Baptism, the simple version.

You make no sense, and you still don't understand the significance and distinction between the old covenant and new as relates to the thief.

Even if the thief was baptized previously, it would have been unto John's baptism, which was and is not the same as being baptized into Christ.

All those baptized unto John's baptism had to be rebaptized such as were the Ephesians as recorded in Acts 19 1-7. As I stated previously as well as in my writing on the misconceptions of the thief on the cross, you couldn't be baptized into Christ while he was alive nor into his death.

The baptism into Christ not only affords one the remission of sins, but also enables the gift of the Holy Ghost to indwell you, and also enables being added to the body of Christ by the Lord which is his church per verse 47 of Acts 2. You can cherry pick scriptures that indicate partial requirements of salvation and ignor those relating ho baptism, but that won't make them go away. When all pertinent scriptures are considered, you end up with the following, all of which are required to be saved.
1. Belief and faith
2. Confession of your belief
3. Repentance
4. Water immersion (baptism)

That's what's required which is very clearly delineated by the scriptures.

You need to search the N.T and research the primary reason that causes a person to be saved.

Ephesians 2:8
For by grace you have been saved through faith; and this is not of yourselves, it is the gift of God.

Your words. You don't know what you're talking about. And the baptism with fire HAPPENED. Read Acts 1 and 2 which discusses this; and it happened to the apostles. That's not the norm nor does it happen today.

Yep. Grace is ultimately required. That's God's part, after we are obedient and do ours.

Read the original Greek in the interlinear. The word is "eis" used in both Mark 1 and Matthew 3 for "in" and "for". There is no inference of what you're suggesting the wording means. It's clear, so clear a blind man could see it. And you continue to cherrypick scripture. Do you really think that in every instance recorded, the complete message was repeated? Wake up! You must put together the various elements found to get the complete message, i.e.; Romans 10:9-10 says belief and confession. Is that all? No. What about repentance? Why is that not mentioned there? Is it not necessary? You're the one that's messed up. Goodbye. Go pedal your nonsense and illogical logic to someone else.

I quote the scripture that tells you that John said that, Jesus would introduce a spiritual baptism. And you jump up and down, saying, that I don't know what I am talking about.

The baptism at Pentecost was a direct fulfillment of John's prophecy. The apostles were indeed baptized with fire and the Holy Spirit.

Does it happen today, of course it does. Are their flames of fire on the heads of baptismal candidates?

We do not need every single, specific miracle to be repeated through history.

We are under a new covenant now, a spiritual life dominated by God's power.

I have attended far too many different types of churches and I can assure you that the Pentecostal churches. Are the closest you can get to the first century church. Give me prophets, and the Holy Spirit's power turned up to the maximum.

Believe what you like. The Pentecostals are simply practicing phoney tongues.

You have just testified to what you believe.

"after we are obedient and do ours"

I must inform you that salvation is a free gift.

A free gift cannot be earned through obedience, never.

I also must inform you that grace is telling you in no uncertain terms. That our salvation, is and always will be, the direct result of the atonement that Jesus performed. We do not and cannot co-contribute to the reconciliation that Jesus performed.

You are saved from the moment you believe in Jesus and receive the Holy Spirit.

John 6:40
For this is the will of My Father, that everyone who sees the Son and believes in Him will have eternal life, and I Myself will raise him up on the last day.

I see that you dodged my questions in post #277. I understand how "eis" is used in various passages of scripture. I already explained repentance, belief, confession and baptism in post #277. I have another question for you. Romans 10:10 says that confession is made unto salvation, yet you have the additional step of water baptism which comes "after" confession in your 4 step erroneous plan of salvation and you say that a person is not saved until "after" they are water baptized. How do you explain that?

Lets see how you get out of this one Houdini. Why do you resort to saying goodbye and to insults whenever someone asks you questions that you end up dodging? Not so sure of yourself, are you?

BYW: Whenever faith is mentioned unto salvation, repentance is implied or assumed and the other way around. Where you have one, you must have the other. Repentance and faith are two sides to the same coin. Repentance (change of mind) new direction of this change of mind (faith in Christ for salvation). No need to "patch together" a works based false gospel.

