Gospel Confusion...

[LightBearer316]

When you get water baptized you are acknowledging that Jesus is your lord, which is what Paul said is a requirement for salvation. For all we know verbal acknowledgement may have been a part of water baptism then

That’s a clever but inaccurate conflation of two separate things — the inner confession of faith and the outward act of baptism.
That’s a stretch Scripture never makes.

Paul did not say baptism is the confession — he said confession with the mouth and belief in the heart result in salvation (Romans 10:9–10).
The Greek term used for confess (ὁμολογέω, homologeō) means to agree, declare, or openly affirm — and Paul connects it explicitly to the mouth, not water.

If verbal confession “might have been part of baptism,” that’s speculation — not Scripture.
What is clear from Scripture is that:

• Confession precedes baptism. The Ethiopian eunuch first declared, “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God,” then Philip baptized him (Acts 8:36–38).
• Faith brings salvation before baptism. In Acts 10:43–48, Cornelius and his household received the Holy Spirit while Peter was still preaching — before anyone touched the water.
• Paul separates baptism from the gospel itself. “Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel” (1 Cor 1:17).

If baptism were the act that constitutes confession or salvation, Paul’s statement would be impossible — he’d be preaching only half the gospel.

So no — baptism follows salvation as its outward testimony, not its instrument.
It’s an expression of obedience, not the cause of regeneration.

Grace and Peace

 

[GWH]

Regeneration doesn't come until one is born from above in the spirit. Peter seems to be saying that happens with water baptism

Yes but there are teachings of Paul that need to be harmonized with Peter.

 

[LightBearer316]

You just contradicted yourself!
You said, “Water baptism is an outward testimony of faith,” and then immediately claimed Paul said it’s “a requirement for salvation.” But Paul’s own words in Romans 10:9–10 make no mention of baptism — only faith and confession.
“That 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.”

That’s the clearest, Spirit-inspired explanation of how salvation occurs:
belief in the heart and confession with the mouth — not baptism in water.
Grace and Peace

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Yes but there are teachings of Paul that need to be harmonized with Peter.

True, but we can't assume that they both said things exactly the same way. Paul doesn't mention water baptism in his conditions for salvation, but we all know that it was always part of his personal conversions.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

That’s a clever but inaccurate conflation of two separate things — the inner confession of faith and the outward act of baptism.
That’s a stretch Scripture never makes.

It's not an inner confession of faith. It's inward belief and outward expression of that belief

 

[LightBearer316]

It's not an inner confession of faith. It's inward belief and outward expression of that belief

That’s actually where you are subtly changing what Paul said!
That’s still not what Romans 10 says.
Paul draws a line between inward belief and outward confession, not between inward belief and baptism.

“If thou shalt confess with thy mouth the Lord Jesus, and shalt believe in thine heart… thou shalt be saved.” (Romans 10:9)​

The confession is verbal (“with thy mouth”), not ceremonial (“with water”). Baptism is certainly an outward expression of faith, but it’s never equated with the confession Paul describes.

In Acts 8, the Ethiopian eunuch confessed first — “I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God” — then he was baptized. His confession wasn’t the water; it was his words of faith.

So yes, faith produces both confession and obedience (like baptism), but Scripture never merges them into the same act. The cause is belief; the effect is confession and obedience.

You are trying to blur the line between faith and baptism — a subtle move toward baptismal regeneration (the belief that salvation is completed or secured through the act of water baptism).

Grace and Peace

 

[LightBearer316]

It's not an inner confession of faith. It's inward belief and outward expression of that belief

ChristRoseFromTheDead is trying to blur the line between faith and baptism — a subtle move toward baptismal regeneration (the belief that salvation is completed or secured through the act of water baptism).

Here’s what’s happening step by step:

1. Redefining Paul’s Words
He’s shifting confession with the mouth (Romans 10:9–10) into baptism with the body.
That’s a theological sleight of hand — Paul said mouth, not water.
By calling baptism the “outward expression,” he’s trying to make it sound identical to confession — but that’s not how Paul used those terms.

2. Smuggling Works Into Faith
Once baptism becomes the “outward confession,” it’s a small step to saying you’re not saved until you’re baptized — turning an act of obedience into a condition for salvation.
That’s exactly what Paul was warning against throughout Romans and Galatians: mixing grace with ritual or law.

3. Appealing to Emotion and Ambiguity
By saying “for all we know verbal acknowledgement may have been part of baptism,” he’s relying on speculation, not Scripture.
This lets him sound plausible while avoiding clear contradictions — but it’s an argument from silence, not truth.

4. End Goal
He’s likely trying to push the idea that baptism is inseparable from salvation — not necessarily claiming “water saves,” but implying you’re not truly saved until you’re baptized.
That’s classic baptismal regeneration under softer language.

