Water baptism/split from free will predestination thread

[domokunrox]

Neo, its not an authoritive charge. There is not a single genuine baptism WITHOUT repenting. It just is not possible.

How do you repent WITHOUT conviction? Are you saying man is without sin? Peter understood this. I don't even like him. Learn from his mistakes.

The baptism needed the water AND a name with power behind it. Hence, the baptism I speak of. The Baptisms performed in Acts.

They were consistent. THEY HAD TO BE CONSISTENT. You think they weren't? That's a even heavier charge, man. They didn't mess up. We would all be in a heap of trouble if they did.

[neo-x]

Dom, I have seen countless people, some of whom I personally know, who never have had a water baptism yet are full of the spirit. How can you just say that someone doesn't have the Holy spirit just because he didn't have the water baptism. This refutes my observation, my better judgement and on top a lot of people's experience, some of which I have witnessed my self.

There is not a single genuine baptism WITHOUT repenting. It just is not possible.

There is nothing in my post to indicate on the contrary, here. I agree.

How do you repent WITHOUT conviction? Are you saying man is without sin?

I do not think I said that anywhere. Or do you think think the water baptism washes away sins?

The baptism needed the water AND a name with power behind it. Hence, the baptism I speak of. The Baptisms performed in Acts.

They were consistent. THEY HAD TO BE CONSISTENT. You think they weren't? That's a even heavier charge, man. They didn't mess up. We would all be in a heap of trouble if they did.

I never said they messed up, I said, I do not see how this makes water baptism a necessity for the Holy spirit.

Dom, I think it would be better if you did not presume on my part, you can just ask me and we can discuss.

[domokunrox]

I apologize Neo. I am at work, and I am tired.

Neo, I do not claim that people cannot be good and show good work. That's my point. People could be reasonable and change. It doesn't confirm they followed the directions correctly.

Its like a blueprint. You can put up a structure. Doesn't mean you followed the plans correctly. Is it a structure? Yes. Will it work? No idea. Its safe to say no, redo it. Then to say, maybe try it.

Again, I base my faith on scripture. Baptism was done in water in Acts. There is no reason to think otherwise. NONE WHATSOEVER. Jesus said WATER AND SPIRIT. Theres no reason to think birth fluid or WATER (birth water), THAN SPIRIT. NONE AT ALL. In fact, makes no logical sense to mention water IF THAT WAS THE CASE.

This is exactly what I am trying to say. Don't risk it.

I can tell you all FROM EXPERIENCE. I thought the same as you all did. I was very bitter and resistant. I can tell you all FROM EXPERIENCE. I came out of the water different compared to before I went in.

[Silvertusk]

Just for you Rick.

Here is Peter. His words should strike you hard.

(NASB)Acts 10:45-48
All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. [46] For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, [47] "Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?" [48] And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.

Looks like they were saved first - then baptised to me - or was the HS a little premature here.

[jlay]

(NASB)Acts 10:45-48
All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. [46] For they were hearing them speaking with tongues and exalting God. Then Peter answered, [47] "Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?" [48] And he ordered them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay on for a few days.

Dom, what are you trying to prove with this verse? This says that the gentile believers had already RECEIVED the HS, prior to their water baptism. Of course Peter would order them baptized, because he was a minister, commisioned by Christ Himself to preach the Gospel of the Kingdom. Obviously, something happened that the Jewish believers did NOT expect. His words whould strike you hard.

[domokunrox]

Wow, logic required here.

If I gave you a million dollars, and you had it. It was yours.

What purpose would it serve to say, "ok, let's go find water. I want to dunk you for fun"?

I am serious. This line of reasoning is a major sidestep to the clearly obvious. I am truly baffled. I cannot help further other then point back to Jesus' baptism.

Heaven opened, and the SPIRIT of God came upon him AFTER he came up out of the WATER.

If you are not convinced still. I cannot help further then say keep reading Acts.