I'll let the words of the bible speak for themselves. Find the elements of salvation in each of the below and piece them together, then you'll have the complete picture of salvation as relates to our part of the bargain. God does his afterwards.

Mark 16:15-16

15And he said unto them, Go ye into all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature. 16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

Acts 2:38

38Then 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.

Acts 8:36-38

36And as they went on their way, they came unto a certain water: and the eunuch said, See, here is water; what doth hinder me to be baptized? 37And Philip said, If thou believest with all thine heart, thou mayest. And he answered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God. 38And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him.

Acts 22:16

16And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Romans 10:9-10

9That if thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart that God hath raised him from the dead, thou shalt be saved. 10For with the heart man believeth unto righteousness; and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation.

You need to interpret your pet verses in light of the rest of scripture. Jig saw puzzle works salvation is what you teach, but that is not what the Bible teaches. (Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; 26:18; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5-6; 5:1; 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:21; 15:1-4; Ephesians 2:8,9; Philippians 3:9; 1 Timothy 3:15; 1 John 5:13 etc..).

Mark 16:16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned. The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely necessary for salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief and not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. *NOWHERE does the Bible say "baptized or condemned."

If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then why did Jesus not mention it in the following verses? (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). What is the one requirement that Jesus mentions nine different times in each of these complete statements? *BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics.

*John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

*So the only logical 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; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

Water baptism followed saving belief in Jesus Christ here. "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God" - John 20:31 - but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. *What happened to baptism?

Paul had already believed in Christ when Ananias came to pray for him to receive his sight (Acts 9:17). It also should be noted that Paul at the time when Ananias prayed for him to receive his sight, he was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17)--this was BEFORE he was water baptized. (Acts 9:18) Verse 17 connects his being filled with the Spirit with the receiving of his sight. We know that he received his sight prior to his baptism.

Excellent article on Acts 22:16 - https://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2015/03/acts-2216-baptism-essential-for.html

*It's interesting that when Paul recounted this event again later in Acts (Acts 26:12-18), he did not mention Ananias or what Ananias said to him at all. Verse 18 again would confirm the idea that Paul received Christ as Savior on the road to Damascus since here Christ is telling Paul he will be a messenger for Him concerning forgiveness of sins for Gentiles as they have faith in Him. It would seem unlikely that Christ would commission Paul if Paul had not yet believed in Him and was still lost in his sins.

No scripture is to be interpreted in isolation from the totality of scripture. Practically speaking, a singular and obscure verse is to be subservient to to multiple and clear verses, and not vice versa.

What happened to baptism? Confessing with our mouth that Jesus is Lord and believing in our heart that God raised Him from the dead are not two separate steps to salvation but are chronologically together. Romans 10:8 - But what does it say? "the word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (TOGETHER) that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, (notice the reverse order from verse 9-10) - that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Confess/believe; believe/confess.


You continue to show your ignorance and lack of true understanding of the scriptures. God made things simple to understand but men like you choose to confuse God's word and make it difficult.

You lack understanding of Ananias and Saul as an example.

Below is a copy of one of my threads posted on this forum on this very subject. Read it carefully, you might learn something.

REPOST

Many times, people erroneously cite Acts 9, and specifically the words of Ananias to Saul in verse 17, as justification that Ananias, who was not an apostle, also possessed the ability to bring about the manifestation of the Holy Spirit/Ghost, the falling of or being filled with the Spirit/Ghost, by the laying on of his hands on Saul (Paul), whereas this is contrary to scripture which clearly indicates that only the apostles had this ability as their promised "power from on high" as stated to them by the Lord in Luke 24:49, and confirmed by such verses as Acts 5:12, Acts 6:6-8, Acts 8:9-19, Acts 19:6, and 2 Tim 1:6.

Their use of this verse is unjustified based on the following:

Notice the difference in the words of instruction given to Ananias in verse 12 by the Lord versus the words of Ananias to Saul in verse 17.

In verse 12, the Lord says nothing about being "filled with the Holy Ghost", only that Saul "might receive his sight". But Ananias words in verse 17 added that he, Saul, should "be filled with the Holy Ghost".

