Blue text link works from my 2 systems.
So you don't read anything explaining parts of the Bible or listen to anybody teaching it? But you read discussions on forums explaining parts of the Bible?
OK. Never mind.
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.
Blue text link works from my 2 systems.
So you don't read anything explaining parts of the Bible or listen to anybody teaching it? But you read discussions on forums explaining parts of the Bible?
OK. Never mind.
You're wrong in your assumptions, i never say that. It's came out of your mouth.
Not really an "assumption".... it's pretty much exactly what you said....
Unless you'd like to back up and clarify your declarative statement a bit..... ?
1. The structure is formulaic
The piece follows a very standard AI pattern:
- Statement
- Explanation
- “Silence does not negate…”
- “According to Mark…”
- Rapid-fire verse list
- Repetition of the thesis
Human writers rarely produce that kind of perfectly tiered outline unless they’re deliberately composing for an essay. AI does it constantly.
2. The tone is unnaturally neutral and evenly paced
It avoids personality, emotion, or emphasis — which is unusual in heated baptism debates.
You always see:
- no contractions (“does not” instead of “doesn’t”)
- carefully symmetrical sentences
- repetition of the same wording (“this in no way…”)
This is exactly how AI insists on clarity and balance.
3. The verse-list dump is another giveaway
The long chained references (“Acts 9:18; Acts 22:16; Acts 16:15; Acts 16:33…”) is something AI models do because they’re trying to appear thorough.
Humans usually:
- comment on each verse
- connect them
- or provide some narrative
AI gives sterile lists.
4. The argumentation is mechanically consistent
AI tends to:
- restate the thesis repeatedly
- avoid nuance
- phrase everything with an appearance of “logical clarity”
The closing sentence:
“Again, this in no way rewrites or reframes Mark 16:16.”
That’s a classic AI-style wrap-up — perfectly symmetrical, no personal voice, no spontaneous language.
5. Zero personal markers
There’s no:
- illustrations
- personal reasoning patterns
- rhetorical pushes
- emotion
- sarcasm
- frustration
- individuality
This is usually the biggest tell.
Conclusion
Definitely AI
It has all the markers of AI-generated text, especially from a model trying to appear “scholarly” and “neutral.”
If you want, I can also break down:
- Where the argument is theologically flawed
- Why the grammar claim about Mark 16:16 is incorrect
- Why Greek participles don’t establish baptismal necessity
They just keep using Ai... You can also tell by looking at the formatting... Since they will keep using ChatGPT Ai it is just Pointless.
Oh I didn't know he used AI as in Satan brain cell, the Prince of this world.
IOW no substantive arguments left about Mark16:16.
For an actual scholarly review of Mark16:16 and Acts2:38 (and other verses), including references to all cited scholarly works, I'm finding this work to be informative:
BAPTISM AND THE GREEK MADE SIMPLE by Dave Miller, Ph.D. - Apologetics Press, Inc.
For an actual scholarly review of Mark16:16 and Acts2:38 (and other verses), including references to all cited scholarly works, I'm finding this work to be informative:
BAPTISM AND THE GREEK MADE SIMPLE by Dave Miller, Ph.D. - Apologetics Press, Inc.
All of you are wasting your time with these guys. You might as well go straight to ChatGPT chatgpt.com and argue with it, because debating Studier and a few of the others in his circle feels exactly the same. The wording, the tone, the structure — it’s identical. You’re basically arguing with a tool, not a person.
That's exactly what we determined from your posts long ago. It's like having a discussion with a robot.
Basically already have.
You said you wanted to talk Scripture and posted an extremely fallacious argument including a once again misleading attempt at referencing scholars with no actual citations, which, as I said, is worthless.
I answered you point-by-point in a focused manner.
You're only response is evasion and many more and continuing fallacies, including an overall ad hominem one.
You've nothing substantive left.
If you care for the Word, you really should read Mr. Miller's work and consider your errors. He addresses in scholarly detail with actual and extensive citations many if not all of the very standard and wrong arguments you've put forth about Acts2:38 and Mark16:16 - arguments you've very obviously taken from the work of others and plugged into Typinator without a care for doing the actual research of the scholars you've misrepresented.