When someone’s motives aren’t to seek truth but to win a debate or push an agenda, the discussion quickly becomes circular. They’ll keep redefining terms, shifting contexts, and refusing to let Scripture speak plainly — because the goal isn’t understanding, it’s control of the narrative. Basically goes on and on in a circle... The motive is disengenuous.

Grace and Peace

 

[GWH]

True, but we can't assume that they both said things exactly the same way. Paul doesn't mention water baptism in his conditions for salvation, but we all know that it was always part of his personal conversions.

Maybe, but we can be assured that the apostle who recognized the fallacy of viewing physical circumcision as salvific
would not turn right around and view the rite of WB as such. (Col. 2:11-13)

 

[LightBearer316]

Maybe, but we can be assured that the apostle who recognized the fallacy of viewing physical circumcision as salvific
would not turn right around and view the rite of WB as such. (Col. 2:11-13)

If Paul, the apostle who warned against treating physical circumcision as something that brings salvation, clearly recognized that such rituals don’t save us (see Colossians 2:11-13), then it would make no sense for him to turn around and teach that water baptism saves us.
FACTS!
Grace and Peace

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Maybe, but we can be assured that the apostle who recognized the fallacy of viewing physical circumcision as salvific
would not turn right around and view the rite of WB as such. (Col. 2:11-13)

Why not? Circumcision was required under the old covenant, so it could be argued that spiritual circumcision happens at baptism, and is therefore required under the new covenant. One is the putting off of flesh that makes the man organ unclean and the other is the putting off of the guilt of sin that makes a heart unclean.

 

[Inquisitor]

Some common sayings among many believers are:

“There's only one gospel throughout all the Bible, and so everyone is saved in the exact same way.”
“Jesus, along with His 12 apostles, and along with Paul, all preached the same gospel message.”
“All that happened was Paul came along later and continued Peter's ministry gospel and ministry, but to the Gentiles.”

Those claims sound very biblical to many, but are the assumptions behind these claims correct?

1. To whom did Jesus and His 12 disciples preach?
2. What was their gospel message?
3. Paul was the apostle to....whom?
4. What was Paul's gospel that he preached?

Please share your thoughts on these questions.

MM

Paul taught a very simple gospel.

1 Corinthians 2:2
For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.

Me winner man.

 

[Ouch]

That kind of reply is dismissive rather than substantive — it’s not engaging your biblical reasoning at all.

Here’s what’s really going on:

He’s shifting from doctrine to accusation — implying I'm unsaved or lacking the Holy Spirit instead of addressing the Scripture I presented. This is a rhetorical deflection: when someone can’t refute the text, they question the person’s spiritual standing (“you need the Holy Ghost,” “best of luck,” etc.).

Notice that he offered no scriptural correction, only a tone of rebuke — which shows he has no real counterargument.


I appreciate your concern, but my trust is in Jesus Christ alone — not in myself, my words, or any book.
The Scriptures I shared speak for themselves: salvation is by grace through faith in the Lord who fills every believer with His Spirit at the moment of faith (Ephesians 1:13).


When you wrote, “you will not enter Heaven without Jesus filling you with the Holy Ghost,” I completely agree — that’s why the apostles taught that the Spirit is given when we believe:

“In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise.” (Ephesians 1:13)​

That sealing happens the moment of faith — not after baptism, not by human merit, but by His grace.

I’m not trying to “convince those who don’t know,” but to let God’s Word interpret itself.
I wan to see people saved through Christ alone.
May His Word — not our emotions — have the final say.

Grace and peace to you.

You can't just pick verse you like, and throw others in the trash, and change the ones to what you want them to say.

How can anyone have a debate when we don't have a good foundation?

You believe what JESUS says in John 3:16 but not in John 3:5

Did you notice John 3:16???

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Notice it says "SHOULD NOT PERISH" if you OBEY HIS word you should not but so many do not and will parish.

For instance

Ephesians 1
King James Version
1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:

2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;

9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.

13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,


Notice Paul is speaking to one of the church's he started in verse 1.

Now lets move to verse 13, he is speaking to him church and about what happen to them in the past.

HE IS NOT TALKING TO THE UNSAVED.

SO YOU'RE WRONG, a person does not get sealed with the Holy Ghost the second they believe!!

So your wrong about that, you alter GODS word you need to repent, get baptized in JESUS name and pray for JESUS to fill you like he did in Acts 2, 8, 10 and 19.

I bet he hasn't.

Satan's plan, keep them out of the water, if they get in the water keep JESUS name out of it.

