Added: 4 years ago
From: SKYSPLASH
Views: 16,652
Sort by time | Sort by thread (beta)

Link to this comment:

Share to:
see all

All Comments (352)

Sign In or Sign Up now to post a comment!
  • @USAFreedomReform "Acts 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: **and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed** "

    "Here is a verse were no baptism of any kind was mentioned but yet the Gentile were ordained to eternal life. "

    First off, you turned the sentence around, altering its meaning .It also doesnt say anything about the Holy Spirit either, so, you wanna believe they were saved without remission of sins and the Holy Spirit ?

  • @USAFreedomReform - "YOU TOTALLY MISSED IT !! JOHN 5 : 6,7,8,9,

    The real miracle didn't come from the man going into the water !!

    It came when the man obeyed what Jesus told him to do !! "

    I hope you realize that you just shot down your whole concept of ' Just believe 'and the Holy Spirit baptizes you without any action on your part . YES - Baptism IS an ACT of Obedience and God has chosen Water as the element by which you DO this act of obedience.

  • @Bobsblues "God has chosen Water as the element"

    Act 13:47 For so hath the Lord commanded us,[saying],I have set thee to be a light of the Gentiles, that thou shouldest be for salvation unto the ends of the earth.

    Act 13:48 And when the Gentiles heard this, they were glad, and glorified the word of the Lord: **and as many as were ordained to eternal life believed**

    Here is a verse were no baptism of any kind was mentioned but yet the Gentile were ordained to eternal life.

  • @USAFreedomReform "Here is a verse were no baptism of any kind was mentioned but yet the Gentile were ordained to eternal life." << wanna try again on Acts 13 because I think you might just contradict (once again) your own belief. Were they ordained without belief? Is "obedience/compliance" inherent in the meaning of "pistis/pisteuo". Did you ever bother to even look the word up? C'mon!

  • @USAFreedomReform " I know this means they didn't understand what the Holy Spirit was "

    Dont try to contort this into that they JUST didnt understand what the Holy Spirit was. WRONG - They HAD NOT RECIEVED THE HOLY SPIRIT. Wanna explain how That fits into your conception of Just believe and the Holy Spirit baptizes you without Real baptism and the laying on of hands .

  • @USAFreedomReform "and the other was a symbol (ritual) carried out to follow the lead of Jesus Christ."

    The following was done as an example to teach the people, and no more a ritual than the real baptism that would later follow.

    John 5:4

    For an angel went down at a certain season into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first after the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole of whatsoever disease he had.

  • @USAFreedomReform - We see in Acts 19 that your version of how and when a person recieves the Holy Spirit, just wasnt occuring in the way you say it does.

  • @Bobsblues "We see in Acts 19"

    Are you refering to talking in tongues and prophesing?

  • @Bobsblues 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

    What do think that means? Read Acts 8:14,15,16. It goes along with this.

    I know this means they didn't understand what the Holy Spirit was , so Paul told them they could be baptized by Jesus Christ and then by them hearing this, Paul laid hands on them & they received the Holy Ghost. 12 were saved the disciples of JOHN.

  • they think music is evil too.lol

  • Mark 16:16, John 3:5, Acts 2:38. And Jesus hadn't died when the thief was on the cross, so he would have been judged according to the old covenant. Baptism was irrelevant to his salvation either way.

    Now, please, entertain me with your stubborn, close-minded, intentionally ignorant attempts to twist the black-and-white, plain-as-the-nose-on-your-face truth to suit your belief that baptism isn't necessary for salvation

  •  Members of baptist sect daz not have biblical fath.

  • First of all we Christians have a different menaing of the phrase Great Commission. To us the Great joint Mission is "Soul Winning" Mark 16:15 .

    I have been preaching the Gospel on the streets of this nation for the last 18 years. When the Apostle Paul was Saved he did not want to "speak in tongues" or any of that...the word says "Straightway he preached "CHRISTt" in the synagogues, that HE IS the SON OF GOD ! ACTS 9:20 and all that heard him were AMAZED........vs 21a

  • , here what he said in Mark 16:16;

    16He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mark 16:16....I know you like accurate words. The baptism here spoken of by Jesus is his own baptism WITH the Holy Ghost {Indwelling the Believer}

  • @ydnar0591 "The baptism here spoken of by Jesus is his own baptism WITH the Holy Ghost {Indwelling the Believer}" LOL No, it's NOT - you have to ASSUME such a thing with plenty of EVIDENCE to the contrary. And #1 on that list is that Mark 16: 15-16 is PARALLEL to Matt 28: 19, 20 and Luke 24: 47. Matthew, Mark, AND Luke ALL record the Great Commission, and to have MARK talking about ONE KIND of baptism, yet Matthew is definately referring to ANOTHER is just a little too much.

  • @lllannallll

    I know Matthew 28:19 is...But the verse in Mark says arise and be baptized. It does not mention the Father , Son and HS.If you are still talking about mark 16:16??? NO father, no soan, no HS. It is not too much for the word of God.

