Baptist and Baptism

When Yahweh tod Moses He will be What He will be, this explains somewhat but not completely just how He may manifest , He Himselfis the Father, the Son and The Holy Spirit. There is not manner of separateing these minefestaions of His being and His will. Jesus Yeshua being the only anointed of Yahweh Who saves mankind, those who come to Him in spirit and truth, from all sin.
So of course there is no other name..........For He will be What He will be..

Here is among the times where you see water baptism done straight after being converted. So salvation and baptism get put in the same verse.

The other thing is when you go to the Greek, word order doesn't matter as much as an English. So salvation can still be the first thing that happened. They were calling on the name of the Lord and got baptised .. could be another way of looking it.

It's also likely related to being baptized FOR the remission of sins.. where the for is like 'related to' 'in regards to' 'in reference ' to.

I think going back to the Greek will show this.

The other main thing is .. when was Saul converted? At this point or earlier?

If it was bit earlier.. then this reinforces the being baptised 'in reference to' or 'regarding' remission of sins.. that would have happened when he encountered God.

Well, that is certainly a side step. Right, it's the Catholic's fault! Except Jesus told his disciples to do this, while he was yet living, before 33 or 30AD, depending which time line you are following. Jesus told them "in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit." I realize the United Pentecostal Church does not believe in the Trinity. That's why you have to insist on being baptized ONLY in the name of Jesus. So, I guess we need to start another 100 or 1000 page thread arguing about the Trinity?

Amazing how a false doctrine like the United Pentecostals make over baptism, or about the Trinity, then runs through all its bad theology!

I had a good friend get caught up in the UP or Oneness doctrine. It really mixed him up. I spent a lot of time discussing this issue with him. I've written papers for my PhD on the Trinity. I KNOW it is in the Bible, because that was my main source for the paper. But, he would eventually stop speaking to me and tell me he doesn't want to talk about it. Your theology regarding the Trinity, blaming it on the Catholics (I am not Catholic, I admit there is a lot wrong with the RCC, but they certainly preserved belief in the Trinity, for which we owe them!) and then totally disregarding an important verse, Matt 28:19, is totally bad eisegesis. And very sad you are in a cult that has deluded you.

Oh, did you forget to mention if you are NOT baptised in the name of Jesus only, and don't speak in tongues, then you are not saved? Another wrong doctrine! Everyone should understand where Wansvic is coming from. It is not just his beliefs about Baptism that are wrong, but also many more things, like not believing in the Trinity!

"The UPCI's theology is consistent with that of Oneness Pentecostalism.[16][17] They reject the Trinity and instead believe that the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit are different manifestations of God, as opposed to separate persons.[18] The UPCI believes that one must repent, be baptized "in the name of Jesus" (as opposed to "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit"), and receive the Holy Ghost with the evidence of speaking in tongues to be saved, as outlined in Acts 2:38."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unite...cism.-,Beliefs,as opposed to separate persons.

"(T)he Oneness doctrine, a form of Modalistic Monarchianism This doctrine states that there is one God, a singular divine spirit with no distinction of persons who manifests himself in many ways, including as Father, Son, and Holy Spirit.[7][8][9] This stands in sharp contrast to the doctrine of three distinct and eternal persons posited by Trinitarian theology."

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oneness_Pentecostalism

Modalism is just another bad doctrine that sprang from Sabellius who taught a form of it in Rome in the 3rd century. These beliefs came to Sabelius via the teachings of Noetus and Praxeas. Although Praxeas later recanted his modalistic views in writing.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sabel...ly associated,teachings of Noetus and Praxeas.

Hmm! I have a lovely analysis of John 1:1 which shows why modalism is wrong if you are read that verse Koine Greek. Maybe I will bring that up. Anyway, Wansvic believes in modalism, which was rejected by the ancient church, the church through the ages, the Middle Ages, the Reformation and today. That kind of settles the entire discussion for me.

"The other thing is when you go to the Greek, word order doesn't matter as much as an English."

No! Word order, as reflected in the cases, matter tremendously in Koine Greek. Another person who has never read the NT in Greek, which I have done many times! Of course, it matters in English, but unless you understand cases in nouns and pronouns in Greek, as well as adjectives and occasionally adverbs, you can never read the Greek NT properly. Anything you say I'm going to disregard, as you don't seem to know anything about what you are pretending to talk about! Sheesh!

Sorry, Wattie! I regret saying the last line of this. Please forgive me! My bad!

No problem.. I read in a book about Greek that sentences aren't structured like English where things have to be in a particular order. But maybe that is wrong. Oh well.

The point was though ... just because remission of sins is put with water baptism.. doesn't mean the water baptism is conditional on salvation.

It's the same point made by mailmandan.. that the reverse case of this isn't scriptural. That not being baptised in water means you aren't saved.

Anyway.. no offense taken

You are right that the structure differs. If you had said that, I would have no quarrel! But although a different structure, words and they way they appear means a lot in Greek. For instance, the word "the" in Koine Greek has 17 different words, in 24 places. The genitive plural are identical for Masculine, Feminine & Neuter. The Nominative and Accusative Masculine & Neuter are also the same! And a few other words. So instead of one word, like English, or 3 words like German, 4 words like Spanish, there are 17 different words. Plus, like many other languages, the adjectives must agree with the noun. It makes it more complex, but also gives it a lot more structure than English!

And I do agree with your point! Just because 2 words appear in a sentences, doesn't mean they are the same or even similar. Having baptism and remission of sins in the sentence could be sequential, related or unrelated. This is where context is king, esp in Greek, but also in most languages!

Sorry! German has 6 words for "the"! I'm posting too late, I think!

