Search results

I just want to make a comment on one thing you said concerning the different baptisms. I think the baptism of fire in Matthew 3:11 is a different baptism from the baptism of suffering that Jesus talked about in Mark 10:38 and Luke 12:50. If you read the context in Matthew 3, especially the...

” According to Mark 7 they had “washings” for many things—hands, cups, pitchers, copper vessels, and couches, just to name a few. I’m not sure how you think this has anything to do with my post. My quote was from Hebrew 9:16-17 and had to do with the death of Christ and when his new law...

It’s in comment # 373.

Thank you so much for this. I have wanted to delete and start over somtimes but had no idea how to do it. I will screen shot your explanation so I can refer to it often—I will need to, I’m afraid. lol. Much obliged for the help.

Actually Paul makes the argument that you cannot rightfully call yourselves after some one UNLESS that person was 1) crucified for you and 2) you were baptized in his name. He’s addressing the problem of those Corinthians wearing the names of men. ( Like Lutherans calling themselves after...

"Jesus is no longer here to save us ..." But he is. God's Holy Spirit enters in and leads,opens, the natural minds, consciousness ,of people so they can understand his Gospel. I am not saying you are wrong—until I have read the scriptures that you use to teach this. I am not familiar with...

I quote: “ The teaching of scripture is that remission ONLY comes by grace through faith. ( Eph. 2:8-9)”. That wasn’t you?? Aren’t YOU the one saying that remission “ONLY comes by grace through faith?? I am not being untruthful at all. I quoted you verbatim. And you DID INSERT THE WORD...

Did you really read my post? I was not arguing that the thief was baptized. He very well might not have been. I took issue with YOUR statement that declared in no uncertain terms that HE WAS NOT BAPTIZED, and I just wondered how you know that? Because none of the rest of us know for sure...

And yet, when Phillip “preached Jesus” to the eunuch in Acts 8, as soon as they came to some water, the eunuch wanted to be baptized. How did he know about baptism?? WHEN did he learn about baptism? He did not even know who Jesus was before Phillip preached Jesus to him. I would say that...

And what scripture tells you the thief “wasn’t baptized at all”? Just wonder how you know that when the rest of us don’t know. True, the thief was saved by the blood of Christ just like everyone else. But who told the thief to be baptized?? No one. The old Jewish law of Moses which...

I don’t think anyone used the number of people that John the Baptist and Jesus baptized as “proof” that the thief was baptized. It was used to show that there is more reason to believe that he “WAS” baptized than to believe that he “Wasn’t” baptized. I don’t know of anyone who claims to know...

There’s that word “only” again. It’s not there, you know. You ADDED it to Eph.2:8-9 but it does not say that. Acts 2:38 says that remission of sins comes as a result of baptism. And verse 8-9 of Eph. 2 does not even mention remission of sins. But those are the very words Peter used in Acts...

Yes, because Jesus was there in person to save him. While Jesus was on earth, He could save anyone, anyway He pleased because He is God. He could choose to save someone who didn’t even believe if He wanted to. But Jesus is no longer here to do that in person. He also saved the man let down...

post: 5510331, member: 308915"]Uh oh. First time, kid? Now, someone will have to repeat the made-up story about that particular thief being baptized before he hung on the cross. There's no record of this, of course... I agree with you, but expect some push back. Well, if we are going to...

I thought I was responding to JBTN. At least my comment was under his post. I’m not sure how your post got in there also; but then I am not very “tech” savvy. My apologies.

When you baptize disciples into the name of the Father, “SON” and Holy Ghost, you are baptizing them into Jesus. . Jesus is the “Son.” Since this was a command of Jesus and He said do it this way, it makes no difference if you say they are “titles” or names. Obviously, Jesus did not care or...

Colossians 2:2 also says Both of the Father and of Christ. That’s 2 and there is nothing in the context to suggest just 1 person. The fact that there is a “Godhead” shows there is more than 1 personality. Why call it a Godhead” if it’s just one person? Colossians 3:1 says Christ is sitting...

That does not answer the question. A dodge?

About that divine revelation—Hebrews 1 says that God spoke to people IN TIMES PAST in various ways; visions, dreams, divine revelations, through prophecies, etc. BUT NOW… In these “last days”, He speaks to us through His Son. The New Tesrament is the last will and testament of Jesus Christ...