  • @ydnar0591 "But the verse in Mark says arise and be baptized." That's Acts 22: 16 that says that, but anyway ... the verses in Mark are Mark's account of the SAME EVENT where Jesus uttered the SAME WORDS as recorded by Matthew and Luke. And the Holy Spirit is not even MENTIONED in ANY of the accounts, is He? The fact that Jesus said "baptizing into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit" in Matthew means the same baptism is referenced in Mark.

  • @ydnar0591 In other words, to assume Holy Spirit baptism in Mark 16: 16, you must TOSS ASIDE whatever evidence there is in Matthew of the Great Commission, and arbitrarily INSERT "baptism of the Holy Spirit" into Mark 16: 16 and start runnin. The EVIDENCE that EXISTS is that Matt 28: 19 and Mark 16: 16 refer to water baptism.

  • @lllannallll

    Did you ever notice that H2o is NEVER first in the order ...it's always after the fact of Faith and repentence, unless it lost something in english translation. But you would have to go to the Greek for that. I have never studied Herew or Greek except to look up a word occasionally. But I try to stick to the English ONLY because that's what was given to us, and it''s what 99.9% of Americans read IF they read the Bible at ALL. When we share our faith it will do no good anyway.

  • @ydnar0591 "Did you ever notice that H2o is NEVER first in the order" Certainly it's not: baptism without pre-existing faith and repentance is FOR NOTHING.

  • @lllannallll

    For you yes ...for me Believing/Repentance is for Salvation by the Grace of God and H2o Baptism is Obedience to Christ's Command/Law.

  • @lllannallll

    For you yes ...for me Believing/Repentance is for Salvation by the Grace of God {unearned} and H2o Baptism is Obedience to Christ's Command/Law. We can be obedient to the Law as long as we do not apply it to our salvation.

    3For I testify again to every man that is circumcised, that he is a debtor to do the whole law. 4Christ is become of no effect unto you, whosoever of you are justified by the law; ye are fallen from grace....Galatians 5:3-4

  • @ydnar0591 "for me Believing/Repentance is for Salvation by the Grace of God {unearned}" Amazing to me that you can LISTEN to God's word, READ God's word, MEDITATE upon the preaching/reading, WEIGH the facts in light of the evidence, then (in your order), TURN to God - REPENT, and TRUST/PLACE CONFIDENCE in Jesus Christ ..... THEN say "praise God it wasn't of baptism: I could BOAST about that! You know such logic is ILLOGICAL.

  • @lllannallll

    Ya know sometimes people spend so much time learning and reading and collecting FACTS as you say, some even spen YEARS learning Greek and Hebrew so that they can win arguments. BUT they forget to have a relationship with GOD.

    Jesus said:

    39 Search the scriptures; for in them ye think ye have eternal life: and they are they which testify of me.

    40And ye will not come to me, that ye might have life. JOHN 5:39-40

    They "forget God's heart" in their zeal to be right.

  • @ydnar0591 "Ya know sometimes people spend so much time learning and reading and collecting FACTS as you" Yep, and I've heard people say, "YOU must hear the gospel, YOU must believe the gospel, YOU must repent .... ", then, when pressed on the matter, turn right around and say GOD FORCED THEN TO BELIEVE. Know why? They erroneously think that if man DOES ANYTHING, he is somehow EARNING something. That's ridiculous. THAT, sir, is just the extent that folks will go to oppose water baptism.

  • @lllannallll "is just the extent that folks will go to oppose water baptism"

    I received water baptism because Jesus Christ did.Jesus was without sin,but still received baptism.John did not want to baptise Jesus Christ,but would have been in disobedience had he not baptised Jesus.FYI,I do not oppose water baptism,but if you go into the water without salvation,you will also come out of the water without salvation.Jesus said ye must be born of water(of woman) and of spirit(holy ghost)to be saved.

  • @USAFreedomReform "Jesus said ye must be born of water(of woman) and of spirit(holy ghost)to be saved." Born of water and of Spirit - one birth, two elements - means ... umm ... natural CHILDBIRTH? Well, that's novel, but at least every human is half-way there, right? Truth is: the phrase is "born of water and (of) the Spirit", not "born of water, then born of the Spirit."

  • @lllannallll "the phrase is "born of water and (of) the Spirit", not "born of water, then born of the Spirit."

    Jesus was telling Nicodemus that he must be BORN again,and Nicodemus thought he was going to have to get back in the womb.

    Being born again is by believing on the name of Jesus Christ and the HOLY SPIRIT coming over you ,thus being baptised in the HOLY SPIRIT.

    You can't baptise the SPIRIT with a FLESH thing like water.

    Again JESUS DID it all on the CROSS !

  • @USAFreedomReform "Being born again is by believing on the name of Jesus Christ and the HOLY SPIRIT coming over you ,thus being baptised in the HOLY SPIRIT." Well, of course, that's simply your assertion. The passage actually doesn't mention faith, nor does it mention "the Holy Spirit coming over you." It says "born of water and of the Spirit." And if Jesus had NOT said, "born of water", your meaning would not change. By the way, how many baptisms are there today, anyway?