[jlay]

Dom,
My advice to you as well, would be to read, excpet doing it while rightly dividing the word of truth. The text you supplied says clearly that the gentiles has ALREADY recieved. Yes or no? Peter's order to baptize was to confirm to the Jews what was happening. If you know anything about how Jews perceived the Gentiles. In fact it is right in the context of Acts itself. Cornelius? Peter's vision?

[PaulSacramento]

IMHO:
We should not get baptized unless we believe that Christ is the son of God, that He is our lord and saviour, that he died and was ressurected and will come again.
I think we all agree on that, yes?
As per Paul , only a believer that has had this truth revealed to them by the HS can say that ( that are sealed by the HS).
It seems to me that the HS comes upon us BEFORE we can freely say that Christ is Lord.
The coming of the HS and our accepting of Christ is one in the same, it happens at the same time.
All those that confess that Christ is lord, do so because they have the HS ( 1John I believe).
The baptisim is the symbolic washing away of sins, what we choose to do AFTER we are sealed by the HS and believe and profess that Christ is Lord.

[DannyM]

I get a kick out of Danny's comment on "Faith alone". That's heresy, Danny. You're saying the bible is false. (NASB)James 2:17-18
Even so faith, if it has no works, is dead, being by itself. [18] But someone may well say, "You have faith and I have works; show me your faith without the works, and I will show you my faith by my works."

Dom, I'm afraid to say that your reading of Scripture is flaky at best. Time and again you have been shown to be in error. And yet you sweep it all under the carpet and continue down this dead-end street. I pray that you will learn to listen and comprehend what the others are telling you here.

[RickD]

IMHO:
We should not get baptized unless we believe that Christ is the son of God, that He is our lord and saviour, that he died and was ressurected and will come again.
I think we all agree on that, yes?
As per Paul , only a believer that has had this truth revealed to them by the HS can say that ( that are sealed by the HS).
It seems to me that the HS comes upon us BEFORE we can freely say that Christ is Lord.
The coming of the HS and our accepting of Christ is one in the same, it happens at the same time.
All those that confess that Christ is lord, do so because they have the HS ( 1John I believe).
The baptisim is the symbolic washing away of sins, what we choose to do AFTER we are sealed by the HS and believe and profess that Christ is Lord.

Paul, of course this is both logical, and biblically consistent. All of us here see this, except dom. Dom is holding onto this belief, in spite of the correction of MANY of us. Now it is dom's choice with what to do next. Either he can heed correction that has been presented to him by all of us, seek God with humility and an open heart, to hear what the Holy Spirit is telling him, or dom can ignore the correction of others in Christ, and be stuck in his errant beliefs. What dom does, will ultimately lead to what decisions have to be made on this forum.

[Silvertusk]

Wow, logic required here.

If I gave you a million dollars, and you had it. It was yours.

What purpose would it serve to say, "ok, let's go find water. I want to dunk you for fun"?

I am serious. This line of reasoning is a major sidestep to the clearly obvious. I am truly baffled. I cannot help further other then point back to Jesus' baptism.

Heaven opened, and the SPIRIT of God came upon him AFTER he came up out of the WATER.

If you are not convinced still. I cannot help further then say keep reading Acts.

Baptism is purely an outward confession of faith after your inward confession between you and the Lord Jesus Christ - it is that simple - stop reading into it more than what was intended. I have been baptised - I come from a Baptist church - I have been on a course for the importance of baptism - trust me I know what baptism is about.

[jlay]

Dom,
In addition. Please define repent.

[RickD]

Dom, I know you may feel overwhelmed here. It seems like everyone is disagreeing with your belief. But, there are way too many questions that people have asked you, that you have yet to answer. If you don't answer the questions, this thread may have to get locked. If you make a claim, as you did, you need to back up your claim. Which you did attempt to do. You should also heed the correction of all the Christians that have tried to show you are in error. While I can't make you open to correction, I can lock the thread, if you won't participate in the discussion, by answering the questions posed to you. The ball is in your court.

[August]

Domokunrox, I think you should consider whether this forum is the right place for you. While we welcome open discussion, the propagating of what is perceived to be heresy by a large majority of Christianity can confuse and mislead many Christians and raise additional points of contention with non-believers, and as such is not welcome here.

