Acts 2:38 has been abandoned by Christianity

[Curtis]

38 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.


What's wrong with this picture?

What’s wrong is ignoring all the scriptures that say repentance is how sins are forgiven, and that there are believers in Acts 10 that received the Holy Spirit before water baptism, so were clearly saved and then baptized.

That’s what’s wrong with that picture.

Plus John said Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit instead of water, Peter did not specify water baptism.

 

[Amazed@grace]

I implied nothing of the sort, but I did prove by scriptures that water baptism is for those already saved, and not to be saved,

BTW if water baptism is for salvation, then Jesus was saved by having John baptize Him, especially since Johns baptism was for repentance.

You need to rethink your baptism dogma.

And Paul said God sent him, not to baptize, but to preach the gospel.

If water baptism is our co-savior, it would have been included in the salvation gospel that God sent him to preach.

I think they error in your dogma that negates the importance and place of Baptism in our faith is in thinking salvation is a moment, not a journey that begins in faith.

And perhaps that is why you imagine I have said baptism saves, which I never did.

Perhaps you should consider Jesus example when prior to beginning his ministry, he, who was sinless and The Word made flesh, was baptized. (Neverminding those who argue that is not true) And it was not for the remission of sins.

 

[Curtis]

To the OP and whoever agrees with the OP, please know that you are in a serious cult everybody knows as "Oneness Pentecostal." They do not teach biblical salvation at all. Nor biblical baptism. All of their doctrines are evil and sinful. They do not please, glorify, or honor God at all.

The only way you will find out is by looking it up, and being humble enough to repent to God for it, and, attend a biblical church.

Blessed are those who love God more than their cult, and fear God enough to find out if they're in a cult, and don't continue to twist the scriptures to their own damnation and the stumbling of others.

There are others like church of Christ and SDA, that claim water baptism is for salvation, though.

 

[Curtis]

I think they error in your dogma that negates the importance and place of Baptism in our faith is in thinking salvation is a moment, not a journey that begins in faith.

And perhaps that is why you imagine I have said baptism saves, which I never did.

Perhaps you should consider Jesus example when prior to beginning his ministry, he, who was sinless and The Word made flesh, was baptized. (Neverminding those who argue that is not true) And it was not for the remission of sins.

Then what’s the problem? I said water baptism has a purpose, it’s the outward sign of washing that can be seen, of the inward washing and regeneration done by the Holy Spirit.

 

[Amazed@grace]

this shows the depth of your ignorance of Bible Doctrine! The fact that The God of the Holy Bible IS eternally The Holy Trinity, is THE Most Important Teaching in the entire Bible. To get this wrong, leaves you in darkness that no one can remove. Unitarianism is a demonic LIE from the devil himself, and the cause of untold millions ending up in eternal punishment.

Please post the
passage wherein Jesus himself teaches the trinity.

 

[Amazed@grace]

Maybe all of Acts 2 will put the importance of Baptism into proper perspective?
Bible Gateway passage: Acts 2 - New English Translation

What's really weird about my typeo's? I'll correct them before committing to post and inevitably one of those fixed typo's prior will show up as it's original self, the typo. calls to mind the classic SNL's church lady: " Sataaaaaannnnnnn!" lol
Edit, sigh

 

[mailmandan]

Christ’s finished work of redemption is sufficient and complete to save believers. No supplements needed. (Romans 3:24-28; 4:5-6; 5:1; Ephesians 2:8-9; Titus 3:5; 2 Timothy 1:9)

 

[GRACE ambassador]

Truther said: ↑
"The bulk of Christianity ignores it entirely."
---------------------------------
Yeah, right! Most are Totally Confused about water baptism!!:

(1) believe AND be baptized
{i.e. immersion to contact their Christ's blood}, THEN saved?

(2) believe, be saved, and THEN
immersion with a symbolic interpretation?

(3) immersion ONCE in the "name of Jesus?

(4) immersion THRICE in the "name of the Triune Godhead?

(5) immersion {whether once or thrice} for
"membership" in their traditional assembly?