  • @USAFreedomReform "Again JESUS DID it all on the CROSS !" And again, I see that you SAY that, but you won't TAKE it for what it's worth. You'll qualify it by turning right around and telling what WE have to do, then when baptism comes up, you'll flip-flop right back to "Jesus did it all," then quietly mention that one must believe. I used to call it the Baptist two-step.  Such is a logical contradiction.

  • @lllannallll "I used to call it the Baptist two-step"

    What are you refering to here. Your cult is the one who just came into existance in the 1800's and Alexander Campbell started it all with The Restoration Movement.

    Mormons and Jehovahs Witnesses also came from the teachings of Campbell.

    CoJC of latter day saints, (self proclaimed) is another branch of campbells teachings.

    Are you part of that CoC that calls themselves conservative?

  • @USAFreedomReform "I used to call it the Baptist two-step" You: "What are you refering to here?" This: put yo right foot in, "nuttin you can do", take ur right foot out, "all you have to do is ...." , put ur left foot in, "Jesus did it all." And turn it all about: "All you have to do is ... " THAT is "what I'm referring to." Can't make your mind so you two-step and flippy-flop. Is it NOTHING? or is it SOMETHING?

  • @lllannallll "put yo right foot in, "nuttin you can do", take ur right foot out, "all you have to do is ...." , put ur left foot in, "Jesus did it all." And turn it all about: "All you have to do is"

    I say Jesus did it all and all that GOD requires is to believe on the name of Jesus Christ to be saved in John 3:16.

    You are taking this way out of proportion.What the CoC does with WATER is of the flesh.

    Calling on the name of Jesus is a spiritual move.

    We have free will to chose !!

  • @USAFreedomReform "I say Jesus did it all and all that GOD requires is to believe" Certainly you do. The only difference between us long that line is WHAT GOD REQUIRES. Your "argument" on "Jesus did it all" is nonsense, and you don't even believe it. Jesus did ALL of His part: He is lacking in nothing - it is FINISHED. But you say we DO have a part .. we must do SOMETHING. Very well.

  • @USAFreedomReform "But, if you would be so kind, would you provide any evidence, either in sacred or profane Greek writings, that hints that "born of water" simply means "childbirth"? I've never seen it." Just a reminder. I still haven't. <-- I hate to mention it, but I've asked that THREE times, without even an attempt to supply any sort of answer. Don't forget it, cuz I'd like to see it. Your entire doctrine depends on your assertion, so I'd like to see the evidence.

  • @lllannallll "Your entire doctrine depends on your assertion that hints that "born of water" simply means "childbirth"?"

    See here is a difference.This word DOCTRINE. You can call it that if you like , but I don't have a doctrine per say. Jesus Christ is my what I believe in and what I have faith in.

    btw,the verse you seek is John 3:6.Jesus was to have said in John 3:5 that a man has to be born of water and of the Spirit to enter the koGOD, so he said what is born of flesh is FLESH.

  • @lllannallll "that hints that "born of water" simply means "childbirth"?"

    HAVE YOU STUDIED YOUR BIBLE or have you just read over it.

    John 6:63,64 the spirit is what is quickened,the flesh profits nothing.The words he speaks to us are of the spirit,and they are life.

    Some still chose not to believe.

    The above verses were paraphrased. Read it for yourself.

  • @lllannallll "either in sacred or profane Greek writings"

    Funny what you believe in. What are you calling sacred and what are you calling profane GREEK?

  • @USAFreedomReform ""either in sacred or profane Greek writings" Certainly! I know you can't find "born of water and Spirit" meaning "childbirth" IN the Bible, but perhaps you can find it OUT OF the Bible. Truth is: you can't find it ANYWHERE, either in the Bible or out.  It's ONE baptism. Two elements. ONE birth. TWO elements. ONE "born" - TWO elements, water and Spirit.

  • @USAFreedomReform You can deny it if you want, but you believe John 3: 5 teaches that a person if 1st born of his MOTHER, then maybe 20 yrs later, BORN AGAIN of the Spirit. Such a view might have a little merit if the verse talked about 2 births (born of water then born again of the Spirit), but it doesn't.

  • @USAFreedomReform "And if Jesus had NOT said, "born of water", your meaning would not change. By the way, how many baptisms are there today, anyway?" I'd like to see your answer to that. C'mon. Is there ONE - just ONE? or TWO? or TEN? Eph 4: 4-6 (AD 62-63) says ONE. Ok, how many do you practice?

  • @lllannallll "how many baptisms are there today"

    If you accept Jesus Christ before going into the water, You are baptised first by the HOLY GHOST (with the HOLY GHOST)and as a follow up RITUAL you are baptised in the water.(Only because Jesus Christ did it)

  • @USAFreedomReform "If you accept Jesus Christ before going into the water, You are baptised first by the HOLY GHOST" Just for argument's sake: "#1 Repent ye .. #2 be baptized ...#3 unto the remission of sins .. and THEN #4, ye shall receive the gift of the Spirit. In Acts 2, the gift of the Spirit is promised after baptism, yet you place it PRIOR to baptism. Any reason for that?