Acts 9:11-12 (KJV)

11And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and inquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth, 12And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight.

Acts 9:17 (KJV)

17And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.

Now, look at Acts 22:1-16 and the words of Paul (Saul) during his recount of the event to the crowd at Jerusalem, specifically verse 13. You'll see Paul's recount of the event also DOES NOT say anything about "being filled with the Holy Ghost", but only that he receive his sight which is consistent with the instructions the Lord initially gave to Ananias in Acts 9:12.

So, does this represent a conflict of scripture? No! Scripture cannot and does not contradict or conflict with scripture. So, what did Ananias mean, why did he say what he said in Acts 9:17, what does this really mean, and when would Saul have then been "filled with the Holy Ghost" to make the scriptures agree?

Note Acts 9:18 and Acts 22:16 below.

After Saul received his sight, he was immediately baptized. It was at this point, when Saul was baptized, that he received the Holy Ghost which is consistent with scripture. See Acts 2:38 (below) which defines when and how one receives the Holy Ghost.

Acts 22:12-13

12And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there, 13Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.

Acts 9:18 (KJV)

18And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.

Acts 22:16 (KJV)

16And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Acts 2:38 (KJV)

38Then 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.

You need to interpret your pet verses in light of the rest of scripture. Jig saw puzzle works salvation is what you teach, but that is not what the Bible teaches. (Acts 10:43; 13:39; 16:31; 26:18; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5-6; 5:1; 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:21; 15:1-4; Ephesians 2:8,9; Philippians 3:9; 1 Timothy 3:15; 1 John 5:13 etc..).

Mark 16:16 - He who believes and is baptized will be saved (general cases without making a qualification for the unusual case of someone who believes but is not baptized) but he who does not believe will be condemned. The omission of baptized with "does not believe" shows that Jesus does not make baptism absolutely necessary for salvation. Condemnation rests on unbelief and not on a lack of baptism. So salvation rests on belief. *NOWHERE does the Bible say "baptized or condemned."

If water baptism is absolutely required for salvation, then why did Jesus not mention it in the following verses? (3:15,16,18; 5:24; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26). What is the one requirement that Jesus mentions nine different times in each of these complete statements? *BELIEVES. *What happened to baptism? *Hermeneutics.

*John 3:18 - He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who (is not water baptized? - NO) does not believe is condemned already, because he has not (been water baptized? - NO) because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God.

In Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

*So the only logical 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; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

Water baptism followed saving belief in Jesus Christ here. "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God" - John 20:31 - but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. *What happened to baptism?

Paul had already believed in Christ when Ananias came to pray for him to receive his sight (Acts 9:17). It also should be noted that Paul at the time when Ananias prayed for him to receive his sight, he was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17)--this was BEFORE he was water baptized. (Acts 9:18) Verse 17 connects his being filled with the Spirit with the receiving of his sight. We know that he received his sight prior to his baptism.

Excellent article on Acts 22:16 - https://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2015/03/acts-2216-baptism-essential-for.html

*It's interesting that when Paul recounted this event again later in Acts (Acts 26:12-18), he did not mention Ananias or what Ananias said to him at all. Verse 18 again would confirm the idea that Paul received Christ as Savior on the road to Damascus since here Christ is telling Paul he will be a messenger for Him concerning forgiveness of sins for Gentiles as they have faith in Him. It would seem unlikely that Christ would commission Paul if Paul had not yet believed in Him and was still lost in his sins.

No scripture is to be interpreted in isolation from the totality of scripture. Practically speaking, a singular and obscure verse is to be subservient to to multiple and clear verses, and not vice versa.

What happened to baptism? Confessing with our mouth that Jesus is Lord and believing in our heart that God raised Him from the dead are not two separate steps to salvation but are chronologically together. Romans 10:8 - But what does it say? "the word is near you, in your mouth and in your heart" (TOGETHER) that is, the word of faith which we are preaching, (notice the reverse order from verse 9-10) - that if you confess with your mouth that Jesus is Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved; 10 for with the heart one believes unto righteousness, and with the mouth confession is made unto salvation. Confess/believe; believe/confess.

