Baptism

I would offer this as proof of it being the first and preferred method:

From Didache

"And concerning baptism, baptize this way: Having first said all these things, baptize into the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, Matthew 28:19 in living water. But if you have not living water, baptize into other water; and if you can not in cold, in warm. But if you have not either, pour out water thrice upon the head into the name of Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the baptizer fast, and the baptized, and whatever others can; but you shall order the baptized to fast one or two days before."

Do you view it as lacking grace for others? I can see that, or they just genuinely believe its the right way to do it.

I already gave you proof otherwise in scripture. In addition, your quote seems to support pouring, not immersion.

They genuinely believe it is the right way to do it, but should be more accepting of those who disagree since it's not an essential doctrine. "In essentials unity, in non-essentials liberty, in all things charity."

Everyone living in the New Testament who has the ability to make an informed decision must believe and obey God's established plan of salvation. Acts 2 records the essential elements of which one is to be obedient to the command to be water baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for remission of sin. (Acts 2:37-42) Infants do not have the capacity to believe or obey this command.

Initially, John the Baptist was sent by God to introduce water baptism and explain it's purpose:
"...the word of God came unto John the son of Zacharias in the wilderness.
And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins;..." Luke 3:2-3
"Then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized of him, O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come?" Luke 3:7


After Jesus' death, burial, resurrection and glorification, water baptism was modified to include His name. Jesus prophesied this would begin in Jerusalem and spread to all nations. (Luke 24:47)


Why is being water baptized in Jesus' name required? Because it was Jesus who was crucified in order that man's sin could be forgiven. (1 Cor. 1:13, Col. 2:12, Gal. 2:20) The Apostle Paul explained that obedience to baptism is when a person is buried with JESUS into His death wherein their sins are destroyed. (Rom. 6:3-6)

Note all detailed accounts reveal the name of Jesus was used by those administering water baptism. (Acts 2:38-41, 8:12-18, 10:43-48, 19:1-6, 22:16) This is relevant because the very Word itself says people can be sure what is true because 2-3 scriptures will say the same thing. Many are coming to understand this truth and being rebaptized in water in the name of Jesus just as the Ephesians did at the instruction of the Apostle Paul in Acts 19:1-7.

Is this factually correct? You're saying John the Baptist's father, Zechariah, was the High Priest?

• “And after she was baptized, and her household as well...” (Acts 16:15 ESV)
• “...and he was baptized at once, he and all his family.” (Acts 16:33 ESV)
• “ I did baptize also the household of Stephanas. (1 Corinthians 1:16 ESV)

Where does it say anything about sprinkling? It just says households were baptized.

Lol
OP started a thread on what is deemed a controversy and has not responded since.

Well, I supposed they could've immersed the young children, but probably not the best idea.

Had a feeling that would happen, lol. That's why I asked the reason for the question. No sense composing a reply for someone who isn't interested. He might still come back around.

I disagree with this post. Nearly every time ”baptism” is mentioned in the NT it is referring to water. The times it is not referring to water, it is clearly stated as such. Moreover, when people are instructed to baptize or be baptized, clearly this is an act that they are to engage in, which would be pretty hard if the context was merely a spiritual baptism.

Likewise, in Acts 2:38 Peter instructs the crowd who believes and is convicted by the message of the risen Christ to “repent and be baptized“ and the result would be “the forgiveness of your sins and you will receive the Holy Spirit.” Peter DOESN’T say, “wait to be baptized by the Spirit and then we will baptize you in water as an outward expression of your inward experience.” Nor does he have to clarify what he means by baptism.

In fact, throughout the book of Acts, we see converts getting baptized. They are always baptized in water and when the term baptize is used, it does not require clarification as to what type or substance the immersion is taking place in. Here are just a few passages from Acts that show the term “baptized“ is used in a way that writer assumes everyone knows what is meant…and when a substance is referred to, it is always water. Again, none of these passages indicate a passive thing being done to a person by the Spirit, but something the person is doing.