 

[GWH]

Why not? Circumcision was required under the old covenant, so it could be argued that spiritual circumcision happens at baptism, and is therefore required under the new covenant. One is the putting off of flesh that makes the man organ unclean and the other is the putting off of the guilt of sin that makes a heart unclean.

Yes, and Paul clarified that it was faith, not PC, that was salvific even in the OT stage of revelation.
It's time to move on CRFTD! (Read Heb. 7:18-10:1)

 

[Ouch]

Is it a sin not to be baptised in the name of Jesus only but baptised in the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit?

When JESUS told HIS disciple to baptized "in the name of" the father, the son and the Holy Ghost they knew who JESUS was and obeyed him. Every recorded act of baptism was done in JESUS name.

 

[GWH]

Paul taught a very simple gospel.

1 Corinthians 2:2
For I determined to know nothing among you except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.

Me winner man.

Yes, some people over think it, but one should be able to explain what "knowing Jesus Christ as crucified" implies.
(5 points :^)

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

Yes, and Paul clarified that it was faith, not PC, that was salvific even in the OT stage of revelation.
It's time to move on CRFTD! (Read Heb. 7:18-10:1)

It most definitely was required under the OT. A man was cut off from Israel and the promises if he was uncircumcised.

 

[LightBearer316]

Why not? Circumcision was required under the old covenant, so it could be argued that spiritual circumcision happens at baptism, and is therefore required under the new covenant. One is the putting off of flesh that makes the man organ unclean and the other is the putting off of the guilt of sin that makes a heart unclean.

This is not just a difference of interpretation; it’s a difference of posture toward Scripture.

What you’re seeing is someone who uses Scripture as support for a pre-set idea, rather than submitting to what Scripture actually says in context. It’s the same tactic false teachers used in Paul’s day — blending truth with speculation to make it sound spiritual or deep, while subtly undermining the sufficiency of faith in Christ.

Notice the pattern:

• He adds to Scripture (“for all we know verbal acknowledgment may have been part of baptism”).
• He redefines clear terms (turning “confession with the mouth” into “water baptism”).
• He shifts symbolic language into salvific function (claiming baptism does what only faith is said to do).
• And now he’s spiritualizing Colossians 2 to make baptism the new circumcision, even though Paul’s entire argument is that salvation is without hands — i.e., not by physical acts.

That’s not careful exegesis; that’s theological agenda-driven reasoning.
And when someone repeatedly twists context like that, it shows they don’t truly take Scripture at face value — they’re using it, not obeying it.

Paul warned about exactly this:

“Handling the word of God deceitfully…” (2 Cor. 4:2)​

“Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth.” (2 Tim. 3:7)​

I've done my part by defending the text faithfully and graciously. Beyond that, the wise path is to step back and let the Word speak for itself.

 

[LightBearer316]

You can't just pick verse you like, and throw others in the trash, and change the ones to what you want them to say.

How can anyone have a debate when we don't have a good foundation?

You believe what JESUS says in John 3:16 but not in John 3:5

Did you notice John 3:16???

John 3:16 For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have everlasting life.

Notice it says "SHOULD NOT PERISH" if you OBEY HIS word you should not but so many do not and will parish.

For instance

Ephesians 1
King James Version
1 Paul, an apostle of Jesus Christ by the will of God, to the saints which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus:

2 Grace be to you, and peace, from God our Father, and from the Lord Jesus Christ.

3 Blessed be the God and Father of our Lord Jesus Christ, who hath blessed us with all spiritual blessings in heavenly places in Christ:

4 According as he hath chosen us in him before the foundation of the world, that we should be holy and without blame before him in love:

5 Having predestinated us unto the adoption of children by Jesus Christ to himself, according to the good pleasure of his will,

6 To the praise of the glory of his grace, wherein he hath made us accepted in the beloved.

7 In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace;

8 Wherein he hath abounded toward us in all wisdom and prudence;

9 Having made known unto us the mystery of his will, according to his good pleasure which he hath purposed in himself:

10 That in the dispensation of the fulness of times he might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven, and which are on earth; even in him:

11 In whom also we have obtained an inheritance, being predestinated according to the purpose of him who worketh all things after the counsel of his own will:

12 That we should be to the praise of his glory, who first trusted in Christ.

13 In whom ye also trusted, after that ye heard the word of truth, the gospel of your salvation: in whom also after that ye believed, ye were sealed with that holy Spirit of promise,


Notice Paul is speaking to one of the church's he started in verse 1.

Now lets move to verse 13, he is speaking to him church and about what happen to them in the past.

HE IS NOT TALKING TO THE UNSAVED.

SO YOU'RE WRONG, a person does not get sealed with the Holy Ghost the second they believe!!