  • @lllannallll "In Acts 2, the gift of the Spirit is promised after baptism, yet you place it PRIOR to baptism. Any reason for that?"

    You say you follow Jesus' teaching but keep going back to what Paul and the other disciples said.

  • @USAFreedomReform "You say you follow Jesus' teaching but keep going back to what Paul and the other disciples said." <-- I'd say that a pretty poor explanation of Acts 2, but I suppose it's about all you can do. Acts 2 is the Great Commission - what Jesus SAID - in action. Best I can tell, you'll just deny that Peter and Paul knew what they were talking about. Why don't you try again? And maybe better luck on the next try.

  • @lllannallll "#1 Repent ye .. #2 be baptized ...#3 unto the remission of sins"

    So, this was Peter that said this.Where was Peter and how many were with Peter when he said this?

  • @USAFreedomReform "#1 Repent ye .. #2 be baptized ...#3 unto the remission of sins" So, this was Peter that said this.Where was Peter and how many were with Peter when he said this?" Oh, blah. Why don't you just go ahead and say Peter basically LIED about it. So did Ananias in Acts 22: 16, too. Who said, "Repentance and remission .. shall be preached in my name beginning at Jerusalem"? Well, was it?

  • @USAFreedomReform So here's USAFreedom right now: "Jesus did it all; nothing you can do; all you have to do is. If you think this is contradictory, you're .. umm .. brainwashed. Yes, Paul said there is one baptism, but drat his hide, there are TWO - one that kinda 'counts', though. I'm not counting the other one. I have a strange counting method: 1 + 1 = 1." Sir, you cast doubt on the Bible and make a mockery of logic, to boot.

  • @lllannallll "And if Jesus had NOT said, "born of water"

    But he DID say it. There are no WHAT IFs !!

  • @USAFreedomReform "But he DID say it. There are no WHAT IFs !! " Jesus said "Born of water and of the Spirit" Lemme ask: HOW many births is Jesus talking about there? How many elements? Land sakes, I believe you'll say "born of water and the Spirit" = TWO births, often separated by many years. Is that not true?

  • @lllannallll "I believe you'll say "born of water and the Spirit" = TWO births, often separated by many years. Is that not true?"

    Did you even read the next verse? What is born of flesh is flesh and WHAT IS BORN OF SPIRIT IS SPIRIT.

    The reason you believe what you do is you have been taught that way.(and because the restoration movement led by Alexander Campbell and other have confused the issue)

    This belief only came about 200 years or more after the K J bible in 1611.

  • @USAFreedomReform 'This belief ('born of water' referring to baptism) only came about 200 years or more after the K J bible in 1611." Oh, really? "For as we were lepers in sin, we are made clean by means of the sacred water ... even as the Lord declared, 'Unless a man be born again through water and the Spirit." Iraneaus (AD102-AD202). And dozens more. Campbell indeed! You're wrong on that.

  • @lllannallll "Iraneaus (AD102-AD202). And dozens more. Campbell indeed! You're wrong on that"

    Where did this reference come from? IS it in the scriptures? Who is Iraneaus?

  • @lllannallll "HOW many births is Jesus talking about there?"

    Jesus is talking of 2 births one of flesh and another when the person repents and is saved. The phrase "born again","reborn" is only of the spirit, by the HOLY SPIRIT baptism.

    YOU HAVE BEEN MIS-LED FOR SO LONG, AND ARE YOU DOING ANYTHING TO CORRECT THE PROBLEM.

    Look if you say(as only you can know)you know Jesus Christ through the process of water baptism, I believe you(but its not me that counts) , its Jesus Christ.

  • @lllannallll If you can say(not for me) but for your own salvation that you are 100% sure that your name is written in the lambs book of life, then you have completed that step in your christian walk.

    Now are you ready to start selling off all you possessions and giving the money to the poor? I will be honest with you, I hadn't started selling off either.

  • @lllannallll I don't have whole lot because I don't need a whole lot,but what I do have is the peace of knowing that I have my name written in the lambs book of life.

    Why, because I called on the name of Jesus Christ, repented of my sins,have FAITH that the Gospel is true and was baptised in the Holy Spirit and later baptised in a cold water creek to symbolize my belief and following in the footsteps of Jesus Christ.

    I know with out a shadow of a doubt that I am and was SAVED by grace !! Amen!

  • @USAFreedomReform "I know with out a shadow of a doubt that I am and was SAVED by grace !!" Well, good for you - you followed a somewhat unique route to get there - much different than the 3,000 on Pentecost or Saul in Acts 22. I'm glad God made an exception for you and Billy Graham.

  • @USAFreedomReform ""how many baptisms are there today" Very well. You name two, just as predicted. But Paul says "there is one baptism" as of AD63. One Lord (not two), One body (not two), One God (not two), One baptism (oh, no, we got 2 of them). You know that's wrong.  Plus, you show no signs of total immersion in the Spirit - the apostles did; you don't. You knew I'd say all that - hence, the delay in answering.

