Understanding : Acts 2:38

[JBO]

I disagree with you. You do not understand it at all..

But thats beside the point.. It is not a valid argument to say someone is wrong with no proof.. that would go for both of us, so this is a silly argument

There are indeed some, such as all who practice infant baptism who believe in baptismal regeneration. However, I do not believe, nor have I ever suggested that baptism is the cause or the basis for regeneration. That can only be God Himself. So please to no accuse me of that nonsense. That you do not know and understand what I believe and the difference between that and baptismal regeneration is on you, not me.

 

[JBO]

you have 2 births there.. Jesus said we must be born again (literally born a second time) he is explaining what this is.

Jesus never mentioned baptism in the passage. You can;t force it into the text.

And He never mentioned physical birth in that passage either, but you are apparently trying to force it into the text.

 

[JBO]

or maybe we do. and your denying it

It is obvious that you don't.

 

[mailmandan]

That is not correct. It was the empowering Holy Spirit that they had not received. That is indicated by the fact that when Peter laid his hands upon them they then began to work miracles. That is the only way Simon could "see that the Spirit was given". The indwelling Holy Spirit is not an observable function. They had received the indwelling Holy Spirit when they were baptized, just as was the case at Pentecost.

You continue to not understand the distinction between the indwelling Holy Spirit given to everyone who believes, repents and is baptized in the name of Jesus Christ and the empowering Holy Spirit which was given very selectively.

In Acts 8 they obviously had received the indwelling Holy Spirt when they responded to Philip's preaching. But Philip was not an apostle. He did not have the power to impart the empowering Holy Spirit. That was why Peter and John went to Samaria.

Again, you fail to know and understand the difference in the roles and works of the Holy Spirit.

It's actually you who fails to know and understand the difference in the roles and works of the Holy Spirit and your error is a byproduct of believing the false doctrine of salvation by water baptism. Acts 10:43 To Him all the prophets witness that, through His name, whoever believes in Him receives remission of sins.” 44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all those who heard the word. 45 And those of the circumcision who believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. 46 For they heard them speak with tongues and magnify God. Then Peter answered, 47 “Can anyone forbid water, that these should not be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have?”

THIS IS CLEARLY THE INDWELLING HOLY SPIRIT ACCOMPANIED BY A SPIRITUAL GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT - TONGUES. THESE GENTILES CLEARLY BELIEVED, RECEIVED THE GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT AND WERE SAVED ALL BEFORE WATER BAPTISM.

 

[mailmandan]

John 3:5 Jesus answered, "Truly, truly, I say to you, unless one is born of water and Spirit, he cannot enter the kingdom of God.

In regard to the word "water" in John 3:5, there are those who would argue that the natural sense of the passage parallels water with being born out of a mother’s womb and with flesh based on the answer of Nicodemus to Jesus. Simply stated in that case, two births are necessary. The first is a physical, literal, "flesh" birth (which is accompanied by amniotic "water") and the second is Spirit.

There are also those who would argue that Jesus mentions "living water" in John 4:10, 14; 7:37-39 and in John 7:38-39, we read - "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this He spoke concerning the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the source of living water and spiritual cleansing.

If "water" is defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again. So, to automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted.

Yet there are still others who would argue that "water" is used in the Bible as an emblem of the word of God, and in such uses it is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26) When we are born again, the Holy Spirit begets new life and we are said to become "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4). The new birth is brought to pass through "incorruptible seed, by the Word of God, which lives and abides forever" (I Peter 1:23) and the Holy Spirit accomplishes the washing of regeneration. (Titus 3:5)

 

[JBO]

It's actually you who fails to know and understand the difference in the roles and works of the Holy Spirit and your error is a byproduct of believing the false doctrine of salvation by water baptism.

I am curious. Have you received the Holy Spirit? If so, did you receive the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands of an apostle as you are claiming for those at Samaria?

 

[JBO]

In regard to the word "water" in John 3:5, there are those who would argue that the natural sense of the passage parallels water with being born out of a mother’s womb and with flesh based on the answer of Nicodemus to Jesus. Simply stated in that case, two births are necessary. The first is a physical, literal, "flesh" birth (which is accompanied by amniotic "water") and the second is Spirit.