1 Corinthians 12:13 - Therefore I make known to you that no one speaking by the Spirit of God calls Jesus accursed, and no one can say that Jesus is Lord except BY the Holy Spirit. There is divine influence or direct operation of the Holy Spirit in the heart of a person when confessing Jesus as Lord. This confession is not just a simple acknowledgment that Jesus is the Lord (even the demons believe that), but is a deep personal conviction, that Jesus is that person's Lord and Savior. So simply believing in our head (and not in our heart) that God raised Him from the dead does not result in righteousness and simply giving lip service to the words "Jesus is Lord" not by the Holy Spirit is not unto salvation.

It's a free gift but requires action and obedience on our part before God grants the free gift of salvation. How is it obtained?

You receive the Holy Ghost at the same time your sins are forgiven and are added to the body of Christ and NOT upon belief (Acts 2:38-47). No scriture says that.

Read the account of the Ethiopian eunuch. He had to more after belief. What was that and how did he become knowledgeable about it, and why was it necessary?

Believe what you like. The Pentecostals are simply practicing phoney tongues.

You continue to show your ignorance and lack of true knowledge, and arrogance towards God's word which is simple. Men like you choose to confuse it and make it difficult.

You lack understanding of Ananias and Saul as an example. Below is a copy of one of my threads on this forum on this subject.

REPOST

Many times, people erroneously cite Acts 9, and specifically the words of Ananias to Saul in verse 17, as justification that Ananias, who was not an apostle, also possessed the ability to bring about the manifestation of the Holy Spirit/Ghost, the falling of or being filled with the Spirit/Ghost, by the laying on of his hands on Saul (Paul), whereas this is contrary to scripture which clearly indicates that only the apostles had this ability as their promised "power from on high" as stated to them by the Lord in Luke 24:49, and confirmed by such verses as Acts 5:12, Acts 6:6-8, Acts 8:9-19, Acts 19:6, and 2 Tim 1:6.

Their use of this verse is unjustified based on the following:

Notice the difference in the words of instruction given to Ananias in verse 12 by the Lord versus the words of Ananias to Saul in verse 17.

In verse 12, the Lord says nothing about being "filled with the Holy Ghost", only that Saul "might receive his sight". But Ananias words in verse 17 added that he, Saul, should "be filled with the Holy Ghost".

Acts 9:11-12 (KJV)

11And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go into the street which is called Straight, and inquire in the house of Judas for one called Saul, of Tarsus: for, behold, he prayeth, 12And hath seen in a vision a man named Ananias coming in, and putting his hand on him, that he might receive his sight.

Acts 9:17 (KJV)

17And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.

Now, look at Acts 22:1-16 and the words of Paul (Saul) during his recount of the event to the crowd at Jerusalem, specifically verse 13. You'll see Paul's recount of the event also DOES NOT say anything about "being filled with the Holy Ghost", but only that he receive his sight which is consistent with the instructions the Lord initially gave to Ananias in Acts 9:12.

So, does this represent a conflict of scripture? No! Scripture cannot and does not contradict or conflict with scripture. So, what did Ananias mean, why did he say what he said in Acts 9:17, what does this really mean, and when would Saul have then been "filled with the Holy Ghost" to make the scriptures agree?

Note Acts 9:18 and Acts 22:16 below.

After Saul received his sight, he was immediately baptized. It was at this point, when Saul was baptized, that he received the Holy Ghost which is consistent with scripture. See Acts 2:38 (below) which defines when and how one receives the Holy Ghost.

Acts 22:12-13

12And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there, 13Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him.

Acts 9:18 (KJV)

18And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized.

Acts 22:16 (KJV)

16And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Acts 2:38 (KJV)

38Then 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.

That statement is the epitome of irony. That salvation is by grace through faith and is not by works (including water baptism) is not hard to understand. It's just hard for you to accept. We are justified by faith (not faith and water baptism) and we have access by faith into grace. (Ephesians 2:8,9; Romans 5:1-2) Yet you would walk around mountains of grace in order to find water.