So your wrong about that, you alter GODS word you need to repent, get baptized in JESUS name and pray for JESUS to fill you like he did in Acts 2, 8, 10 and 19.

I bet he hasn't.

Satan's plan, keep them out of the water, if they get in the water keep JESUS name out of it.

We need Scripture, not speculation. You said I “pick verses,” but I’m simply letting the text speak in context.

1) John 3:5 (“born of water and of the Spirit”).
Jesus rebukes Nicodemus for not knowing the OT (John 3:10). He’s pointing to Ezekiel 36:25–27—God’s promise to “sprinkle clean water” and give a “new spirit.” That’s cleansing + new heart by the Spirit, not a ritual doing the saving. Jesus immediately explains the point: “That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit” (John 3:6). The saving agent is the Spirit, received by faith (John 3:14–18).

2) Ephesians 1:13—when are we sealed?
Paul gives the conversion sequence:
“Heard the word of truth… believed… were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise.” He’s writing to believers about what happened when they believed—that doesn’t make the sequence untrue for the unsaved; it describes how anyone is saved (compare Gal 3:2, 14). The Spirit is received by hearing with faith, not by water.

3) Acts’ “patterns.”
Acts shows varied timing (2, 8, 10, 19) in a transitional era; doctrine is clarified in the epistles. Where timing differs, Scripture still teaches faith is the instrument:

• Cornelius received the Holy Ghost while hearing and before baptism (Acts 10:43–48).
• Paul: “Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel” (1 Cor 1:17). If water were required to be saved, that statement would be impossible.
  

4) “Should not perish.”
The same chapter says, “He that believeth on him is not condemned” (John 3:18) and elsewhere, “He that heareth… and believeth… hath everlasting life” (John 5:24). Salvation rests on Christ’s finished work, received by faith, not on completing a rite.

Bottom line: the new birth is “without hands” (Col 2:11), the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Ghost (Titus 3:5). Baptism is an obedient sign that follows; it is not the cause of forgiveness or the Spirit.

John 3:5 points Nicodemus back to Ezekiel 36:25–27—cleansing and new heart by the Spirit, not a rite that causes salvation. Paul’s sequence is plain: having heard the gospel and believed, you were sealed with the Holy Spirit (Eph 1:13; cf. Gal 3:2,14). Acts shows varied timing in a transitional moment (2, 8, 10, 19), but never makes water the instrument of regeneration—indeed, Cornelius received the Spirit before baptism (Acts 10:44–48), and Paul says Christ sent him not to baptize but to preach the gospel (1 Cor 1:17). Salvation is by grace through faith; baptism is the sign, not the source (Titus 3:5; Col 2:11).

Grace and peace.

 

[ChristRoseFromTheDead]

And now he’s spiritualizing Colossians 2 to make baptism the new circumcision, even though Paul’s entire argument is that salvation is without hands — i.e., not by physical acts.

Water baptism doesn't put off the flesh of the heart, but it is an appeal, or plea, or petition to God to do so. In this verse Peter says water baptism saves us.

Which antitype, water baptism, also now saves us. Not laying aside filth of flesh, but a petition of a good conscience towards God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 3:21​

 

[LightBearer316]

Water baptism doesn't put off the flesh of the heart, but it is an appeal, or plea, or petition to God to do so. In this verse Peter says water baptism saves us.

Which antitype, water baptism, also now saves us. Not laying aside filth of flesh, but a petition of a good conscience towards God, through the resurrection of Jesus Christ, 1 Peter 3:21​

That is a common misunderstanding of 1 Peter 3:21, but Peter actually explains what he means right in the same sentence.

“The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ.” (1 Peter 3:21 KJV)​

​

Peter is careful to say what kind of baptism he’s talking about—not the external washing (“not the putting away of the filth of the flesh”), but the inward appeal or “answer of a good conscience toward God.”

That word answer (eperōtēma) in Greek means pledge, request, or appeal—it’s the heart’s response of faith.
So Peter is describing salvation through the reality baptism symbolizes—union with Christ in His death and resurrection (“by the resurrection of Jesus Christ”).

If water itself saved, he wouldn’t have added the clarification that it’s not about washing the flesh.
Just as Noah’s family was saved by being in the ark, not by the water that drowned the world, we are saved by being in Christ, not by the water that represents that union.

Basically....

• Peter uses baptism as a figure—a symbol of the inner reality of salvation.
• The saving element is the resurrection of Christ, received by faith, not by the physical act of immersion.
• The verse explicitly denies that it’s about outward washing.

So 1 Peter 3:21 actually supports your point, not his. It shows baptism is a symbolic appeal of faith, not the instrument of salvation.

Grace and Peace