(6) sprinkling water on babies inducting them
into religion washing away their original sin?

(7) sprinkling water on babies inducting them into
some covenant?

(8) sprinkling water on babies inducting them into their parent's custody
that they promise to raise them right? {into Mass Confusion?}

(9) sprinkling water on babies, admitting that their ritual is UNscriptural,
but "we do it anyway, because it is OUR tradition!"?

(10) pouring water onto babies or adults for Whatever
traditional reason religion "can come up with"?

(11) Any other water Confusion (?) I haven't heard of yet?
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
"God is NOT the author of Confusion!" Praise HIS Blessed Name!!

Imagine for a possible split-second twinkling-of-an-eye moment, IF:

God's Biblical Answer = "NO!" NOT Required, Today, Under GRACE!

Then what? NO Confusion? FULL "study" here: 13 Bible baptisms
------------------------------------------------------
?See you in God’s Great GloryLand! ↑ ♫

 

[LC627]

John 6: 53 has been abandoned by the church:
Jesus said to them, "Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.

unless one has communion they're not saved.

See the issue with using only verse to back up a doctrine?

I work in corrections and at my prison Level 5 custody inmates cannot be baptized due to security reasons. So basically with baptism regeneration the law of the state overrides God and people can refuse / withhold the salvation to others.

This limits the saving power of God to a puddle of water about 3-4 feet deep. God can only save a person if water is present and someone is there to baptize them. The person doing the baptizing in a way acts as a mediator because by their hands salvation is brought to an individual. Think about it, if no one could baptize the individual they would be lost forever. This adds another person to the work of Christ, God can't save you unless someone is there to immerse you. But, we know as believers there is only one Mediator. We are saved by grace through faith.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I never said that. Your mind conjured that thought.

The holy spirit told us of Jesus baptism.

What spirit is active in seeking to invalidate baptism in God's plan?

Yeah it did

He was baptized for the same reason Arron and his sons were baptised. To be a witness that he is to be the one sent from God. Not to save him

However, if as you claim WATER baptism is essential. and you use jesus baptism as the example. you are in fact claiming he ws saved by his baptism.

Baptism is in God plan for salvation. As john said, He will baptize with the Holy Spirit.

Your problem is your trying to replace HS baptism performed by God in the act of circumcising u with the circumcision made without hands (col 2)with water baptism performed by a sinner.

That is blasphemy of the worse kind

 

[mailmandan]

John 6: 53 has been abandoned by the church:
Jesus said to them, "Very truly I tell you, unless you eat the flesh of the Son of Man and drink his blood, you have no life in you.

Jesus is the Bread of Life. Just as bread nourishes our physical bodies, Jesus gives and sustains eternal life to all believers. John 6:35 - "I am the bread of life. He who comes to Me shall never hunger, and he who believes in Me shall never thirst." As He was accustomed, Jesus used figurative language to emphasize these spiritual truths. Jesus explains the sense of the entire passage when He says in John 6:63 - "It is the Spirit who gives life; the flesh profits nothing. The words that I speak to you are spirit, and they are life."

Eating and drinking is not cannibolism here, but the reception of God’s grace by believing in Christ, as Jesus makes abundantly clear:

John 6:40 - Everyone who looks to the Son and believes in Him may have everlasting life; and I will raise him up at the last day.
John 6:54 - Whoever eats My flesh and drinks My blood has eternal life, and I will raise him up at the last day.

John 6:47 - Most assuredly, I say to you, he who believes in Me has everlasting life.
John 6:58 - He who eats this bread will live forever.

"He who believes" in Christ is equivalent to "he who eats this bread and drinks My blood" because the end result is the same, eternal life. Jesus is not talking about 'transubstantiation' here.

Bread represents the "staff of life." Sustenance. That which essential to sustain life. Just as bread or sustenance is necessary to maintain physical life, Jesus is all the sustenance necessary for spiritual life.

The source of physical life is blood -- "life is in the blood." As with the bread, just as blood is the empowering or source of life physically, Jesus is all the source of spiritual life necessary.