In sum, there is one baptism. According to Scripture, baptism is a ”prayer to God for a clean conscience” and those who submit to baptism as an act of faith in Jesus as their Lord are promised to be washed, buried with Christ, raised and given the Holy Spirit. I think it is a mistake to point to the Apostles being given “power from on high” on Pentecost to perform signs and wonders as a normative event that negates the didactic teachings throughout the NT on what constitutes a typical baptism and how the early church made disciples. One does not have to look long at early church history and the writings of church fathers to see that this is how all of the early church understood conversion and that those who hear and believe the message publicly profess their faith, are baptized in water and accepted God’s promise to wash them and grant them His Spirit as a result of this disciple-making process.

Only one way. Follow what the word itself means. It's not a translated word, but transliterated from the Greek word 'baptizo' which means to dip, plunge, immerse. That's your answer.

Poor choice of words.

From Vocabulary.com:


When we are contrasting the Lord and His work with any physical copy, we should give more honor to Him than the copy.

as Jesus was in John Chapter 1 and as Jesu says to be baptized in Mark 16

I don’t think it is a poor choice of words. “Merely” if we are going to deal with semantics, in the modern vernacular is an adverb that means, ”just, only” -New Oxford American Dictionary.

So, yes, I stand by the statement that “merely a spiritual baptism” means “only” or “just” a spiritual baptism and is not referring to the act of immersing a person in water. That is NOT what we see in the NT, and again, its pretty hard to obey Christ’s command to baptize disciples if it is a spiritual act and is not something we have the means to initiate. Rather, my position is the “spiritual” baptism takes place in the moment of physical baptism. Thus, it is not “merely” spiritual but both physical AND spiritual. In fact, this is how the church viewed baptism throughout Church history until the time of Zwingli. Even Luther believed baptism to be a sacrament and not merely an expression.

It is crucial for people to understand that scripture provides clarity concerning the misconception that water baptism and receiving the Holy Ghost/Spirit occur simultaneously. Why? Because those who believe this error will not pursue receiving God's gift of the Holy Ghost; it's essential for salvation.

Peter conveyed God's promise that those who repent and are water baptized in the name of Jesus can expect to receive the Holy Ghost. What Peter said is absolutely true; however, as revealed elsewhere in scripture the experiences occur separately.

Acts 8:12-17 - The Samaritans did not receive the Holy Ghost until days after being water baptized.

Acts 10:43-48 - Cornelius and others received the Holy Ghost and afterwards submitted to water baptism.

Acts 19:1-6 - The twelve Ephesian individuals were rebaptized in water in the name of Jesus and did not receive the Holy Ghost until Paul laid hands upon them.

Nowhere in the New Testament is the believer told to seek the baptism of the Spirit. There is no New Testament command to be baptized with the Spirit. The believer is baptized with the Spirit (simultaneously) upon being born again. Indeed, it is not possible be to a believer without being indwelt by the Holy Spirit.

Agreed. Just read Acts 2:38 and other scriptures bear this out. Upon being baptized into Christ, you receive the gift of the Holy Spirit or Ghost. You're not really baptized by it, but rather, baptized into it which is the body of Christ, the church. The baptism of the Spirit is a bit different, which was experienced by the apostles on the day of Pentecost as recorded in Acts 2 and as promised by the Lord to THEM, in Luke 24:49.

Actually the need to seek the Holy Spirit if a person has not already been indwelt is in the New Testament. Jesus spoke of it Himself:
"If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him?

Jesus also stated that being born again involves both water and Spirit:
"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...
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." John 3:3, 5)

And as you said, no one is born again unless that have the Holy Spirit. Consider Paul's question in Acts 19. It reveals a person CAN believe but still not have the Holy Spirit:
"He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost (YET) since ye believed?" (Acts 19:2)


Many haven't received revelation concerning these topics. Why? Because faith comes by hearing, and hearing BY THE WORD OF GOD. Pastors need to get back to preaching the truth!