Do you believe Spirit baptism replaces water baptism?

[Bible Highlighter]

You've said a lot to say not much at all that addresses the plain and simple difference in the Greek interlinear and the kjv which I use and like but am also aware of it's minor flaws,

1 Corinthians 12:13 (New American Standard Bible)
For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Legacy Standard Bible)
For also by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Amplified Bible)
For by one [Holy] Spirit we were all baptized into one body, [spiritually transformed—united together] whether Jews or Greeks (Gentiles), slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one [Holy] Spirit [since the same Holy Spirit fills each life].

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Christian Standard Bible)
For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and we were all given one Spirit to drink.

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Aramaic Bible in Plain English)
For we also are baptized by The One Spirit into one body, whether Jews or Aramaeans or Servants or free men, and we are all made to drink The One Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Great Bible):
For by one sprete are we all baptysed to make one body, whether we be Iewes or Gentyls, whether we be bonde or fre, and haue all droncke of one sprete.

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Geneva Bible):
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we bee Iewes, or Grecians, whether we be bonde, or free, and haue bene all made to drinke into one Spirit.

i.e., using the word Easter instead of passover, pascha in Greek, in Acts 12:4.

As for Acts 12:4:

Well, I would recommend checking out the 3 dollar book called, Don’t Passover Easter at Amazon’s Kindle Store.
It is really a worthwhile read. He goes into how William Tyndale invented the word “Passover” and he looks at the Old Textus Receptus bibles, and dictionaries, ECT. In other words, Easter was the word used for Jewish Passover before William Tyndale came up with the word Passover in English.

It is a really super fast read (20-25 minutes).

Here it is at the Kindle Store:

Amazon.com

www.amazon.com

You can't use the kjv to justify the mistranslation of 'by' for 'in', but that passage on and of itself is also not justification for the unscriptural position that baptism is not essential to salvation; way too many passages that clearly say otherwise. Believe what you like. Goodbye

1 Corinthians 1:17
"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."

Cornelius and his household heard the gospel message and received the Holy Spirit (Which is the downpayment of their inheritance) BEFORE being water baptized.

 

[CadyandZoe]

You're both a bit lacking in understanding. Nobody was born again while Jesus was alive. Not possible. No one could be baptized into Christ nor his death to be raised like him as Romans 6 explains, until he was dead. The Ephesians had to be re-baptized since they were baptized unto John's baptism, so likewise Nicodemus would have had to. Also, read Hebrews 9:15-17. For a testament to be in effect it requires the death of the testator, Jesus.

Why do you say that no one could be born again prior to the cross? What is the basis for that?

 

[DJT_47]

1 Corinthians 12:13 (New American Standard Bible)
For by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Legacy Standard Bible)
For also by one Spirit we were all baptized into one body, whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Amplified Bible)
For by one [Holy] Spirit we were all baptized into one body, [spiritually transformed—united together] whether Jews or Greeks (Gentiles), slaves or free, and we were all made to drink of one [Holy] Spirit [since the same Holy Spirit fills each life].

1 Corinthian s12:13 (Christian Standard Bible)
For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and we were all given one Spirit to drink.

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Holman Christian Standard Bible)
For we were all baptized by one Spirit into one body—whether Jews or Greeks, whether slaves or free—and we were all made to drink of one Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Aramaic Bible in Plain English)
For we also are baptized by The One Spirit into one body, whether Jews or Aramaeans or Servants or free men, and we are all made to drink The One Spirit.

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Great Bible):
For by one sprete are we all baptysed to make one body, whether we be Iewes or Gentyls, whether we be bonde or fre, and haue all droncke of one sprete.

1 Corinthians 12:13 (Geneva Bible):
For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we bee Iewes, or Grecians, whether we be bonde, or free, and haue bene all made to drinke into one Spirit.


