John 3 and Water Baptism in the Ministry of Jesus Christ

[hornetguy]

““Can anyone withhold water for baptizing these people, who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?””
‭‭Acts‬ ‭10‬:‭47‬ ‭ESV‬‬
https://bible.com/bible/59/act.10.47.ESV

Again, you are making this say something that, in context, it is not saying.
This would be equivalent to saying "I passed my driving test at 16... and my friend George passed it just as I did" It doesn't mean we both answered the test questions in exactly the same way, or made every turn and stop exactly the same way. It means that we both passed the test the same way.... by taking the class and the driving test. One of us didn't get ours through mail-order. We got them in the same way.

And in the larger context, you are still missing the point that this was a ONE TIME HAPPENING. It was for a specific purpose.
IF this was the "normal" way to receive the Spirit, why does not EVERY story of conversion in the NT show us that?

You are trying to make scripture say what you want it to say...

 

[JBTN]

Peter said there was not one distinction in the way that the Holy Spirit was received by the House of Cornelius, the Apostles, and the elders. He could have said it in a way that would have allowed what you are saying, but he didn’t. If the conversion of the House of Cornelius was not “the norm” that would mean it was distinctively different.

 

[Komentaja]

I doubt it. I've been saying exactly this for a long time, and yet there are still those who preach that baptism isn't integral to the gospel. But the fact that you're saying it too may indicate progress.

It definitely is part of the Gospel, it is the second step:

Matthew 28:19-20
"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: and, lo, I am with you alway, even unto the end of the world. Amen."

 

[GWH]

The Apostle Paul was still preaching the same message presented at Pentecost some 20+ years later. This account provides evidence that the same requirements pertain to everyone and will continue to do so until Jesus returns.

Acts 19:2-6 (Disciples who did not realize they had to water baptized in Jesus name)
"He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? Paul's question indicates people can believe but have yet to receive the Holy Ghost. This truth is confirmed in the Samaritans account as well. (Acts 8:12-18)

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. And all the men were about twelve.

And for years afterward, Paul continued sharing the truth with both Jews and Gentiles:

"And he went into the synagogue, and spake boldly for the space of three months, disputing and persuading the things concerning the kingdom of God.
But when divers were hardened, and believed not, but spake evil of that way before the multitude, he departed from them, and separated the disciples, disputing daily in the school of one Tyrannus.

And this continued by the space of two years; so that all they which dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord Jesus, both Jews and Greeks." Acts 19:8-10

"

Re "Acts 19:2-6 (Disciples who did not realize they had to water baptized in Jesus name)
"He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? Paul's question indicates people can believe but have yet to receive the Holy Ghost. This truth is confirmed in the Samaritans account as well. (Acts 8:12-18) ":

An alternate explanation is that ignorance of GW limits the HS.
In this case "they" had not learned Rom.5:6-8, 1Cor.12:13 and Eph.4:4,
so they did not realize there is only one salvific baptism by the HS
into the body of Christ at the moment of faith in Jesus as Lord,
so water baptism (like circumcision) must symbolize that dynamic.

 

[GWH]

The story that Peter gave as the definitive answer to the question of "what do we, as sinners, need to do to repent from our sins and be saved?"
That instruction was established at Pentecost, and is the understood/assumed beginning of joining the body of Christ. All other discussions of salvation after that point are based on this known/understood "first step".
Of COURSE salvation depends on belief.
Of COURSE salvation depends on faith.
Those two things, which logically come after hearing about Jesus and his sacrifice for us, are the steps preceding repentance and baptism, which is the culmination.... at which point, having obeyed God's command, we receive the free gift of salvation, and the Spirit of God comes and indwells us, as new believers. ......

It is not just one thing... it's not just belief.... even demons believe. It's not just faith...

"have you received the Holy Spirit?" "we didn't even know there WAS such a thing"..... the immediate first question was "whose baptism were you baptized with?" the answer "John's baptism.... " which did NOT include receiving the Spirit... so, they were baptized in the name of Jesus... and received the Spirit...

So, you understand Peter as contradicting NT doctrinal writings including Acts 16:30-31, 1Cor.12:13, Rom.5:6-8 and Eph.4:4?

 

[Pilgrimshope]

again, for the 150th time (at least)

The story of Cornelius' family is NOT the norm. It was a one-time happening, for a SPECIFIC purpose. It happened so that the Jewish Christians would see for themselves that Gentiles were accepted by God, and that they (Jewish Christians) should NOT prevent them from being baptized, which apparently they were doing.

I mean, read the whole story of Peter and his vision on the rooftop.... the WHOLE story is about the revelation to the Jews that Gentiles are also acceptable to God...

God let his Spirit enter Cornelius' family to PROVE this point. Then what happened? They were immediately baptized. This is NOT the normal sequence of events... it was SPECIAL.

“The story of Cornelius' family is NOT the norm. It was a one-time happening, for a SPECIFIC purpose. It happened so that the Jewish Christians would see for themselves that Gentiles were accepted by God, and that they (Jewish Christians) should NOT prevent them from being baptized, which apparently they were doing. “

And what proof in scripture do you have that this is the “ norm “

How many times is this order shown ?

“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.”
‭‭Acts‬ ‭2:38‬ ‭KJV‬‬

and this is not the norm ?

“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 ‭10:43-48‬ ‭KJV‬‬

if you have some biblical reasoning I’d like to hear it also . It doesn’t say they were forbidding baptism for gentiles there Peter asked them “ can anyone forbid baptism because they have received the holt ghost like we have ?”

then he commands then to be baptized in Jesus name afterwards . Baptism isn’t a proscription it’s an act of faith . The promise of the holy ghost is solely based on who believes the gospel like those men who hears and believes and received the spirit


a you have the same right as everyone to your opinion though I’m just wondering if you have any biblical reason to come to your conclusion there it doesn’t seem like there’s one particular order that it needs to happen in , but like you have your opinion , that’s only my opinion because it clearly happens both ways in scripture

I don’t see any reason to say which would be the “ norm “ or if there is even a singular “ norm “

baptism has its place and function receiving the Holy Ghost isn’t why we get baptized belief brings the spirit

 

[hornetguy]

So, you understand Peter as contradicting NT doctrinal writings including Acts 16:30-31, 1Cor.12:13, Rom.5:6-8 and Eph.4:4?

Absolutely not....

Acts 16 was not saying "all you have to do is believe".... it was a statement that belief comes first. What happened then? They went to his house and preached Jesus to them.... so that they COULD choose to believe.... and they were immediately baptized... he and his whole household.... belief is absolutely necessary for salvation..

1 Corinthians is describing how we are also immersed in the Spirit when we are baptized in Jesus' name... the baptism that Jesus brought is different from John's baptism, because it brings us the indwelling Spirit.

Romans 5.... ? Being justified through our faith? Of course... we cannot obey God's directives if we don't have faith... faith is the precursor to obedience... it all works together.... IF you have faith, you WILL obey God's instruction. If you choose to not obey, do you really have faith? This all is still based on the initial instructions by Peter at Pentecost. That was the inauguration of the church of Jesus... first question, "what must we do?" Then the straightforward answer... Repent and be baptized... All the discussions of being saved through faith, or belief are based on the assumption that the "repent and be baptized" has already been done... we do the repent and be baptized because of our belief, and we have faith that what Jesus tells is is true...

Ephesians tells us that Jesus' baptism, that brings us the Spirit is THE baptism. The baptism of John won't do it... any other baptism won't do it. Jesus taught baptism by immersion in water... everyone in the first century KNEW that. Peter and the apostles were pretty plain about the importance of baptism in water. Why would they insist on that, if "baptism" only meant a spiritual thing? Peter told us that baptism by immersion in water BRINGS us the Spirit, and our "immersion" into Him...

 

[Wansvic]

Re "Acts 19:2-6 (Disciples who did not realize they had to water baptized in Jesus name)
"He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? Paul's question indicates people can believe but have yet to receive the Holy Ghost. This truth is confirmed in the Samaritans account as well. (Acts 8:12-18) ":

An alternate explanation is that ignorance of GW limits the HS.
In this case "they" had not learned Rom.5:6-8, 1Cor.12:13 and Eph.4:4,
so they did not realize there is only one salvific baptism by the HS
into the body of Christ at the moment of faith in Jesus as Lord,
so water baptism (like circumcision) must symbolize that dynamic.

Actually Paul wrote 1 Corintians during his time in Ephesus on his third journey. This indicates what he told the 12 Ephesians in verses 1-6 still applied at the time he wrote Corinthians. Note as well that Ephesians was written to the very people he instructed earlier in Acts 19:1-10. Also, Paul spread the very same message in that area for 2 years to both Jews and Gentiles. (see verses 8-10) And Romans was written while Paul was in Corinth during his third journey. As such, the idea Paul's message changed is unfounded. He was still preaching the same message some 20+ years after Pentecost. Keep in mind Jesus prophesied concerning this truth. He said that repentance and remission of sin would be preached in his name (water baptism) among ALL nations and would BEGIN in Jerusalem. (Luke 24:46-17) This happened, and will continue to do so until He returns.

If it were customary to receive the Holy Ghost upon believing the gospel, Paul would not have asked those he perceived to be believers if they had received the Holy Ghost yet.

Consider what scripture actually reveals:
1. The 120 in the upper room believed in Jesus well BEFORE receiving the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:4, 33)
2. The Apostle Peter explained how those who ALREADY believed in Jesus could receive the Holy Ghost. (Acts 2:36-42)
3. The Samaritans who ALREADY believed in Jesus and obeyed the command to be water baptized in His name did not receive the Holy Ghost until days later. Acts 8:12-18
4. The Gentiles received the Holy Ghost upon believing in Jesus as confirmation that they were accepted of God, and afterward obeyed the command to be water baptized in the name of Jesus. (Acts 10:43-48)
5. The Ephesus disciples did not receive the Holy Ghost until Paul laid hands upon them AFTER they believed in Jesus and were water baptized in His name. (Acts 19:1-7...)
6. Jesus Himself instructed people to ASK the Father for the Holy Ghost. This indicates receiving the Holy Ghost does not automatically occur upon belief. (Luke 11:13)

 

[studier]

faith is the precursor to obedience... it all works together.... IF you have faith, you WILL obey God's instruction.

I'd take this further; Genuine Faith is also Obedience.

 

[GWH]

Absolutely not....

Acts 16 was not saying "all you have to do is believe".... it was a statement that belief comes first. What happened then? They went to his house and preached Jesus to them.... so that they COULD choose to believe.... and they were immediately baptized... he and his whole household.... belief is absolutely necessary for salvation..

1 Corinthians is describing how we are also immersed in the Spirit when we are baptized in Jesus' name... the baptism that Jesus brought is different from John's baptism, because it brings us the indwelling Spirit.

Romans 5.... ? Being justified through our faith? Of course... we cannot obey God's directives if we don't have faith... faith is the precursor to obedience... it all works together.... IF you have faith, you WILL obey God's instruction. If you choose to not obey, do you really have faith? This all is still based on the initial instructions by Peter at Pentecost. That was the inauguration of the church of Jesus... first question, "what must we do?" Then the straightforward answer... Repent and be baptized... All the discussions of being saved through faith, or belief are based on the assumption that the "repent and be baptized" has already been done... we do the repent and be baptized because of our belief, and we have faith that what Jesus tells is is true...

Ephesians tells us that Jesus' baptism, that brings us the Spirit is THE baptism. The baptism of John won't do it... any other baptism won't do it. Jesus taught baptism by immersion in water... everyone in the first century KNEW that. Peter and the apostles were pretty plain about the importance of baptism in water. Why would they insist on that, if "baptism" only meant a spiritual thing? Peter told us that baptism by immersion in water BRINGS us the Spirit, and our "immersion" into Him...

Well I think it makes no sense to think that the NT would substitute WB for circumcision except as an optional rite signifying SB in both cases. Nor do I believe we are not saved between believing and getting WB.