  • @lllannallll "Very well. You name two, just as predicted"

    Predictions are border line sorcery. No, I name one baptism of the HOLY SPIRIT (the one that counts, and the other was a symbol (ritual) carried out to follow the lead of Jesus Christ.

  • @USAFreedomReform "No, I name one baptism of the HOLY SPIRIT (the one that counts, and the other was a symbol (ritual) carried out to follow the lead of Jesus Christ." Yep, and you have two - yet Eph 4: 4-6 says there is one. And you aren't following "the lead" of Jesus, anyway. So that's that: remember Paul said AD63, "there is one." You come along in 2012, still claiming two. Go figure.

  • @lllannallll "there is one,You come along in 2012,still claiming two"

    Paul says one baptism,the baptism of the HOLY SPIRIT.Since that is the one and only baptism, all these years later man has slipped back into the ways of baptism before John said in Mark 1:8 "I indeed baptize you with water: BUT (JESUS)he shall baptize you with the HOLY GHOST."

    This water baptism ended when Jesus Christ started baptising with the HOLY GHOST.

    See you just can't stand JESUS & his abilitys !!

  • @USAFreedomReform "This water baptism ended when Jesus Christ started baptising with the HOLY GHOST." LOL Oh, my! Kinda odd that the eunuch was baptized in water in Acts 8. Peter said baptism is in water, I Pet 3. But water baptism, as per you, all just came to a close on the day of Pentecost in Acts 2? Well, WHY, pray tell, was it contiunally practiced throughout the rest of Acts?

    

  • @lllannallll "Kinda odd that the eunuch was baptized in water in Acts 8. Peter said baptism is in water"

    How do you know if the order of the events in Acts are actually in the order they happened?

  • @USAFreedomReform "See you just can't stand JESUS & his abilitys !!" Like the ability to dispatch the Paraclete to inerrantly guide the apostles so they wouldn't make eternal MISTAKES? Like the ability to preserve His written word in an understandable form? Those kinda things? No, you're busy out looking for amputees who have been healed - and you'll find ZERO.

  • @lllannallll Now , water baptism is just a symbol that you are following in the footsteps of Jesus Christ. Nothing MORE. SORRY to burst your egotistical . This is the truth and if you will quit following the teachings of a CULT, COOL-AID CLUB, you will see what the TRUTH is.

    Wonder if this Jerry Jones is related to JIM JONES that caused the death of all his followers after drinking the laced cool-aid

  • @USAFreedomReform "water baptism is just a symbol that you are following in the footsteps of Jesus Christ."  Oh, the Bible does even say that - YOU did, just repeating what you've been taught. I've repeatedly asked you to REALLY EXPLAIN Acts 2: 38 and Acts 22: 16, and you come back with the standard denominational assertion.

  • @lllannallll "I've repeatedly asked you to REALLY EXPLAIN Acts 2: 38 and Acts 22: 16, and you come back with the standard denominational assertion"

    Even if I do explain it to you, you will not believe me, so whats the use.

  • @USAFreedomReform "Even if I do explain it (Acts 2 and Acts 22) to you, you will not believe me, so whats the use?" The USE is that you will have to say that, for instance, Acts 2: 38 MEANS: "Repent, then get baptized by the Spirit in order to recieve the gift of the Spirit", I guess. I will point out, as you know, that IF the phrase meant "get Spirit-baptized" then such a person, THEN AND THERE, has the gift of the Spirit - same thing.

    

  • @USAFreedomReform "if you will quit following the teachings of a CULT, COOL-AID CLUB" <-- Oh, c'mon. THIS from the "nothing you can do ... you have to do is" fella who has an error-riddled Bible, 'sees' imaginary contradictions, then asks the Spirit for "some of de illumination" so the Spirit can explain it all? If that's not cultish, I dont know what is. Really? When God "explains" these concepts to you, are you thus "inspired"?

  • @USAFreedomReform "the other was a symbol (ritual) carried out to follow the lead of Jesus Christ." No, it wasn't. Plenty of people were baptized with John's baptism, just as Jesus was, and they certainly were not "following Jesus' lead." Where'd you get that? About the 10th chapter of your imagination?

  • @lllannallll One place in scripture(i'll find it later) Paul said to imitate PAUL. Thats not right. Paul placed himself as a replacement for Jesus Christ when he said this. We are not to worship PAUL, PETER, or any other man. Only GOD/Jesus Christ do we worship.

  • @USAFreedomReform "One place in scripture(i'll find it later) Paul said to imitate PAUL." LOL Ok, you do that. I'm quite sure Paul meant to imitate his faith - not WORSHIP him. In fact, he condemned those who were saying "I am of Paul. I am of Cephas."  Anyway, carry on with your search for contradictions.

  • @USAFreedomReform I know of no Greek text, either in Bible or out of it, that uses the figurative phrase "born of water" to mean "natural childbirth." I do know that every so-called "church father" that ever wrote on the subject said "born of water" means "water baptism." But, if you would be so kind, would you provide any evidence, either in sacred or profane Greek writings, that hints that "born of water" simply means "childbirth"? I've never seen it.