Yes, I am familiar with all of that nonsense. Why would Jesus speak of being born again physically? Never has the expression born of water ever, now or in the past, been a euphemism for physical birth.

There are also those who would argue that Jesus mentions "living water" in John 4:10, 14; 7:37-39 and in John 7:38-39, we read - "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this He spoke concerning the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the source of living water and spiritual cleansing.

John 3:1-15 is clearly not speaking about what flows out of the heart of the believer.

If "water" is defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again. So, to automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted.

I have never spoken of water baptism as the source of being born again. That is baptismal regeneration, something that I reject.

Yet there are still others who would argue that "water" is used in the Bible as an emblem of the word of God, and in such uses it is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26) When we are born again, the Holy Spirit begets new life and we are said to become "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4). The new birth is brought to pass through "incorruptible seed, by the Word of God, which lives and abides forever" (I Peter 1:23) and the Holy Spirit accomplishes the washing of regeneration. (Titus 3:5)

You speak of "the new birth". Where in the NT do you read of the new birth other than the really bad NIV translation? I would point to Acts 22:16 where Paul refers to the washing away of sins in conjunction with being baptized. The Greek word Paul uses there is the very same word as he used in his words to Titus as the washing of regeneration.

Besides all of that, given that Nicodemus would have undoubtedly been familiar with John's baptism and his baptism of Jesus, it is no stretch at all to see that he would understand water as baptism. And given that in the very next chapter we find Jesus' disciples, obviously with Jesus' approval, baptizing even more than John.

For what it is worth, Albert Barnes, not necessarily one of my favorite commentarians, has this to say about the water in John 3:5.

Be born of water - By “water,” here, is evidently signified “baptism.” Thus the word is used in Eph_5:26; Tit_3:5. Baptism was practiced by the Jews in receiving a Gentile as a proselyte. It was practiced by John among the Jews; and Jesus here says that it is an ordinance of his religion, and the sign and seal of the renewing influences of his Spirit. So he said Mar_16:16, “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved.” It is clear from these places, and from the example of the apostles Act_2:38, Act_2:41; Act_8:12-13, Act_8:36, Act_8:38; Act_9:18; Act_10:47-48; Act_16:15, Act_16:33; Act_18:8; Act_22:16; Gal_3:27, that they considered this ordinance as binding on all who professed to love the Lord Jesus.

That makes a lot more sense to me than all those other explanations such as you have given.

 

[mailmandan]

I am curious. Have you received the Holy Spirit? If so, did you receive the Holy Spirit through the laying on of hands of an apostle as you are claiming for those at Samaria?

I received the Holy Spirit several years ago upon believing the gospel (Ephesians 1:13) and before water baptism the following morning. No hands were laid on me by an apostle (which is the exception and not the rule anyway) and I did not speak in tongues (which is a spiritual gift that not all believers in the body of Christ receive - 1 Corinthians 12:27-31).

 

[JBO]

I received the Holy Spirit several years ago upon believing the gospel (Ephesians 1:13) and before water baptism the following morning. No hands were laid on me by an apostle (which is the exception and not the rule anyway) and I did not speak in tongues (which is a spiritual gift that not all believers in the body of Christ receive - 1 Corinthians 12:27-31).

You know that how? I hear others say something similar but I never hear any explanation of just how they knew that had happened.

 

[mailmandan]

You know that how? I hear others say something similar but I never hear any explanation of just how they knew that had happened.

I knew without a doubt that I had received the Holy Spirit and had become born again and my life changed drastically. What really blew my mind is how afterward, I recalled multiple people in the past who tried to share the gospel with me and it's like everything they said to me (prior to my conversion) just went right over my head but after my conversion, it's like a light came on and instantly I recalled those moments and said to myself, "that's what he was trying to tell me, that's what she meant, that's what they were talking about." I finally get it! Praise God!

Prior to my conversion I had no assurance of salvation but after my conversion I now have assurance of salvation.

Romans 8:16 - The Spirit himself testifies with our spirit that we are God’s children.

1 John 5:13 - These things I have written to you who believe in the name of the Son of God, that you may know that you have eternal life, and that you may continue to believe in the name of the Son of God.