As for Acts 12:4:

Well, I would recommend checking out the 3 dollar book called, Don’t Passover Easter at Amazon’s Kindle Store.
It is really a worthwhile read. He goes into how William Tyndale invented the word “Passover” and he looks at the Old Textus Receptus bibles, and dictionaries, ECT. In other words, Easter was the word used for Jewish Passover before William Tyndale came up with the word Passover in English.

It is a really super fast read (20-25 minutes).

Here it is at the Kindle Store:

Amazon.com

www.amazon.com

1 Corinthians 1:17
"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."

Cornelius and his household heard the gospel message and received the Holy Spirit (Which is the downpayment of their inheritance) BEFORE being water baptized.

You conveniently forgot to list the translations that say 'in' that do agree with the Greek.

And you're not understanding the 1 Cor passage you quoted or maybe you didn't read 1 Cor beyond that part. Read a bit further to 1 Cor 3:6. Paul planted and Apollos watered. Paul was the orator.

 

[Marymog]

John 4:1-3, Now when Jesus learned that the Pharisees had heard, “Jesus is making and baptizing more disciples than John” (although it was not Jesus himself but his disciples who baptized), he left Judea and started back to Galilee.

Thanks Jim B,

Thank you for answering my question. I forgot about that passage.

Mary

 

[DJT_47]

Why do you say that no one could be born again prior to the cross? What is the basis for that?

Did you not read what you requoted?

 

[Marymog]

The fact that Nicodemus was born again is implied in the dialogue.

Nicodemus: “Rabbi, we know that You have come from God as a teacher; for no one can do these signs that You do unless God is with him.”
Jesus: Truly, truly, I say to you, unless someone (Nicodemus for instance) is born again he cannot see (recognize) the kingdom of God.

Implication: The confession of Nicodemus demonstrates that he recognizes the kingdom of God in the signs that Jesus does, therefore, Nicodemus is born again.

Hey C&Z,

I understand your interpretation now: Since Nicodemus recognized OR confessed that Jesus was a teacher from God who is able to perform miracles that is how Nicodemus became "born again".

Confessing that he is a teacher (prophet) from God that performs miracles is sufficient enough to be saved?

I always thought we had to confess/accept that Jesus was our Lord and Saviour to be saved.

Mary

 

[Marymog]

Well, perhaps you are right; maybe Philip explained the ritual to the Eunuch. I couldn't prove it from the text though.

Thank you.

The proof from the text that Philip explained the ritual of baptism to the Eunuch is when the Eunuch asked to be baptized right after he believed. We see this happening in other parts of Scripture: Belief then baptism

Mark 16:16
Acts 2:41
Acts 8:12

 

[Marymog]

Baptism was already a cultural practice. But the innovation of Jesus was "baptizing them in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit." For instance, John the Baptist was making disciples for himself, i.e. in his own name and under his own authority. Those whom John baptized were John's disciples.

Jesus changed that concept. The Apostles were going to baptize and teach others to baptize. But rather than making disciples for themselves; the apostles were to make disciples for Jesus. The disciples were those of Jesus; and his students were to learn from the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

See what I mean? Although Baptism was a cultural practice at the time, Jesus changed the meaning of the event, making Baptism into a Christian rite.

I see what you mean....

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You conveniently forgot to list the translations that say 'in' that do agree with the Greek.

And you're not understanding the 1 Cor passage you quoted or maybe you didn't read 1 Cor beyond that part. Read a bit further to 1 Cor 3:6. Paul planted and Apollos watered. Paul was the orator.

You are not getting the bigger scope of the picture of Bible history.
Just as the Bible talks about there being two vines (Vine of Sodom) (True Vine), there are two lines of manuscripts.

