Have you been baptised correctly?

[Willie T]

Yes, that is definitely one thing that make many cautious of Presb. I am in the PCA, so there are quite a few differences.

Yeah, my friend shares a building with our old church (getting pretty common now days) and we finally ended up leaving there because our congregation also began turning to celebrating those "alternative" lifestyles. It is a shame, because otherwise, we really liked that congregation, and we still haven't found a new home in almost two years now.

 

[Taken]

This is what Scripure says...

Acts 2:37-38
38 Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and said unto Peter and to the rest of the apostles, Men and brethren, what shall we do?
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.

Have you come through the door or the window? Have you come in obedience to God's provided way or have you been tought wrong by some denomination?

I See the "churches" having some delinquency.

This command is so simple yet I find so few are willing to subject themselves to this truth. This is Scripture! If you have not...

Agree that particular command IS SIMPLE, and agree, but not surprised that it touches FEW, since Scripture itself foretells it will be FEW.

Repent! And be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ

Yes! Teachers, Pastors, the Saved and born again disciples....spread the Good News to others that they may Believe ...

AND "Become" Repentant ..

AND "be" baptized in the Name of Jesus Christ ...

AND "receive" the Holy Spirit".

This "IS" the "VERY BASIC"...
The "MUSTARD SEED" inclusion in the Lords Kingdom, within the "FEW".
"The" "reasonable service" of those within the "FEW".

Matt 17:20
(A revealing of the Power of one who HAS the Faith of a teeny, tiny, mustard seed).

Rom 12:1
(A revealing of ANY mans "reasonable service" TO God, ie "the basics" for the man to FIRST "SAVE Himself" unto the Lord).

The Deliquency:
The STRESS, of the teaching going forward FOR the SAVED and Born AGAIN.....
What it MEANS and ENTAILS and HOW TO GAIN THE "UNDERSTANDING" "according to God."

IOW....ALL the "additional"....."ANDS"
Example in short;

Love those you hate, (ie strongly dislike)
Love those who are against you (ie enemies)
Do well to others who hate you.
Keep Learning About your God.
Learn "HIS PRECEPTS'. (And there are many)
Practice "HIS PRECEPTS'.
Conform your "natural MIND" to your "new
...hearts" thoughts, transforming "your MIND"
...into a "spiritural mind", (ie Like Christ's)
Learn HOW TO gain HIS UNDERSTANDING,
....and THEN LEAN ON THAT above your own.

And, And, And.....etc. etc. etc.....
Which IS Gods desire that a man GO BEYOND, his own "Basic" "Mustard Seed Faith" of "I'm taken care of"....(ie...saved and born again).

Get to getting...."walk", "talk", "do", "help" "others poor in spirit", to "hear", to "learn", to "desire" "THEY ALSO" may BECOME "RICH" in the "Gifts and Blessings and Safety and Security and Power of the Lord God Almighty Forever".

The "churches" Delinquency AND Corruption;
Teaching others to TOLERATE and ENCOURAGE and ACCEPT what IS AGAINST Gods Precepts.
Teaching others "getting RICH with Jesus" is about MONEY and POSSESSIONS.
Teaching others the "Lords Forgiveness given a man", is "insufficient" and "constrained".
Etc. etc.

God Bless,
Taken

 

[Willie T]

How do you interpret "as numerous as the grains of sand on the beach" or "as numerous as the stars in the skies" as being just a few?

 

[Philip James]

I've seen the saints and your not it.

Wow. Just wow...

 

[Enoch111]

ah, the Baptism of Fire has been cancelled now?

That and believer's baptism by immersion it would appear. Another example of why doctrine cannot be built on one passage. While there is a contextual reason in Ephesians to focus on "one baptism" ("with" not "by" the Spirit) there are several other baptisms which are all valid.

 

[Windmillcharge]

O really? You know? Then why are you arguing it?

Please explain how to straighten out Matthew 28:19 with Acts 2:38 and don't forget Acts 19:5

I'm eager to see you do it.

You're the one with the odd interpretation.

As far as I'm concerned we are baptised by what ever formular the church you attend uses.
Those I've attended use, "I baptise you in the name of the Father, Son and Spirit."

 

[GISMYS_7]

YES!! God wants born again believers to be baptized NOT in order to become saved but because we Have been saved.

 

[Heart2Soul]

 

[Frank Lee]

I just think about the simple uneducated people that were being saved then and in parts of the world now. They're so glad to be saved they want to please God and so are baptized by a missionary or evangelist. They know nothing of fights over methods.

When I was baptized with my brother in the Arkansas River backwater on a cold January day we used driftwood to break the ice. I don't remember the words but when I got home my wife said I was glowing. It was a wonderful experience.

Thankfully we don't have to make it so hard that no one was ever baptized correctly. Thank God He isn't taking notes on form with angels holding up scorecards. If He were like that I'd never make it into the kingdom.

Now there so many picky sects. The forwardites. The backwardites. So much division over a simple command. Squirting with a Holy water pistol or spritzing with a holy spray bottle does not constitute biblical baptism.

I have a nephew that is church of Christ indoctrinated and he's more concerned with everyone getting baptized and I never hear him speak of salvation. Surely a religious horse pushing a denominational cart.

 

[marksman]

But what does it mean to be IN the name?

Being "in the name" is much more than simply saying "in the name of Jesus" when we are praying. People say that there is power in the name and there is but the key is to be "IN" the name. At a neighborhood bar room people may regularly say the word, "Jesus" with their mouths but never are "IN" the name.