It's you who lacks understanding and there is a reason for that. In regards to Acts 22:16, as Greek scholar AT Robertson points out, baptism here pictures the washing away of sins by the blood of Christ, but it does not literally wash away our sins, contrary to your conclusion.

https://www.bibletools.org/index.cfm/fuseaction/Bible.show/sVerseID/27721/eVerseID/27721/RTD/rwpnt

Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary makes not of the importance of the Greek in Ananias' statement. When Ananias tells Paul to "arise, be baptized, wash away your sins, calling on the name of the Lord," the tense of the last command is literally "having called" (aorist middle participle). "Calling on [epikalesamenos] --- 'having (that is, after having) called on,' referring the confession of Christ which preceded baptism." [Jamison, Fausset, and Brown Commentary, vol. 3 pg. 160]. Kenneth Wuest picks up on this Greek nuance and translates the verse as follows: "And now, why are you delaying? Having arisen, be baptized and wash away your sins, having previously called upon His Name." (Acts 22:16, Wuest's Expanded NT).

In Acts 10:43, receiving remission of sins is connected with "believes in Him" and not with baptism. These Gentiles received the remission of sins, the gift of the Holy Spirit and spoke in tongues (which is a spiritual gift that is ONLY for the body of Christ (1 Corinthians 12) and were saved BEFORE water baptism. (Acts 10:43-47) That is not in harmony with your biased interpretation of Acts 22:16 and it's also not in harmony with multiple other passages of scripture which make it clear that we are saved through belief/faith "apart from water baptism." (John 1:12; 3:15,16,18,36; 6:29,40,47; 11:25,26; Acts 10:43; 13:39; 15:9; 16:31; 26:18; Romans 1:16; 3:24-28; 4:5; 5:1; 10:4; 1 Corinthians 1:21; Galatians 2:16; 3:7-9, 26; Ephesians 2:8; 2 Timothy 3:15; Philippians 3:9; 1 John 5:13 etc..).

In Acts 9, Jesus told Ananias that Paul "is a chosen vessel unto Me" (vs 15), although the apostle had not yet been water baptized. Before Paul was baptized, Christ had already commissioned him to "bear His name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel" (Acts 9:15) and such a commission is not for one who is still lost in their sins. Before Paul’s baptism, Christ had set him aside as one who would "suffer for His name’s sake" (9:16). Can one who is a child of the devil, as all the lost are (Ephesians 2:1-3, John 8:44), really suffer for Christ’s sake? NO.

So, Paul had already believed in Christ when Ananias came to pray for him to receive his sight (Acts 9:17). It also should be noted that Paul at the time when Ananias prayed for him to receive his sight, he was filled with the Holy Spirit (Acts 9:17)--this was BEFORE he was water baptized (Acts 9:18). Verse 17 connects his being filled with the Spirit with the receiving of his sight. We know that he received his sight prior to his baptism.

Be sure to go back and read this excellent article on Acts 22:16 below:

https://kentbrandenburg.blogspot.com/2015/03/acts-2216-baptism-essential-for.html

Once again, in Acts 2:38, "for the remission of sins" does not refer back to both clauses, "you all repent" and "each one of you be baptized," but refers only to the first. Peter is saying "repent unto the remission of your sins," the same as in Acts 3:19. The clause "each one of you be baptized" is parenthetical. This is exactly what Acts 3:19 teaches except that Peter omits the parenthesis.

*Also compare the fact that these Gentiles in Acts 10:45 received the gift of the Holy Spirit (compare with Acts 2:38 - the gift of the Holy Spirit) and this was BEFORE water baptism (Acts 10:47).

In Acts 10:43 we read ..whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins. Again, these Gentiles received the gift of the Holy Spirit - Acts 10:45 - when they believed on the Lord Jesus Christ - Acts 11:17 - (compare with Acts 16:31 - Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you will be saved) BEFORE water baptism - Acts 10:47. This is referred to as repentance unto life - Acts 11:18.

*So the only logical 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; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18). *Perfect Harmony*

Goodbye. I'm done with you on this thread and any future ones.

Baptism is not necessary for salvation. Baptism is supposed to be done in obedience to Christ once you are saved. If you say you have to be baptized to be saved, you are negating the work Christ did on the cross for us. Salvation come through Jesus Christ only.

We are not under the law. Christ fulfilled the law in letter and Spirit.

Romans 11:32

Romans 11:33-36