  • @lllannallll "I do know that every so-called "church father"

    You can't rely on "every church father",only JESUS CHRIST.

    Putting anything before Christ(except GOD) is saying that JESUS dying on the CROSS was not enough.

    John 3:5,6 Jesus was explaining to Nicodemus that born of water meant born of a woman.(Jesus was born of woman)Jesus also said a man must be born of the Spirit(the HOLY SPIRIT).

    Next verse: What is FLESH is FLESH(woman) and what is SPIRIT is SPIRIT(HOLY SPIRIT)

  • @USAFreedomReform "You can't rely on "every church father",only JESUS CHRIST." I don't. Jesus Christ said "born of water". I said it is singularly odd that every "church father" who ever wrote on the subject said "born of water" means "water baptism." And on top of that, NO then-contemporary Greek text, sacred or profane, uses "born of water" to mean "childbirth." So you apply a figurative meaning in contradiction to every church father and every other sacred/profane source.

  • @USAFreedomReform "Jesus was telling Nicodemus that he must be BORN again" Yes, then He tells him HOW: born of water and of the Spirit. You simply MUST separate the two and try to make it: "born of water, then fifteen or fifty years later, born of the Spirit." The two cannot be separated like that. And you are actually saying it means "born of the Spirit" alone. Is that correct?

  • @USAFreedomReform "John did not want to baptise Jesus." I know he didn't. Why not? Because Jesus was "without sin". Why baptize a person who is without sin? Jesus said, "Suffer it ... (permit it, allow the exception" .. to fulfill all righteousness." Jesus was not baptized for the remission of His sins: He had none. You and I do not fall into that category.

  • @lllannallll You and I don't fall into that category..to fulfill all righteousness.

    You could be immersed in every hole of water around the earth and all you are gonna get is wet because it is physical,NOT SPIRITUAL. JESUS DID IT ALL ON THE CROSS.

    All we have to do to be saved is the BELIEVE on the name of JESUS CHRIST.Its that simple.

    Nothing MAN can do except believe,will get you into heaven. JESUS DID IT ALL. By you saying that a ritual must be performed to be saved is PROOF.

  • @USAFreedomReform "JESUS DID IT ALL ON THE CROSS. All we have to do to be saved is the BELIEVE .." Sir, do you not see the logical contradiction in your own words. You say "Jesus did it all", then turn right around and proceed to tell us what WE have to do. I'd surmise that you'll say Jesus did it all, but we must repent. Jesus did it all, but we must love God. Jesus did it all, but we must trust in Him. And unless we DO these things, He didn't do it all. Contradictory.

  • @lllannallll "And unless we DO these things,He didn't do it all.Contradictory"

    Your just taking it as contradictory because thats the way you have been taught.

    Simplfied: WHO/What saves you? Jesus or Water?

    WHO/What forgives you ? JESUS or WATER?

    WHO/What gives you eternal Life? JESUS or WATER?

    WHO/What will judge you? JESUS or WATER?

    WHO/What is preparing a place for his bride/church? JESUS or WATER?

    When I say JESUS I am including the trinity, FATHER, SON and HOLY GHOST.

  • @USAFreedomReform "WHO/What forgives you ? JESUS or WATER?" Jesus .. WHEN? <-- you forgot to ask that, so I will.

    "WHO/What gives you eternal Life? JESUS or WATER?" Jesus .. WHEN <-- tell us that, too.

    I told you that the question on the whole she-bang is "When?" earlier.

  • @lllannallll "I told you that the question on the whole she-bang is "When?" earlier"

    And you expect me to take the WORD of one who thinks WATER is the way to Jesus Christ?

    THANK YOU but , No thank you !!

  • @USAFreedomReform "Your just taking it as contradictory because thats the way you have been taught." No, I don't think so. Anyone with a smattering of reason can see that "Jesus paid it all. There's nothing you can do. All you HAVE to DO is ... " is a logical fallacy. You can't say, "You can't do anything", then add "You have to do something" in the same breath. I think you or anyone else can see that.

  • @lllannallll "You can't say, "You can't do anything", then add "You have to do something" in the same breath"

    SURE I CAN, Watch !!

    JEsus did it all on the cross and all GOD requires is to BELIEVE on the name of Jesus Christ and be saved !!

    See it is just that simple !!

  • @USAFreedomReform "JEsus did it all on the cross and all GOD requires is to BELIEVE on the name of Jesus Christ and be saved" Then didn't quite do it "all", did he? You have to kinda help the salvation process out, eh? I think anyone else could see the logical contradiction in your comment, but you're stuck with it. Keep asserting it, dude - that'll make it true! LOL

  • @USAFreedomReform "Nothing MAN can do except believe,will get you into heaven" <-- there it is again. Why, sir, don't you simply be consistent and say, "Jesus did it all, and there's nothing we can do." I don't agree with that, but it makes more sense. "Nothing you can do; Jesus did it all; here's what you have to do ... " You know that won't work.

