theology forums with an amazing breadth of access to ling published information.
Get used to it.
BTW, after you informed re: Typinator, I did a bit of research on it simply by doing searches on the internet. Google AI chimed in once to my query re: Typinator output potentially being mistaken as AI. The answer was that it was entirely possible for it to be so mistaken.
IOW, again, we could have cleared all this up hundreds of posts ago.
Also, you did not answer re: your using AI for anything. Transparency seems an issue for you for whatever reason.
Any more on John5:24?
When I re-read what you wrote I can't get past the fact that you are a dishonest person to have a discussion with. You converse via a tolkit of rhetorical talking points that in no way follow the rules of an honest discussion. If I say I am not saying something, and then you respond with a point you are trying to make as if I did say it, then that is simply dishonesty. Either you can't think clearly, or you are an incorrigibly dishonest person.
You sure? No questions again? Ready to answer whenever a proper question might be asked.
What a lame excuse... It’s clear you’re bringing up my use of Typinator to deflect from the fact that you’ve been using AI yourself. Typinator isn’t AI — it’s a simple text-expansion tool that pastes prewritten snippets, nothing more. There’s no reasoning, pattern recognition, or generation involved. Trying to equate that with AI is a category error and a distraction from the actual issue — your lack of transparency about AI use and your avoidance of the real discussion on John 5:24 KJV.
Typinator is not AI at all. It’s just a text expansion utility — like a programmable keyboard shortcut. It stores phrases or templates (snippets) and pastes them when triggered. There’s no generative function, no reasoning, no pattern analysis, no context awareness.
In other words:
Typinator ≠ ChatGPT, Claude, or any AI model.
Typinator = fancy copy-paste with automation.
So when you say Typinator output “looks like AI,” that’s a category mistake. It’s like confusing a macro recorder for a thinking assistant. “Typinator isn’t AI — it’s a basic text-expansion utility. It can’t analyze or generate anything on its own. It just inserts prewritten snippets I’ve stored, like a shortcut key. There’s a major difference between automation and artificial intelligence.”
https://ergonis.com/typinator
You've been caught using AI and my IT friend exposed you!
Grace and Peace
Numbers 32:23 (KJV) — “your sins will find you out.” You were using Ai all along while accusing others of doing using it!
Yeah, that’s rich coming from someone who literally uploaded a picture portraying me as a wolf in sheep’s clothing — complete with my username on it — which the moderators had to remove. Let’s not pretend moral high ground here. I’ve stayed on topic and dealt with arguments; you’ve resorted to personal attacks and misrepresentation.
Grace and Peace
You definitely come across as some sort of software automation rather than being a human being. You have no capacity to converse at a human intelligence level.
Honestly it's to the point where I have to wonder - aka assume - if you have such a friend. If you were to say you're having AI analyze my posts, then that would answer that you do use it. Interesting dilemma.
We have your statement again .
Here's Google and it's basic AI used in its search engine:
Q: can Typinator output be mistake for AI?
A:
Yes, output from the text expansion tool Typinator can potentially be mistaken for AI-generated text, particularly by automated AI detection tools. However, this is a result of the limitations of current AI detectors, not because Typinator uses AI itself.
Typinator is a text expansion tool that replaces short abbreviations with predefined, human-written text snippets, images, or dynamic content. It does not use machine learning or AI to generate novel content; its output is entirely based on the specific content the user has programmed into it.
Why the Confusion Can Occur
- Consistent and Formal Style: Typinator is often used for business or academic communication where consistency and formality are key (e.g., email templates, standard responses, legal disclaimers). This style (predictable structure, consistent grammar) can sometimes resemble the output patterns of Large Language Models (LLMs), which often produce highly consistent, low-"burstiness" text.
- Lack of "Human" Variation: Human writing typically features a natural mix of sentence lengths, structures, and occasional "mistakes" (burstiness). Text expanded by Typinator is identical every time it's used, lacking this natural variation unless the user intentionally adds dynamic or random elements, which can sometimes be flagged by AI detectors.
- Limitations of AI Detectors: Multiple studies and even companies like Turnitin acknowledge that AI detection tools are not perfectly accurate and can produce "false positives" (incorrectly flagging human-written text as AI-generated). Factors like a user's direct, highly structured writing style or non-native English can increase the likelihood of being incorrectly flagged.