No 90% for him over 100% for you, since you post under various accounts here.
From the OP:
Worldwide, churches of all shapes and sizes teach people to be baptized in water. It's hard to get two of them to agree on exactly how it's supposed to be done,
whether you baptize in the name of Jesus, or in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost;
whether you sprinkle or pour water on people, or dunk them in the water;
whether it's done in a pool inside a church, or in a river;
who does it;
what the person doing it needs to believe in order for it to be valid;
whether you tip the person backward, or forward, when putting them under the water;
how old the person needs to be before you can baptize them;
what to do if the person backslides after being baptized;
whether the Holy Spirit comes into a person before, during, or after the water baptism...
The list goes on and on. There have been more divisions in the church over water baptism than over any other teaching in the Holy Bible or out of it.
Paul is the first person to have seen through this confusion to the truth behind it.
People were arguing over who had baptized them. Paul had baptized only a small handful of people, but soon realized that Jesus never meant for us to baptize people in water:
For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chl-oe that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. (1 Cor. 1:11-17).
Here's another oft-missed clue:
And [Jesus] said unto [his disciples], Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized [in the Spirit, NOT water baptized] shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned [IOW, belief results in spiritual baptism unto salvation; unbelief results in damnation (water baptism is irrelevant)]...And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word [NOT with water baptisms] with signs following. Amen. (Mark 16:15-16, 20).
The understanding of baptism has been messed up and distorted from antiquity. The result has been not unlike the parable of the sower, where two different seeds were sown but only one produced fruit. And such rituals of men are easy to fake. There is something far more satisfying than being dunked in water. God says that he wants obedience more than sacrifice (1 Sam. 15:22).
Water baptism was a Jewish ritual, a Hebrew practice. There is nothing uniquely Christian about water baptism. The disciples did baptize in water, but Jesus did not do it (John 4:2). Water baptism is inconsistent with the Spirit of everything else that Jesus taught. Most of Jesus' enemies were circumcised; most were water baptized!
...I [John] indeed baptize you [the multitude] with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire (Luke 3:16).
What of Jesus' baptism? John protested:
But John forbade [Jesus], saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? (Mat. 3:14).
Jesus was the perfect spotless Lamb of God; he didn't need his sins washed away. Rather, Jesus asked John to accommodate him, because it made sense for them "to fulfill all righteousness". So John went ahead and baptized Jesus. The end of the old, and the start of the new.
So what does "to fulfill all righteousness" mean?
Well, Jesus was born into a Jewish family; circumcised at 8 days of age; taken to the temple at 12 years of age; raised in all the disciplines of the Jewish religion. And now he does this one final Jewish ritual, marking the end of his Jewishness and the start of a deeper revelation.
Jesus came to replace, fulfill, render useless, the law of Moses:
The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it (Luke 16:16). Out with the old, in with the new.
There is only one Lord, one faith, and one baptism via the Holy Ghost!
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body...(1 Cor. 12:13).
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Mat. 28:18-20).
What are the action words in that passage (v. 19)?
There are only two action words = go and preach. When the disciples obey the commands to go and to preach, then the result is that people get baptized and taught. The disciples are NOT told to water baptize anyone. Rather, baptizing is what takes place EVERY TIME someone receives the truth of what they preach.
So baptism is never a one-off. Baptizing happens to someone EVERY TIME he receives the truth.
actions of men = go and preach;
results of Holy Spirit = taught and baptized
* preaching the gospel = baptizing *
Also, in that cited passage above (Mat. 28:19), it is WE who make yet another ASSUMPTION; we "just add water" i.e. we ASSUME that the "baptism" spoken of is of water!!!
Another assumption was that speaking in tongues was of the Holy Spirit whereas the reality is that the teachings of Jesus are of the Holy Spirit.
Other false assumptions: Torah worship; Moses worship; Paul worship.
* truth (teachings of Jesus) vs. false assumptions (e.g. water baptism) *
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh [e.g. water baptism and other traditions of men] profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life (John 6:63).