[zacchaeus]

Wow, logic required here.

If I gave you a million dollars, and you had it. It was yours.

What purpose would it serve to say, "ok, let's go find water. I want to dunk you for fun"?

I am serious. This line of reasoning is a major sidestep to the clearly obvious. I am truly baffled. I cannot help further other then point back to Jesus' baptism.

Heaven opened, and the SPIRIT of God came upon him AFTER he came up out of the WATER.

If you are not convinced still. I cannot help further then say keep reading Acts.

Dom... seriously, WOW!!!

1)... and let me try and keep this simple to see if you make the connection, God gives Freewill (your million dollars); can't put a price on salvation by the way, then you have it and its yours. This is just a side note, I know this is about baptism and the Holy Spirit and salvation.

2)Your the one preaching obedience... my point exactly as to an answer for what purpose would it serve; it serves as obedience, Hello! (By you asking that question though its clear that you admit they were baptized with the Holy Spirit (evidence speaking in tongues) before they were baptized with water!!!

a. You've clearly said that the baptism of the Holy Spirit comes after the baptism of Water... and you've not in so many words admit in Acts the gentiles were baptized with the Holy Spirit before the baptism of Water. Again, no two truths are the same, it has to be one or the other.

Lets look at Acts 10:43-48

43)"To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins"
-Through His name (not through water), whoever believes in Him (also not water).
44)"While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word."
-will faith then not come by hearing???
45)"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."
-They of the circumcision (Jews) were astonished and amazed that they of the uncircumcised (Gentiles) received the Holy Spirit! But but, wait, they can't have the Holy Spirit God, You can't give them the Holy Spirit... they aren't circumcised nor have they been baptized with water!!! Hogwash!! As Dom would say He is GOD, we are not, He can do what He wants. But wait a second... do all need to be circumcised too on top of water baptism, really? Oh wait, didn't physical circumcision change to a spiritual circumcision, that of the heart. circumcision of the heart, hmmm....!!!!
46)"For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter, 47)"Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
-I'm curious as to how literal are we wanting to take this cause um, well it says then answered Peter... what was he answering, did someone ask him a question, or um doesn't it just mean simply Peter said. LOL!!! Its also funny he is answering with a question. Anyways, Peter isn't asking, can any man as in the Gentiles (uncircumcised) with the Holy Spirit forbid water, He's asking can any man as in the other Jews (circumcised) forbid them, the Gentiles to get water baptized since they like them already have the Holy Spirit, Hello!!! There's that um, logic you were talking about. His question like ours to you was Rhetorical as Rhetorical could get... and so what did he do verse... 48)And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

Lets Review...

This is why in verse 46 they knew the Gentiles had received the same Spirit baptism that they had received 8 years before at Pentecost. This experience proves that the Holy Spirit baptism is given at the time of conversion, as in the case of Paul (Acts 9:17-18), proving can be received before water baptism. Verse 47 question is, shall we baptize these Gentile converts who have been born again (without water), whose sins are already remitted (without water), and who have received the Spirit baptism (without water), as we did at Pentecost? Or, shall we not baptize them at all? Here and in the case of Paul its clear that sins were remitted and the Holy Ghost given before water baptism. If water baptism was essential to the remission of sins and salvation, shall we accuse God? Should we tell Him He isn't doing His job right as if we could do any better? Again, these just like Peters questions are all Rhetorical. Or, shall we be more SENSIBLE and ACCEPT God's work (not ours) without water baptism? And verse 48 since no man could "forbid water" baptism to these new converts and new Spirit-baptized people, Peter commanded them to be baptized as all converts should be (as in obedience, isn't that right Dom and not required); not to save the soul, but as an answer to a good conscience and an outward testimony of an inward work!!! The end.

Sorry if the text seems harsh or sarcastic, its really not, I just tried to break down as if I was speaking to my kids.

side note: I wished there were like buttons on the comments of threads so if we liked what someone said we could say so just as an encourager tool!!!