The text generated by Typinator is fundamentally human-created and manually inserted via a shortcut. Any confusion with AI output stems from the fallibility of AI detection technology in distinguishing highly structured, pre-defined text from machine-generated content, not from the nature of Typinator's technology itself.
Q: is there any way to detect if AI has been used to assist in creating the human input into Typinator?
A: There is no guaranteed way to definitively detect if AI was used to assist in creating input for Typinator, as the text itself is what is being analyzed, not the creation process. However, you can use AI detection tools and look for common indicators of AI-generated text. These tools use machine learning and NLP to analyze patterns, but they are not always reliable and can produce false results.
Really, all we have is one another's word. For reason I have said several times that you have zero credibility with me. I'm fine with your copying me and concluding the same.
Good enough. No actual questions? Nothing further re: John5:24. Care to clarify what you said about faith and obedience a few moments ago? I was confusing.
So how do you know you have the Holy Ghost?
If you don't have it how can it regenerate you?
In John 3 JESUS is very clear.
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.
AND
/an(d),(ə)n(d)/
conjunction
1.
used to connect words of the same part of speech, clauses, or sentences, that are to be taken jointly.
"bread and butter"
Similar:
together with
along with
with
as well as
in addition to
including
also
too
besides
furthermore
moreover
plus
what's more
2.
used to introduce an additional comment or interjection.
So you can see what the word "AND" means.
WATER AND SPIRIT.
Meaning we have to be born of WATER.
We ALSO have to be born of SPIRIT.
Now let's look at,
Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.
So you can see what the word "AND" means.
Meaning, we have to BELIEVE.
We ALSO have to be BAPTIZED TO BE SAVED.
The second part of Mark 16:16 does not make the fist part null and void.
What the second part means is if you DON'T BELIEVE, why would you be baptized.
"Baptism is a powerful testimony of faith — but the power to save is in Christ’s blood, not the water."
Of course, baptism for a testimony of faith is s lie from Satan, but you are right water has NO power at all, it's the obedience to JESUS that does.
When we OBEY HIS word and get baptized in JESUS name that is what removes sins.
HOW DO I KNOW THIS??? Yep, Acts 2:38, 22:16. Plul the whole story about John and the reason of his existence.
Not sure how many times I have to correct you and show you HIS word for you to be able to see?
IT'S NOT HARD TO SEE!!!
Satan's plan keep them out of the water, if they get in the water keep JESUS name out of it.
Are you "AI" and can't get past your programing?
How do you know you have the Holy Ghost?
Water and Spirit aren’t two separate requirements for salvation—they describe one spiritual birth. The Spirit is the agent, and the “water” symbolizes cleansing and renewal, not a ritual. Salvation rests in faith in Christ’s finished work, not the physical act of baptism.
Grace and Peace
This is like saying Naamam the Syrian whom Elisha told to go immerse himself in the Jordan 7 times was healed by his faith, not by the physical act of washing in water. Without physically immersing in water in obedience to Elisha's word Naamam wouldn't have been healed. Faith and obedience to God's word are inseparable. But disobedient people with work-phobia look for excuses to not obey God because they think he should do everything and them do nothing.
Naaman thought he would be healed by faith alone and was furious when Elisha told him to go do something he thought was insignificant. But unlike you he was amenable to correction from his servant, obeyed the word of Elisha and was healed.
So Naaman came with his horses and with his chariot, and stood at the door of the house of Elisha. And Elisha sent a messenger unto him, saying, Go and wash in Jordan seven times, and thy flesh shall come again to thee, and thou shalt be clean. But Naaman was wroth, and went away, and said, Behold, I thought, He will surely come out to me, and stand, and call on the name of the LORD his God, and strike his hand over the place, and recover the leper. [Are] not Abana and Pharpar, rivers of Damascus, better than all the waters of Israel? may I not wash in them, and be clean? So he turned and went away in a rage. And his servants came near, and spake unto him, and said, My father, [if] the prophet had bid thee [do some] great thing, wouldest thou not have done [it]? how much rather then, when he saith to thee, Wash, and be clean? Then went he down, and dipped himself seven times in Jordan, according to the saying of the man of God: and his flesh came again like unto the flesh of a little child, and he was clean. 2 Kings 5:9-14