What Jesus taught is his true Holy Spirit. You cannot know the Holy Spirit of Jesus without having the words he spoke. People know Jesus' name and ancestry, but they don't know his teachings or beliefs. So they do not and cannot have his Spirit. But if I preach, I am covering/baptizing/immersing you in his Spirit. People receive the Holy Spirit every time they believe something Jesus said.
The Holy Spirit is not visible, as water or tongues is. Jesus told Nicodemus: the wind blows wherever; you hear it but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it's going. You can't put the wind (or the Spirit) in a box (or a font).
Or, what is the water in John 3:5? Again, context is everything:
1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
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.
6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
The emphasis is that one must be born again albeit spiritually - as opposed to the "normal" earthly method of birth that we of the flesh all experience i.e. via the birth canal and its water. This confuses Nic, as he can relate only to a physical birthing and its water - and we only do that once.
In vs. 5 & 6, Jesus tells Nic that for those of the flesh (i.e. people), it takes BOTH "births" (the natural and the spiritual) to "see the kingdom of God."
To totally upset a majority here, know that this mitigates AGAINST ANY requirement for a "water baptism." We have entire denominations built upon the shifting sand of some physical "water baptism" as a requirement for whatever. THEY ARE WRONG.
The first believers got it slightly wrong - water baptism is a trick, a test, built into the gospel.
Worldwide, churches of all shapes and sizes teach people to be baptized in water. It's hard to get two of them to agree on exactly how it's supposed to be done,
whether you baptize in the name of Jesus, or in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Ghost;
whether you sprinkle or pour water on people, or dunk them in the water;
whether it's done in a pool inside a church, or in a river;
who does it;
what the person doing it needs to believe in order for it to be valid;
whether you tip the person backward, or forward, when putting them under the water;
how old the person needs to be before you can baptize them;
what to do if the person backslides after being baptized;
whether the Holy Spirit comes into a person before, during, or after the water baptism...
The list goes on and on. There have been more divisions in the church over water baptism than over any other teaching in the Holy Bible or out of it.
Paul is the first person to have seen through this confusion to the truth behind it.
People were arguing over who had baptized them. Paul had baptized only a small handful of people, but soon realized that Jesus never meant for us to baptize people in water:
For it hath been declared unto me of you, my brethren, by them which are of the house of Chl-oe that there are contentions among you. Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were you baptized in the name of Paul? I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. (1 Cor. 1:11-17).
Here's another oft-missed clue:
And [Jesus] said unto [his disciples], Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized [in the Spirit, NOT water baptized] shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned [IOW, belief results in spiritual baptism unto salvation; unbelief results in damnation (water baptism is irrelevant)]...And they went forth, and preached everywhere, the Lord working with them, and confirming the word [NOT with water baptisms] with signs following. Amen. (Mark 16:15-16, 20).
The understanding of baptism has been messed up and distorted from antiquity. The result has been not unlike the parable of the sower, where two different seeds were sown but only one produced fruit. And such rituals of men are easy to fake. There is something far more satisfying than being dunked in water. God says that he wants obedience more than sacrifice (1 Sam. 15:22).
Water baptism was a Jewish ritual, a Hebrew practice. There is nothing uniquely Christian about water baptism. The disciples did baptize in water, but Jesus did not do it (John 4:2). Water baptism is inconsistent with the Spirit of everything else that Jesus taught. Most of Jesus' enemies were circumcised; most were water baptized!
...I [John] indeed baptize you [the multitude] with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire (Luke 3:16).
What of Jesus' baptism? John protested:
But John forbade [Jesus], saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me? (Mat. 3:14).
Jesus was the perfect spotless Lamb of God; he didn't need his sins washed away. Rather, Jesus asked John to accommodate him, because it made sense for them "to fulfill all righteousness". So John went ahead and baptized Jesus. The end of the old, and the start of the new.
So what does "to fulfill all righteousness" mean?
Well, Jesus was born into a Jewish family; circumcised at 8 days of age; taken to the temple at 12 years of age; raised in all the disciplines of the Jewish religion. And now he does this one final Jewish ritual, marking the end of his Jewishness and the start of a deeper revelation.