 

[Spyder]

I remain astounded at those who may claim that they "believe the Bible" and argue against it.

 

[RedFan]

I remain astounded at those who may claim that they "believe the Bible" and argue against it.

Whenever "I believe the Bible" really means "I believe my interpretation of the Bible," it's not astounding at all to see argumentation for that interpretation and against other interpretations.

 

[Eternally Grateful]

You think to be born again involves a physical rebirth also?

Good God man do you ever listen to what people say?

Who said anything about a physical REBIRTH??

 

[Eternally Grateful]

And He never mentioned physical birth in that passage either, but you are apparently trying to force it into the text.

Actually yes he did

That which is born of flesh is flesh. (Physical birth)

 

[Eternally Grateful]

It is obvious that you don't.

Its obvious you don't

now we have a stalemate

so can we now look at truth?

 

[Eternally Grateful]

In regard to the word "water" in John 3:5, there are those who would argue that the natural sense of the passage parallels water with being born out of a mother’s womb and with flesh based on the answer of Nicodemus to Jesus. Simply stated in that case, two births are necessary. The first is a physical, literal, "flesh" birth (which is accompanied by amniotic "water") and the second is Spirit.

There are also those who would argue that Jesus mentions "living water" in John 4:10, 14; 7:37-39 and in John 7:38-39, we read - "He who believes in Me, as the Scripture has said, out of his heart will flow rivers of living water. But this He spoke concerning the Spirit. The Holy Spirit is the source of living water and spiritual cleansing.

If "water" is defined as baptism, then we could just as justifiably say, "Out of his heart will flow rivers of living baptism" in John 7:38. If this sounds ridiculous, it is no more so than the idea that water baptism is the source or the means of becoming born again. So, to automatically read "baptism" into John 3:5 simply because it mentions "water" is unwarranted.

Yet there are still others who would argue that "water" is used in the Bible as an emblem of the word of God, and in such uses it is associated with cleansing or washing. (John 15:3; Ephesians 5:26) When we are born again, the Holy Spirit begets new life and we are said to become "partakers of the divine nature" (2 Peter 1:4). The new birth is brought to pass through "incorruptible seed, by the Word of God, which lives and abides forever" (I Peter 1:23) and the Holy Spirit accomplishes the washing of regeneration. (Titus 3:5)

Amen,

Again, If water baptism is in context. Jesus would have said, For god so loved the world. that he gave his only son, thjat whoever believes and is water baptized will never perish,l but has eternal life. He who believes and is water baptized is not condemned, but he who is not water baptized or does nto believe is condemned already, because they either do not believe, or failed to get water baptized even though they do believe....

 

[Eternally Grateful]

I remain astounded at those who may claim that they "believe the Bible" and argue against it.

Oh I agree

Just as astounded at those who want to claim work that only God can do.. then say its from God..

 

[JBO]

Amen,

Again, If water baptism is in context. Jesus would have said, For god so loved the world. that he gave his only son, thjat whoever believes and is water baptized will never perish,l but has eternal life. He who believes and is water baptized is not condemned, but he who is not water baptized or does nto believe is condemned already, because they either do not believe, or failed to get water baptized even though they do believe....

How can you say you believe in God and then not only fail to do what He says, but actually reject what He says. Can anyone be saved without first repenting of his sins or confessing that Jesus is both Lord and savior? To just point out a few cases of what God said.

He said in Mark 16:16, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved..."

He said in Matthew 28:19-20, "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, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

I would comment here that the only command here is the verb "make". Baptizing and teaching are participles modifying make. In other words, baptizing and teaching are not commands on what to do to disciples; rather, baptizing and teaching are the descriptions on how to make disciples.

He said in Acts 2:38, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. "

Mistranslating/misinterpreting the Greek word "eis" to mean "because" is unacceptable.

He said in Acts 8:36, And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, "See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?"

He said in Acts 22:16. " And now why do you wait? 'Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.' "

There is not a single case in the entire NT where baptism is mentioned that water is specifically eliminated as the medium for the baptism. That is true even in the case of baptism in/with/by the Holy Spirit.