When a person is in the name completely isn't it that he has the mind of Christ? Do all of us have the mind of Christ all of the time? If we did, we certainly wouldn't sin at all, would we?

I believe that a person can be in the name without saying the name or even without knowing the name in his carnal mind. A number of people in the OT [at least, in a measure], I believe were in the name before any prophet knew what that name was in order to be able to speak it with his mouth.

Wasn't Elijah in the name when he was confronting the 400 prophets of Baal?

Wasn't David 'a man after God's own heart' and the 'apple of God's eye', also in the name or in His name, when God was inspiring him to write many of the psalms attributed to him in the Bible?

Neither Elijah nor David knew that the name of the savior was to be "Jesus" or "Yeshua" or any other spoken name, which man has applied to the Savior in the flesh, unless it was Immanuel.

Yet, were not both of them, and others, in the name or in His name long before the time of John the Baptist?

The following verse gives us more about this, does it not?

"For when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves:

Which show the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the mean while accusing or else excusing one another)" Rom 2:14-15

Were those not also in some measure in the name when they did the right things without having heard the spoke word, "Jesus"?

Sorry brother, no disrespect intended but that is pure semantics and irrelevant.

 

[marksman]

Following that.….. Not one of us was baptized in the same Aramaic name Mary or the Apostles used when speaking to the one we call, Jesus, in the English language.

See why we need to be careful when we start playing these games we were warned not to engage in? (Not directed at your post.... just trying to show how far out of reason we can get if we chase all these "Greek" ear-tickling rabbit trails)

ear tickling rabbit trails....I like it.

 

[marksman]

Oh dear Jesus got it wrong when he said 'Therefore go and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit.'

No he didn't, we did.

He told us to baptize in the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit.

Since when has 'father' been a name? it isn't, it is a title.

Since when has 'son' been a name? It isn't, it is a title.

Since when has 'Holy Spirit' been a name? It isn't, it is a title.

As everything else in the New Testament was done in the name of Jesus, it is logical to baptise in the same name, not three titles.

 

[amadeus]

Sorry brother, no disrespect intended but that is pure semantics and irrelevant.

For a man following only the ways of men you would likely be correct, but when being led by the Spirit it would be and is entirely a different thing, is it not?

Not even every believer in God sees the same things at the same time in exactly the same way.

All of us may be seeing "as through a glass darkly", but we do not all have the same function as a part of the Body of Christ and we are not all at the same point in our development. In spite of differences we may have a correct vision considering what and where we are... or not.

All each of us can really do to assure being where He wants us when He wants us to lean on Him and to follow Him.



Give God the glory!

 

[marksman]

For a man following only the ways of men you would likely be correct, but when being led by the Spirit it would be and is entirely a different thing, is it not?

Not even every believer in God sees the same things at the same time in exactly the same way.

All of us may be seeing "as through a glass darkly", but we do not all have the same function as a part of the Body of Christ and we are not all at the same point in our development. In spite of differences we may have a correct vision considering what and where we are... or not.

All each of us can really do to assure being where He wants us when He wants us to lean on Him and to follow Him.



Give God the glory!

No.

 

[Willie T]

If the person baptizing you couldn't speak, you would really be in trouble come judgement day...…. "The proper words weren't spoken... I never knew you!!!"

 

[amadeus]

No.

"But let your communication be, Yea, yea; Nay, nay: for whatsoever is more than these cometh of evil." Matt 5:37

 

[APAK]

If the person baptizing you couldn't speak, you would really be in trouble come judgement day...…. "The proper words weren't spoken... I never knew you!!!"

Now you are just wanting to be difficult or argumentative here, bordering on the ridiculous. The name of Jesus, in his name, comes from the heart and into the mind first before being spoken or not spoken using vocal chords. I would think that being ‘spoken’ in the mind only is sufficient! Of course, to ensure your standard is met, to cover all bases, it can also be written down, if that person could write and read having vision and hands to do so. I would think Christ would get the message and intent.

APAK

 

[Willie T]

Now you are just wanting to be difficult or argumentative here, bordering on the ridiculous. The name of Jesus, in his name, comes from the heart and into the mind first before being spoken or not spoken using vocal chords. I would think that being ‘spoken’ in the mind only is sufficient! Of course, to ensure your standard is met, to cover all bases, it can also be written down, if that person could write and read having vision and hands to do so. I would think Christ would get the message and intent.

APAK

Yes, I am absolutely hoping to show the ridiculousness of searching Scripture to try and locate a "proper formula of verbal speech pattern" that legitimizes a person's baptism.

 

[APAK]

Well that's twice you have fooled me into thinking you meant something else. I wonder why? Oh well. no worries thought mate. The hidden thought that was in my mind though is that 'in Jesus' or 'his name' is correct, and never in the added-in Trinitarian formula of Matt 28:19 - in the 'name' of 3 titles as @marksman was explaining...which I agree with.

APAK

 

[Willie T]

Well that's twice you have fooled me into thinking you meant something else. I wonder why? Oh well. no worries thought mate. The hidden thought that was in my mind though is that 'in Jesus' or 'his name' is correct, and never in the added-in Trinitarian formula of Matt 28:19 - in the 'name' of 3 titles as @marksman was explaining...which I agree with.

APAK

I hope next time you will pause a second or two and see who it is that is posting. Byrdd and I (and a few others) often post absurd "fake statements" like that, assuming most people know us and will catch the "sarcastic absurdity" of such an obviously wild statement we might make.