  • @ydnar0591 "They "forget God's heart" in their zeal to be right." Reminds me of those who have a "zeal without knowledge." They are ZEALOUS - ENERGETIC - AMBITIOUS ... but woefully IGNORANT. They need to COOL their ZEAL, and THAW OUT their KNOWLEDGE. Then, they might have a ZEAL WITH KNOWLEDGE - a much more preferable state.

  • @ydnar0591 "We can be obedient to the Law as long as we do not apply it to our salvation." CERTAINLY! And PART of "being obedient" is to TRUST/HAVE FAITH/HAVE CONFIDENCE in Jesus Christ ... to believe that He IS the Son of God, and to REPENT. Who did that? YOU did In so doing, WHO obeyed God? YOU did. Sir, you didn't EARN your salvation, but you were ACTIVE in complying with the TERMS set forth by the Master. And so with baptism.

  • @ydnar0591 "I know Matthew 28:19 is...But the verse in Mark says arise and be baptized." Blah. That's Acts 22: 16. Mark is simply recording the EXACT SAME EVENT - the same SUBJECT, TIME, and PLACE - as Matthew, and in HIS rendering, Matthew makes PLAIN the reference to water baptism. In the absence of other evidence to the contrary, Mark 16 MUST refer to the same baptism as Matt 28. And you present absolutely NO EVIDENCE - just your ASSERTION. That won't work.

  • @ydnar0591 "The baptism here spoken of by Jesus is his own baptism WITH the Holy Ghost {Indwelling the Believer}" By the way, WHO SAID that the "indwelling of the believer" is synonymous with the BAPTISM of the Spirit? I sure didn't. The BAPTISM of the SPIRIT was ACCOMPANIED by certain things: for one, all things spoken by Jesus were brought to their remembrance. For another, they spoke in foreign tongues or languages without ever learning the language.

  • Comment removed

  • The New Covenant went into force at the moment of Christ's death (Heb. 9:16-17, Mk. 15:37-38); the elect thief died under the New Covenant (Jn. 19:32-33), but never was baptized in water: this is known because he was lost at the beginning of Christ's Crucifixion and was saved at the end of It (Mt. 27:44, Mk. 15:32, Lk. 23:39-43). This is irrefutable proof that water baptism is not essential for salvation. What saith the Scripture? Lk. 7:50 (KJV): "Thy faith hath saved thee."

  • WE know that 1 Cor 1:14-15 is talking about "Water Baptism becuse it is speaking of Men baptizing men...In this case Paul's non enthusiasm for the practice of H2o baptism.

    We also notice in these verses that Paul attached NO significance to water baptism as a Salvation doctrine. Nor did he ever.

    So we conclude that since "Jesus" himself and "Paul" did not come to baptize in water , they placed no importance on it for salvation, as they did with Grace through Faith in Jesus Blood...PERRIOD !

  • @ydnar0591 "So we conclude that since "Jesus" himself and "Paul" did not come to baptize in water" That's why Jesus said, "He the believeth and is baptized shall be saved ..... ", and Paul was told "Arise, and be baptized, and wash away they sins .... " Paul never intended to belittle water baptism - the verse is an implied ellipsis, for one reason: PAUL DID BAPTIZE! He either disobeyed Christ or else baptized people for the SAME REASON that he was baptized.

  • Paul said:

    14 I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius;

    15 Lest any should say that I had baptized in mine own name. 1 Cor 1:14-15

    Paul did not want to start a CULT of H2o believers here , back in vs 12:

    12 Now this I say, that every one of you saith, I am of Paul; and I of Apollos; and I of Cephas; and I of Christ.

    Just 2 of the "Hallmarks" of a CULT are a "Human Leader" {or group} and a NON-essential doctrine as "Essential" to one's Salvation !!!

  • @ydnar0591 "Drink no longer (only) water, but (also) wine ... " "For Christ sent me not (only) to baptize, but (also) to preach the gospel. Makes sense, because the WRITER of the passage was told "Arise .. be baptized ... wash away thy sins ... calling on the name ... " Paul was saved just as the 3,000 on Pentecost. EVERY SAVED PERSON since Pentecost was baptized - EVERY example of conversion in Acts INCLUDES baptism. And the Pentecost preacher later said "baptism doth now save us."

  • Ok we have already seen that Jesus came to save BUT did NOT baptize anyone..and did not attach any impotrtance to H2o.

    Now in this verse we will see that Paul also Never baptized over 3-4 people and attached very little importance to H2o. as per salvation.

    BTW: "Withouit the shedding of Blood is NO REMISSION of sins". ..CofC would say: "Blood and water" must be here in this verse at... Hebrews 9:22 for it to be correct.

  • @ydnar0591 "Now in this verse we will see that Paul also Never baptized over 3-4 people" About all we see in THOSE VERSES is that Paul HIMSELF never baptized but a few CORINTHIANS. Why was he THANKFUL of that? Because he KNEW that he MIGHT BE ACCUSED of baptizing in HIS OWN NAME. Why was this important? Because if one was baptized "in the name of PAUL", he was "of Paul." If he was baptized "in the name of Christ", he was "of Christ."