Jesus came to replace, fulfill, render useless, the law of Moses:
The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it (Luke 16:16). Out with the old, in with the new.
There is only one Lord, one faith, and one baptism via the Holy Ghost!
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body...(1 Cor. 12:13).
And Jesus came and spake unto them, saying, All power is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you: and, lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world. Amen. (Mat. 28:18-20).
What are the action words in that passage (v. 19)?
There are only two action words = go and preach. When the disciples obey the commands to go and to preach, then the result is that people get baptized and taught. The disciples are NOT told to water baptize anyone. Rather, baptizing is what takes place EVERY TIME someone receives the truth of what they preach.
So baptism is never a one-off. Baptizing happens to someone EVERY TIME he receives the truth.
actions of men = go and preach;
results of Holy Spirit = taught and baptized
* preaching the gospel = baptizing *
Also, in that cited passage above (Mat. 28:19), it is WE who make yet another ASSUMPTION; we "just add water" i.e. we ASSUME that the "baptism" spoken of is of water!!!
Another assumption was that speaking in tongues was of the Holy Spirit whereas the reality is that the teachings of Jesus are of the Holy Spirit.
Other false assumptions: Torah worship; Moses worship; Paul worship.
* truth (teachings of Jesus) vs. false assumptions (e.g. water baptism) *
It is the spirit that quickeneth; the flesh [e.g. water baptism and other traditions of men] profiteth nothing: the words that I speak unto you, they are spirit, and they are life (John 6:63).
What Jesus taught is his true Holy Spirit. You cannot know the Holy Spirit of Jesus without having the words he spoke. People know Jesus' name and ancestry, but they don't know his teachings or beliefs. So they do not and cannot have his Spirit. But if I preach, I am covering/baptizing/immersing you in his Spirit. People receive the Holy Spirit every time they believe something Jesus said.
The Holy Spirit is not visible, as water or tongues is. Jesus told Nicodemus: the wind blows wherever; you hear it but you cannot tell where it comes from or where it's going. You can't put the wind (or the Spirit) in a box (or a font).
Or, what is the water in John 3:5? Again, context is everything:
1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews:
2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him.
3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God.
4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born?
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.
6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.
7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again.
8 The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.
The emphasis is that one must be born again albeit spiritually - as opposed to the "normal" earthly method of birth that we of the flesh all experience i.e. via the birth canal and its water. This confuses Nic, as he can relate only to a physical birthing and its water - and we only do that once.
In vs. 5 & 6, Jesus tells Nic that for those of the flesh (i.e. people), it takes BOTH "births" (the natural and the spiritual) to "see the kingdom of God."
To totally upset a majority here, know that this mitigates AGAINST ANY requirement for a "water baptism." We have entire denominations built upon the shifting sand of some physical "water baptism" as a requirement for whatever. THEY ARE WRONG.
No it's not. He submitted to baptism in order to fulfill all righteousness, which I'm certain you don't have a clue what that means. Throughout history God has interacted with people through physical rites as an expression of their faith. Baptism was just a continuation of that pattern.
...and the answer, again, for those with discernment:
"Jesus was the perfect spotless Lamb of God; he didn't need his sins washed away. Rather, Jesus asked John to accommodate him, because it made sense for them "to fulfill all righteousness". So John went ahead and baptized Jesus. The end of the old, and the start of the new.
So what does "to fulfill all righteousness" mean?
Well, Jesus was born into a Jewish family; circumcised at 8 days of age; taken to the temple at 12 years of age; raised in all the disciplines of the Jewish religion. And now he does this one final Jewish ritual, marking the end of his Jewishness and the start of a deeper revelation."
Jesus never water baptized anyone. Jesus came to replace, fulfill, render useless, the law of Moses:
The law and the prophets were until John: since that time the kingdom of God is preached, and every man presseth into it (Luke 16:16). Out with the old, in with the new.
There is only one Lord, one faith, and one baptism via the Holy Ghost!
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body...(1 Cor. 12:13).