It is interesting to note that it is only in Acts in which, following the inauguration of the New Covenant at Pentecost, we read about the actual saving of individuals. There are about 13 instances where such salvic events are presented. In those instances, there are several things specifically mentioned in conjunction with and as precursors to those events. They are variously listed as "they heard the word", "they believed", "they repented their sins". "they accepted (confessed) Christ", and "they were baptized". In these various events, not all were mentioned. In some only one was mentioned, in others sometimes two or three were mentioned. That they were baptized is mentioned in conjunction with and as precursors to being saved more times than even that they believed. Of the

It would seem to that what the Bible says these various individuals did to be saved should not be ignored or rejected.

But of course, you are free to do as you like.

As an addendum, here are the 13 events listed in Acts where it says that one or more persons were saved; you can read for yourself.

The 3000 - Acts 2:37-41.
The Brothers - Acts 3:19.
At Jerusalem - Acts 4:4.
The Samaritans - Acts 8:12.
Simon - Acts 8:13
The Ethiopian - Acts 8:35-39.
Cornelius - Acts 10:47-48.
Lydia - Acts 16:13-15.
The Jailor - Acts 16:29-34.
All men - Acts 17:34
The Corinthians - Acts 18:8.
The Ephesians - Acts 19:1-7.
Saul of Tarsus - Acts 22:16.

 

[Spyder]

Oh I agree

Just as astounded at those who want to claim work that only God can do.. then say its from God..

Your response makes no sense to me. Is it a case where my statements were confusing?

 

[Spyder]

How can you say you believe in God and then not only fail to do what He says, but actually reject what He says. Can anyone be saved without first repenting of his sins or confessing that Jesus is both Lord and savior? To just point out a few cases of what God said.

He said in Mark 16:16, "Whoever believes and is baptized will be saved..."

He said in Matthew 28:19-20, "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, teaching them to observe all that I have commanded you. And behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age."

I would comment here that the only command here is the verb "make". Baptizing and teaching are participles modifying make. In other words, baptizing and teaching are not commands on what to do to disciples; rather, baptizing and teaching are the descriptions on how to make disciples.

He said in Acts 2:38, "Repent and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins, and you will receive the gift of the Holy Spirit. "

Mistranslating/misinterpreting the Greek word "eis" to mean "because" is unacceptable.

He said in Acts 8:36, And as they were going along the road they came to some water, and the eunuch said, "See, here is water! What prevents me from being baptized?"

He said in Acts 22:16. " And now why do you wait? 'Rise and be baptized and wash away your sins, calling on his name.' "

There is not a single case in the entire NT where baptism is mentioned that water is specifically eliminated as the medium for the baptism. That is true even in the case of baptism in/with/by the Holy Spirit.

It is interesting to note that it is only in Acts in which, following the inauguration of the New Covenant at Pentecost, we read about the actual saving of individuals. There are about 13 instances where such salvic events are presented. In those instances, there are several things specifically mentioned in conjunction with and as precursors to those events. They are variously listed as "they heard the word", "they believed", "they repented their sins". "they accepted (confessed) Christ", and "they were baptized". In these various events, not all were mentioned. In some only one was mentioned, in others sometimes two or three were mentioned. That they were baptized is mentioned in conjunction with and as precursors to being saved more times than even that they believed. Of the

It would seem to that what the Bible says these various individuals did to be saved should not be ignored or rejected.

But of course, you are free to do as you like.

As an addendum, here are the 13 events listed in Acts where it says that one or more persons were saved; you can read for yourself.

The 3000 - Acts 2:37-41.
The Brothers - Acts 3:19.
At Jerusalem - Acts 4:4.
The Samaritans - Acts 8:12.
Simon - Acts 8:13
The Ethiopian - Acts 8:35-39.
Cornelius - Acts 10:47-48.
Lydia - Acts 16:13-15.
The Jailor - Acts 16:29-34.
All men - Acts 17:34
The Corinthians - Acts 18:8.
The Ephesians - Acts 19:1-7.
Saul of Tarsus - Acts 22:16.

Unfortunately, the "popular" doctrine in evangelical circles says that water has nothing to do with baptism or being saved - despite bible verses saying differently.