Sidestepping? Nothing you mentioned changes what the biblical record reveals concerning the proper way to administer water baptism. If Jesus meant for the apostles to baptize using a phrase, rather than a name, why are there no baptism records to that effect? No such records exist. What does exist, is the actions of the apostles. Their actions should assist everyone in understanding the truth. This direct evidence proves water baptism was to be administered in the name of the Lord Jesus. Why? Because it was Jesus who was crucified for all mankind. And as Paul explained in Romans 6:3-6 those who are baptized have been been buried with Jesus into His death.

Many do not realize they have developed opinions prompted by tradition. Tradition that goes directly against God's word. For those who are interested in learning the truth, there are many references concerning the removal of the name of the Lord Jesus from water baptism. The Roman Catholic Church takes credit for the change themselves. The RCC boosts that members of Protestant churches that water baptize in the phrase are no longer considered outside the church but are elevated to the title of sister churches; with the RCC being the mother church from which they sprang.

Please consider with an open heart what God's word actually reveals concerning the necessity of being baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And as you do keep in mind that God's word does not contradict itself. I pray that the eyes of your understanding my be opened:

"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: " Matt 28:19-20

"Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?" 1 Cor 1:13


Acts 2:38-39 (Jewish)
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.
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.
Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

Acts 8:12-17 (Samaritans)
But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.
Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.
Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:
(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)
Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost.

Acts 10:43-48 (Gentiles)
43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.
While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

Acts 19:2-6 (Disciples who were baptized by John the Baptist did not realize they had to water baptized in Jesus name. After being told they were re-baptized in water and afterward received the Holy Ghost.

He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

Acts 22:14-16 (Paul's water baptism)
And he (Ananias) said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth.
For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard.
And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

I would venture to say that those who elevate themselves, in their own minds, above others have less wisdom then they think.

It is not conditional. Peter did not tell everyone to be baptised. He only told a select group of people. He told everyone to repent.

remission of sin is what they got for repenting. Peter told people to get baptized on the account of they received remission of sin.

says the one who elevates his/herself above everyone in the world when it comes to baptism

What angela said about you is correct. It is why I refuse to acknowledge your posts.. but I could not resist the chance to call out a hypocritical statement when I see one

I know many refuse to accept that obedience to water baptism in the name of Jesus is required in order for a person to be saved. However, scripture expresses it so often that that stance puzzles me.

Jesus' sacrifice provided for the sins of all of mankind. But as Paul was advised, and expressed to others, obedience to baptism was where every individual's personal sin is dwelt with in association by Jesus' sacrifice. (Rom. 6:3-6) As mentioned, Jesus sent Ananias to tell Paul how to have his sins washed away. (Acts 22:16) Jesus prophesied that repentance and remission of sin would be preached in His name to all nations BEGINNING in Jerusalem. (Luke 24:47) This happened as Jesus said it would. With keys in hand, Peter first revealed the truth in Acts 2:38. Those who believed in Jesus were to repent and submit themselves to being baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus for remission of sin. He later commanded Cornelius and others to do the same. (Acts 10:43, 48)

I find your comment interesting since all I do is share scripture. I place confidence in what scripture says not what people say it means. Personally, I don't believe it takes an expert to understand the comment "be baptized and wash away thy sins calling on the name of the Lord." It's not confusing. It means be obedient to the God-given command and your sins will be washed away as provided for by the shed blood of the Lord Jesus Christ. Scripture means what it says. People are free to accept or reject scripture. However, it is what Jesus said all will be judged by.

Actually the group asked what they must do. Peter's response was repent AND be baptized...:

"Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter...what shall we do?
Then Peter said unto them, Repent, AND be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, ..." Acts 2:37-38

Also, the biblical record will always confirm the truth with at least 2-3 other scriptures. In all detailed conversion accounts entire groups were required to submit to water baptism:

An angel told Cornelius to send for Peter who would tell him how to be saved. (Acts 11:13-14) The entire group of Gentiles received the indwelling of the Holy Ghost and was told to be baptized (water) in the name of the Lord. (Acts 10:43-48)

Paul re-baptized the entire group of 12 Ephesus disciples in the name of the Lord. (Acts 19:1-6)

The entire group of Samaritans believed Philip's message and were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. (Acts 8:12-18)

The word elevates itself. It is mightier than a twoedged sword. (Heb. 4:12) If what I share about water baptism makes you feel uncomfortable you may want to study it out for yourself.

I attended Baptist Churches till the age of 16. They did not seem to understand baptism, though their statement of faith declared water baptism to be not required for salvation.

I have not heard of any baptist that things water baptism is a work required to be saved..

Yeah.. that was the point being made about the Greek in what I read.. is that especially with Greek.. context is king. When an entire group receives the Spirit, it's already saved people bring empowered by the Holy Spirit. It usually also means the Holy Spirit coming 'in the midst' of them and they become one of God's churches.

The sequence is always saved first.. with the Holy Spirit indwelling right away.. then in Acts you see some l group of believers gather and receive the Holy Spirit after baptism in water. That isn't salvation.

That's a group with Jesus as the Comforter in their midst..aka Matthew 18:20.

Paul mentions belief does not automatically assure that a person has been indwelt by the Holy Spirit. "Have you received the Holy Ghost since you believed?" (Acts 19:1-6) Being indwelt by the Holy Spirit is a requirement for a person to be considered a child of God. (Rom. 8:9) The experience of the 12 Ephesus disciples was not to establish a church. Also consider the Samaritan's experience speaks to the same truth. People can hear and believe the gospel message, and even be baptized in water, yet they may still need to receive the indwelling presence of the Holy Ghost.

"But when they believed Philip preaching the things concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women...
Then Simon himself believed also: and when he was baptized, he continued with Philip, and wondered, beholding the miracles and signs which were done.

Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:
Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost:

(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)

Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost."