Prax, please explain the above post. I'm totally lost, seriously. I think I lost something in translation somewhere.
I thought she was saying that John was baptizing people in Jesus name. Is that not what she was saying?
No, that's not what I was saying. I was saying Jesus and his disciples baptized but I'm not sure that they baptized according to John's baptism or in the same manner as John.
__________________
His banner over me is LOVE.... My soul followeth hard after thee....Love one another with a pure heart fervently. Jesus saith unto her, Said I not unto thee, that, if thou wouldest believe, thou shouldest see the glory of God?
To be a servant of God, it will cost us our total commitment to God, and God alone. His burden must be our burden... Sis Alvear
No, that's not what I was saying. I was saying Jesus and his disciples baptized but I'm not sure that they baptized according to John's baptism or in the same manner as John.
Jesus baptized nobody but His disciples did. From what I read, it was referred to as John's baptism. There is no recording of people being baptized in Jesus name before the ascension.
__________________
I've gone and done it now! I'm on Facebook!!!
Your last statement is a typical strawman fallacy. Nobody that believes in Water baptism in Jesus name believes there is any value in the water itself. However let's note that after Cornelius and his household were baptized with the Spirit Peter commanded, not recommended but commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord and they obeyed.
Are you advocating that tap water has redemptive value? Regeneration by water? Water baptism under the law was used to "cleanse oneself" from the impurities everytime a person became unclean. Under the law they baptized themselves many times, over and over and over again. It was only natural for Peter to tell them to do so. Even after Peter was converted, he still attempted to hold the new believers hostage to many of the traditions under the law, thereby being confronted by Paul.
Under the 3 step premise; Since original baptism washes away sin, wouldn't we have to be rebaptized over again once a new sin is committed after the original baptism?
Would you not agree that under the "new covenant", the blood of Jesus cleanes us from all sin?
In whom we have redemption through his blood, the forgiveness of sins, according to the riches of his grace; Ephesians 1:7
And, having made peace through the blood of his cross, by him to reconcile all things unto himself; by him, I say, whether they be things in earth, or things in heaven. Col. 1:20
Neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by his own blood he entered in once into the holy place, having obtained eternal redemption for us. Heb. 9:12
But if we walk in the light, as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another, and the blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us from all sin.
1 John 1:7
You know the doctrine of the blood redemption and there are many more scriptures to prove that. So those should suffice.
Now I know the argument is that the blood is applied at water baptism. Truth is there are no scriptures to prove that either. When the blood is applied is up to Jesus, since He is the one who died for us and He alone can know our hearts.
What happens to a believer if they are filled with the H.G. and never baptized and die? Are you saying they are lost, having the H.G.? Many 3 steppers say "God gave it to them on loan". (nonsense)
Fast forward to Jerusalem in Acts 15: when the law of Moses was being used to yoke the new believers...Peter's words...
So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He did to us, 9and made no distinction between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.10Now therefore, why do you test God by putting a yoke on the neck of the disciples which neither our fathers nor we were able to bear? 11But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they.”
James the brother of the Lord spoke up and they all agreed to write a letter to send with Paul and Barnabus concerning what would be required of the new believers, even the gentile nation...this is the letter.
Since we have heard that some who went out from us have troubled you with words, unsettling your souls, £saying, “You must be circumcised and keep the law”—to whom we gave no such commandment—25it seemed good to us, being assembled with one accord, to send chosen men to you with our beloved Barnabas and Paul, 26men who have risked their lives for the name of our Lord Jesus Christ. 27We have therefore sent Judas and Silas, who will also report the same things by word of mouth. 28For it seemed good to the Holy Spirit, and to us, to lay upon you no greater burden than these necessary things: 29that you abstain from things offered to idols, from blood, from things strangled, and from sexual immorality.£ If you keep yourselves from these, you will do well.
Farewell.
If we are going to operate under the law even, we should abstain from eating meat that has been strangled...so much for grandmas fried chicken...
Never was there a mention of water baptism? Why? Why did Paul consider water baptism non-essential to his personal ministry if water saved you?
For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. 18For the preaching of the cross is to them that perish foolishness; but unto us which are saved it is the power of God. 1 Cor. 1:17
Paul did not consider the message of baptism to be the Gospel. The good news of Jesus was the cross.
When Paul was converted, he went and baptized himself calling on the name of the Lord.
Couple scriptures to consider.
1 Cor. 1:12
Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ. 13Is Christ divided? was Paul crucified for you? or were ye baptized in the name of Paul?
14I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; 15Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. 16And I baptized also the household of Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other.
I am not saying baptism isn't important and shouldn't be done. Every believer should be baptized! However, water does not save us, neither does it redeem us. Even if baptism is performed and faith is not attached, it has no value either. We know that "whatsoever is not of faith is sin".
You cannot assume Jesus was referring to water baptizm in his conversation with nicodemus...the water meant a natural birth, he followed up immediately and explained what he was talking about...that which is born of the flesh.
Again it is the word of God that gives us birth and the spirit of God that gives life. "In Him was life."
God bless.
Dan, I'm going to have to say that though the Greek for remission is the same as forgiveness, the Bible definition of this word doesn't exactly mean what we think when we say the word, forgive. Baptism in water is referred to as a washing, a cleansing, a blotting out, a circumcision, remission, forgiveness of sins. It's not just a grant of pardon but an actual REMOVAL of the body of sins from our hearts, a purging of our conscience by the blood of Christ. Something in reality takes place. These are not figures of speech but a real event, as real as a circumcision made with hands.
Forgiveness is the mental, emotional and/or spiritual process of ceasing to feel resentment, indignation or anger against another person for a perceived offence, difference or mistake, or ceasing to demand punishment or restitution[1]. Wiki
1. to grant pardon for or remission of (an offense, debt, etc.); absolve.
2. to give up all claim on account of; remit (a debt, obligation, etc.).
3. to grant pardon to (a person).
4. to cease to feel resentment against: to forgive one's enemies.
5. to cancel an indebtedness or liability of: to forgive the interest owed on a loan.
–verb (used without object) 6. to pardon an offense or an offender.
dictionary.com
1 John is written to saints, those who have already been baptized in Jesus name.
There is so much here that is faulty ... but I'll start w/ the last part ...
It is one of the many pat answers rehearsed by many 3 steppers when faced with New Birth doctrine they can do little to refute ....
Who will argue that 1 John, like other letters, and even the Gospels {Luke} and Acts are written ... or addressed to believers.
Ironically, in your discourse to defend baptismal regeneration you use letters to the Romans and Colossians to support the erroneous sacramentalist interpretation which proports our spiritual circumcision/New Birth/regeneration takes place, or is partially completed, during a properly administered water baptism.
The letters to believers are not only for the spiritually mature or those with with the PAJC soteriological secret decoder ring. These letters also address the when and how of our New Birth in many instances and are, like all of God's Word ... in perfect harmony.
1 John was written to believers, young and old ... and often these letters were also read in churches where seasoned Christians, new converts and the unconverted would listen to them being read aloud.. Timeless biblical principles permeate throughout ... and to assume that the writers "forgot" or "assumed that all knew what they were talking about" by failing to mention a 3 step process is to underestimate the writers' intents when addressing many of the issues they sought to explain or not fully guaging the audience.
Again, the when and how of our New Birth is found in the Epsitles,... and this is especially true about 1 John ... I will show how later.
One of the main topics ... especially found in 1 John is the issue of our New Birth ... This is evident in the various times John speaks about being "born of God".He teaches about the when and how of our regeneration is also in this book and how the believer should live because of his/her New Birth.
The main impetus behind John writing this specific book was to combat the heretical teachings of Gnosticism that was seeping thru the church during his day. One writer describing this heresy states:
One of the most dangerous heresies of the first two centuries of the church was Gnosticism. Its central teaching was that spirit is entirely good and matter is entirely evil. From this unbiblical dualism flowed five important errors:
The human body, which is matter, is therefore evil. It is to be contrasted with God, who is wholly spirit and therefore good.
Salvation is the escape from the body, achieved not by faith in Christ but by special knowledge (the Greek word for “knowledge” is gnosis, hence Gnosticism).
Christ’s true humanity was denied in two ways: (1) Some said that Christ only seemed to have a body, a view called Docetism, from the Greek dokeo (“to seem”), and (2) others said that the divine Christ joined the man Jesus at baptism and left him before he died, a view called Cerinthianism, after its most prominent spokesman, Cerinthus. This view is the background of much of 1 John (see 1:1; 2:22; 4:2–3 and notes).
Since the body was considered evil, it was to be treated harshly. This ascetic form of Gnosticism is the background of part of the letter to the Colossians (see Col 2:21,23 and notes).
Paradoxically, this dualism also led to licentiousness. The reasoning was that, since matter—and not the breaking of God’s law (1Jn 3:4)—was considered evil, breaking his law was of no moral consequence.
Consequently, John wrote this letter with two basic purposes in mind: (1) to expose false teachers (see 2:26 and note) and (2) to give believers assurance of salvation (see 5:13 and note). In keeping with his intention to combat Gnostic teachers, John specifically struck at their total lack of morality (3:8–10); and by giving eyewitness testimony to the incarnation, he sought to confirm his readers’ belief in the incarnate Christ (1:3). Success in this would give the writer joy (1:4).
The same writer of the Gospel of John begins this book in the same manner he did in the first book of his gospel. ... Speaking of the incarnate Christ who has made himself manifest as the Word and Light of the World.
In 1 John, he touches on other themes found his gospels, too. In the first chapter of his first epistle ... he specifically speaks of the fellowship and union the Spirit-filled believer has w/ Christ .... or KOINONIA ... and the fruit displayed by this spiritual union.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
Jesus baptized nobody but His disciples did. From what I read, it was referred to as John's baptism. There is no recording of people being baptized in Jesus name before the ascension.
When Jesus and His disciples baptized it was referred to as John's baptism? Where does the bible say that?
Remember name is authority. Baptism is part of the process of making disciples.
Mat 28:18 And Jesus came and said to them, "All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to me. Mat 28:19 Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, Mat 28:20 teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."
Act 19:1 And it happened that while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul passed through the inland country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. Act 19:2 And he said to them, "Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?" And they said, "No, we have not even heard that there is a Holy Spirit." Act 19:3And he said, "Into what then were you baptized?" They said, "Into John's baptism." Act 19:4 And Paul said, "John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus." Act 19:5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Note the connections with being a follower of someone? John baptized people and they became His disciples. We baptize by proxy which is why we baptize in HIS name. When we baptize people we are making disciples out of them TO Jesus.
Let's revisit the verse in question..I noted this already in a previous post
Joh 4:1 Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard that Jesus was making and baptizing more disciples than John Joh 4:2 (although Jesus himself did not baptize, but only his disciples),
Notice again the connection here between making disciples and baptism?
In whose authority were the followers of Jesus baptizing in?
That does not necessarily mean pre-resurrection they were invoking the name of jesus though.
__________________ Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:
There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
Every sinner must repent of their sins.
That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
Originally Posted by Praxeas
Your last statement is a typical strawman fallacy. Nobody that believes in Water baptism in Jesus name believes there is any value in the water itself. However let's note that after Cornelius and his household were baptized with the Spirit Peter commanded, not recommended but commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord and they obeyed.
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazyhomie
Are you advocating that tap water has redemptive value? Regeneration by water?
CH...clearly you did not even read what I just posted. You just reposted a strawman argument I pointed out is a fallacy and ignored everything I posted.
__________________ Let it be understood that Apostolic Friends Forum is an Apostolic Forum.
Apostolic is defined on AFF as:
There is One God. This one God reveals Himself distinctly as Father, Son and Holy Ghost.
The Son is God himself in a human form or "God manifested in the flesh" (1Tim 3:16)
Every sinner must repent of their sins.
That Jesus name baptism is the only biblical mode of water baptism.
That the Holy Ghost is for today and is received by faith with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues.
The saint will go on to strive to live a holy life, pleasing to God.
I think people are throwing around the accusation of "baptismal regeneration" without really knowing what it is. Baptismal regneration is not the belief that one must be baptized to be saved.Baptismal regeneration is the belief that one needs no faith and no volition are involved in order to be regenerated, and that regeneration occurs through being baptized. That is why Catholics baptize infants. One only does this if one believes that infants need no faith and need only be regenerated through water baptism.
__________________ ...MY THOUGHTS, ANYWAY.
"Many Christians do not try to understand what was written in a verse in the Bible. Instead they approach the passage to prove what they already believe."
I think people are throwing around the accusation of "baptismal regeneration" without really knowing what it is. Baptismal regneration is not the belief that one must be baptized to be saved.Baptismal regeneration is the belief that one needs no faith and no volition are involved in order to be regenerated, and that regeneration occurs through being baptized. That is why Catholics baptize infants. One only does this if one believes that infants need no faith and need only be regenerated through water baptism.
Curious ... how 3 steppers disassociate themselves from this term. Praxeas, has stated, if I'm correct, that baptismal regeneration is the belief that one immediately receives the Holy Spirit after being water baptized.
Baptismal regeneration is simply the belief our regeneration, is complete or a partially complete because of water baptism ... Most scholars, on both sides, agree on this ...
I love Spurgeon's ... Grace: God's Unmerited Favor .... I'm re-reading it now.
More on the Spirit indwelling the believer, Spiritual Union {koinonia}, and the when and how of our New Birth as found in 1 John and other Epistle/Gospel witnesses .... a little later.
My soul followeth hard after thee....Love one another with a pure heart fervently. 
Linear Mode