 

[Truther]

I'm not saying that. You seem to be saying that by virtue of the fact that you believe there is no other way to be saved.

Acts 2:38 is the only way to be saved since it's inception.

 

[Truther]

The RCC is in agreement with you on Acts 2:38. They use it to support baptismal regeneration.

They teach to baptize unregenerated infants.
They teach the name of the son is 'son".
Nope.
You skip Acts 2:38 altogether and save folks by their OWN faith....Self salvation.

 

[Truther]

I have no problem with what Peter said in Acts 2:38. Just your misinterpretation of what Peter said that is not in harmony with (Luke 24:47; Acts 3:19; 5:31; 10:43-47; 11:17,18; 15:8,9; 16:31; 26:18).

What exactly would you have told the 3000 at Pentecost?

Quote it.

If you cannot quote it, you have a problem with it.

 

[Truther]

Acts 2: 38 is perfectly fine. If properly interpreted.

why would I want it to go away?

Because you do not want the name of Jesus Christ spoken over you by anyone as you are baptized for the remission of your sins, nor for anyone else.

This is the last thing most Christians would want to experience.

They like "short cuts" to God.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

What exactly would you have told the 3000 at Pentecost?

Quote it.

If you cannot quote it, you have a problem with it.

I would have told them what Peter told them

Repent, and you shall recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit. and let every one of you (who recieved the gift) be baptized for (because you have recieved) the remission of sin

 

[Truther]

You have to consider all scriptures on a topic, not just the ones that fit your dogma.

Had you been paying close attention, I was responding to the acts 2:38 proof text, that says REPENT and be baptized for remission of sins, by showing scriptures that make clear that repentance is what remits sins, not water.

Acts 3:19 - repent and be converted to have your sins forgiven- no water found there, but forgiveness from repentance IS found there.

Acts 10, those Peter preached to were saved by faith before being baptized.

Paul said He was sent, NOT TO BAPTIZE, but to preach the gospel - if water was our co-savior, then water baptism would have been included in the salvation gospel Paul was sent to preach.

If water baptism isn’t symbolic, but is for salvation, then Jesus was saved when He had John baptize Him - especially since Johns baptism was for repentance.

You need to rethink the dogma that water is our co-savior.

Acts 2:38 was after Christ ascended.

Acts 2:38 is before Acts 3.

In Acts 2:38 a precedent was set by God via Peter.

All following verses refer to salvation per Acts 2:38, and do not debunk it.

Very clever pitting latter verses against it.

Excellent debunking technique when one wants to start his own religion.

 

[Truther]

What’s wrong is ignoring all the scriptures that say repentance is how sins are forgiven, and that there are believers in Acts 10 that received the Holy Spirit before water baptism, so were clearly saved and then baptized.

That’s what’s wrong with that picture.

Plus John said Jesus would baptize with the Holy Spirit instead of water, Peter did not specify water baptism.

You said baptism is not salvational.

Peter said it is for the remission of sins.

Therefore you teach remission of sins is not salvational.

You get an F on the scripture test today.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Because you do not want the name of Jesus Christ spoken over you by anyone as you are baptized for the remission of your sins, nor for anyone else.

This is the last thing most Christians would want to experience.

They like "short cuts" to God.

Nah

I just want to do what the tax collector did and get on my knees, And cry out to God to show mercy on me a sinner, out of becoming Bankrupt in spirit. And let God save me through the washing (baptism) and renewal (new birth) of the holy spirit.

Then after all of this. I want to do what God wants me to do Including allowing myself to be baptized in water in my profession of faith that I have received remission of sin based on What God did. Not what I did.

Sadly, I fear many want to get in Gods way and hold God to wait until some man baptizes you in water before God can have the ability to save you.

 

[Truther]

I would have told them what Peter told them

Repent, and you shall recieve the gift of the Holy Spirit. and let every one of you (who recieved the gift) be baptized for (because you have recieved) the remission of sin

That is exact opposite of what Peter said.

Now, here is what Peter REALLY said...


38 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.


Funny how you cannot post the actual verse like I can.

Why?