There is a corrupt line of manuscripts and a true line of manuscripts.
Men were repeatedly martyred for their faith favoring the Textus Receptus line of manuscripts, and those who had the wrong manuscripts (the Catholics) persecuted those who had the right ones. This is just history.
In addition, we can observe in the here and now the doctrinal attacks on a subtle level, as well. Over and over again, we see an attack on good doctrines in Modern bibles. Of course, a person who has been to Bible college (Learning the false art of Textual Criticism) and or those who have been sucked into this movement make the Bible say whatever they want it to say. THEY become their own authority and not the Bible. You can always find some other rendering or manuscript or scholar in the world of Textual Criticism to agree with your thinking. James White does not agree with Dan Wallace. There is no final Word of authority.

Yes, I understand the KJB is written in archaic 1600s English, and I am not against using Dictionaries or even Modern Translations to help update the King James Bible. Just know that Modern Bibles should not be your final Word of authority because there are MANY problems in taking that approach (Both biblically and historically).

But you can believe as you wish.

I forget what religion you are in. Are you Catholic or a part of the Church of Christ?

 

[CadyandZoe]

Did you not read what you requoted?

Pretend I didn't.

 

[CadyandZoe]

Hey C&Z,

I understand your interpretation now: Since Nicodemus recognized OR confessed that Jesus was a teacher from God who is able to perform miracles that is how Nicodemus became "born again".

Confessing that he is a teacher (prophet) from God that performs miracles is sufficient enough to be saved?

I always thought we had to confess/accept that Jesus was our Lord and Saviour to be saved.

Mary

Jesus is talking about confessing that the kingdom of God is near. Not all of Jesus' contemporaries were willing to confess that Jesus is the Christ, the son of God. Nicodemus was willing, in my view, because the Spirit was already at work in his heart and mind.

 

[DJT_47]

You are not getting the bigger scope of the picture of Bible history.
Just as the Bible talks about there being two vines (Vine of Sodom) (True Vine), there are two lines of manuscripts.

There is a corrupt line of manuscripts and a true line of manuscripts.
Men were repeatedly martyred for their faith favoring the Textus Receptus line of manuscripts, and those who had the wrong manuscripts (the Catholics) persecuted those who had the right ones. This is just history.
In addition, we can observe in the here and now the doctrinal attacks on a subtle level, as well. Over and over again, we see an attack on good doctrines in Modern bibles. Of course, a person who has been to Bible college (Learning the false art of Textual Criticism) and or those who have been sucked into this movement make the Bible say whatever they want it to say. THEY become their own authority and not the Bible. You can always find some other rendering or manuscript or scholar in the world of Textual Criticism to agree with your thinking. James White does not agree with Dan Wallace. There is no final Word of authority.

Yes, I understand the KJB is written in archaic 1600s English, and I am not against using Dictionaries or even Modern Translations to help update the King James Bible. Just know that Modern Bibles should not be your final Word of authority because there are MANY problems in taking that approach (Both biblically and historically).

But you can believe as you wish.

I forget what religion you are in. Are you Catholic or a part of the Church of Christ?

You've again said a bunch of nothing and didn't address the issue nor my response which questioned your logic and understanding or lack therof, of 1 Cor.

And I'm certainly NOT catholic. I'm Christian.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

You've again said a bunch of nothing

That's not true. I said plenty, but it is information that you would rather not look into because it would destroy your current worldview that you cherish.

and didn't address the issue nor my response which questioned your logic and understanding or lack therof, of 1 Cor.

It does address the issue because having the right Bible will give you the right words.
Your approach to the Bible is not consistent. It is not naturally duplicatable.

And I'm certainly NOT catholic. I'm Christian.

Ah, so you are a part of the Church of Christ?
There are not many organizations that believe in water baptism for initial salvation.
Lutheranism, Methodism, and some Reformed believe in baptismal regeneration, too.

I prefer just to believe the Bible and not some church (which have their own traditions, or creeds, etcetera).

 

[DJT_47]

That's not true. I said plenty, but it is information that you would rather not look into because it would destroy your current worldview that you cherish.


It does address the issue because having the right Bible will give you the right words.
Your approach to the Bible is not consistent. It is not naturally duplicatable.



Ah, so you are a part of the Church of Christ?
There are not many organizations that believe in water baptism for initial salvation.
Lutheranism, Methodism, and some Reformed believe in baptismal regeneration, too.

I prefer just to believe the Bible and not some church (which have their own traditions, or creeds, etcetera).

goodbye. Believe what you like

 

[Bible Highlighter]

goodbye. Believe what you like

We can agree to disagree (of course).

May the Lord Jesus Christ bless you.

 

[DJT_47]

We can agree to disagree (of course).

May the Lord Jesus Christ bless you.

Sorry, I don't agree that untruth is OK. Goodbye. You'll hear no more from me.

 

[Bible Highlighter]

Sorry, I don't agree that untruth is OK. Goodbye. You'll hear no more from me.

The phrase "agree to disagree" is not saying I am okay with untrue things.
It merely means that we both agree to the fact that we disagree with each other on a particular belief.

In any event, may the Lord's peace be upon you.

 

[mailmandan]

He was. But not in the matter of having righteousness imputed to him, but in the matter of being shown to have that imputation of righteousness. 'Justified' means, both, to be made righteous and to be shown to be righteous. A genuine faith will, both, make a person righteous, and produce works that show them to have that righteousness. And so a man is justified by, both, faith, and works, just as James says (James 2:24).

Abraham was credited the righteousness of God when he had faith in the promise given him in Genesis 15:6. He was shown to have that faith by what he did in the offering of Isaac on the altar in Genesis 22:9, at which time the evidence of the righteousness he received earlier by faith in God's promise was revealed:

"12“Do not lay a hand on the boy or do anything to him,” said the angel, “for now I know that you fear God, since you have not withheld your only son from me.”" Genesis 22:12​

​

And this is the very point that James is addressing in his discourse. He even says that:

​

"Show me your faith without deeds, and I will show you my faith by my deeds." James 2:18​

Amen and well said brother! In James 2:24, James is not using the word "justified" here to mean "accounted as righteous" but is shown to be righteous. James is discussing the evidence of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18) and not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God. (Romans 4:2-3)

Being justified over and over and over again maintains salvation???
I just showed you, you don't have to start all over again every time you sin.

Amen! Maintaining our salvation equates to "type 2 works salvation" and is a false doctrine.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

Amen and well said brother! In James 2:24, James is not using the word "justified" here to mean "accounted as righteous" but is shown to be righteous. James is discussing the evidence of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18) and not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God. (Romans 4:2-3)


Amen! Maintaining our salvation equates to "type 2 works salvation" and is a false doctrine.

They forget so fast the leading of the law

once a year the high priest had to make atponement for everyones sin, every year in symbolic terms, everyone had to be saved again.

But Jesus, as our great high priest entered the holy place once and for all to make atonement for sin forever

 

[Johann]

Amen and well said brother! In James 2:24, James is not using the word "justified" here to mean "accounted as righteous" but is shown to be righteous. James is discussing the evidence of faith (says-claims to have faith but has no works/I will show you my faith by my works - James 2:14-18) and not the initial act of being accounted as righteous with God. (Romans 4:2-3)

And yet-the very next verse-

Jas 2:25 And in the same way was not also Rahab the prostitute justified by works when she received the messengers and sent them out by another way?
Jas 2:26 For as the body apart from the spirit is dead, so also faith apart from works is dead.


2:25 "Rahab the harlot" She was Judaism's ultimate proof of God's forgiveness and the power of repentance (i.e., a Canaanite prostitute, cf. Joshua 2). She also is an ancestor of Jesus (cf. Matt. 1:4). James uses two extremes, Abraham and Rahab, to prove his point.

2:26 Active love is to faith what the breath is to the human body. We could summarize James' description of lifeless faith as

demonic, James 2:19
vain, James 2:20
dead, James 2:26.

J.