  • St. Paul in Ephesians 4:5 is not saying that there is ONE Baptism left...and that Jesus quit baptizing in the spirit .lol He is saying there is ONLY 1 baptism that is IMPORTANT ENOUGH to SAVE people...the baptism "WITH" the Holy Spirit and fire. {The indwelling Spirit.}

    There is also the baptism "IN" the Holy Spirit with POWER, the manifestations of the Spirit ..the gifts of the Holy Spirit. Healing, miricles, tongues 1Cor 12:8-11

    I don't think Jesus has stopped administering the Spirit.

  • Jesus said:

    10 For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was lost.

    If H2o is SO important then Jesus would have been dunking people right and left. He never baptized anyone. He never spoke in tongues and he never taught speaking in tongues.

    He did however talk a TON about BELIEVING/FAITH, blind man was saved by his faith, Mary Magdalene, woman -John 4 etc

    It does'nt make sense, NOT 1 PEPSON DID HE SAVE BY H2o NOT ONE ! Why if is as IMPORTANT AS FAITH ???

  • Mr. Host,

    Your commentary is totally wrong. Jesus told the disciples (appostles) they would receive a baptism of the Holy Spirit. Power from on High. A different measure of the Holy Spirit that what the christians who obeyed on the day of Pentecost recieved. You cannot hold this argument and apply it this way. You need to re-study, Sir. You comments are a different subject matter entirely. Your bias is apparent and erroneous.

  • How is it that you all argue about a commandment thats simple? Does Jesus tell you to get baptised? Yes...........so why not just do it the way He said to do it and thats it. Why did Paul say its for or why does the Bible say its for or what it does? You all have the Bible right? End of story

  • Those Church of Christ brothers did a wonderful job. I watched the video and would like to add that faith is the substance of things hoped for, and the evidence of things not seen, Hebrews 11:1. So a sinner has no hope in the world of sin. He develops faith when he hears the gospel, believes, repents of his sin, confess that Jesus Christ is the Son of God, and then become baptized in his name to receice the holy spirit. Acts 2:38. do you not know that faith without works is dead?

  • @booman4184 .. Actually they did not!! It is because the "other side" were less than "knowledgeable" on the issue. My Name is Morgan Sorensen, you can find me on any large "search engine". If I had been invited to that debate, those "church of christers" would have been humiliated, for their lack of knowledgeof the scriptures, and their false teaching of water baptism, as nescessary for salvation. The three things that constitute baptism, is the 'Candidate', (the one to be baptized) ....

  • ...secondly, the 'element',(the substance Into which the 'candidate" is to be immered) and thirdly, the 'Agent", (the one who performs the baptism) Once this is clear in ones mind, the rest is very simple. Rom.6:3, and Gal.3:27, both declare that this particular baptism spoken of here, (the "one baptism" that saves, in Eph.4:5)

    is "Into Christ", (the element) 1.Cor.12:13, further details this same event, as done "by one Spirit" (the agent that performs this baptism) This posits that these...

  • ... passages do NOT refer to 'Water Baptism'. 1.Pet.3:21, refers to 'water baptism' as a "like figure unto", (a mirror image of) this "Baptism INTO Christ", and that unlike this "baptism Into Christ" (which clothes us in righteousness) the baptism into water, "doth Not put off the filth of the flesh", But "saves", in the sense that it is "an answer of a good conscience to God". In water baptism a pastor or elder, is the 'agent', (and not the Holy Spirit) and water is the 'element',(not Christ

  • ..Now notice, in the baptism of the Holy Spirit, with evidence of power and the "gifts",( something that the 'church of christers', as well as the "baptists" do not understand) The Holy Spirit, becomes the 'element' into which the 'candidate' is "immersed', by Christ,(the 'agent') These are the three baptisms the scriptures discuss, that pertain to christianity. !.Cor 12:28 , declares that "God set in the Church" first "Missionaries", then "Prophets", then "teachers, this has never been....

  • ..repealed by God. So as long as the Church exists in the earth, those functions must prevail. This then becomes a glaring expose' of those 'churches' who do not believe that these functions are available today, and ended with the apostles. The Bible says in 2.Jn.9, "Whosoever transgresseth and abideth Not in the doctrine of Christ, hath not God, He that abideth in teh doctrine of Christ, hath both the Father and the Son." The baptism teaching of the 'church of christers', is un-biblical

  • what these c.o.C. ministers do not understand, when they are discussing Gal.3:26-17, is that this passage does Not imply ' water baptism'. It speaks of the 'baptism INTO CHRIST" (that means Christ is the "substance" 'baptized into', The 'element' ) 1.Cor.12:13 validates this fact by saying; " By one Spirit," (the Holy Spirit) " are we all baptized into one body". Ask yourself a question, when someone is baptized into water, is that done by a human being, or by the Holy Spirit ? ...

  • ...Is 'water baptism' into water,(as the 'element') or is it into Christ, (as the 'element') the simple answer is obvious. If they argue that 'water baptism' is "into Christ", then why does a person come up wet??? And secondly, is the officiating minister/elder the "Holy Spirit" ?? (to conform to 1.Cor.12:13, as to both the 'agent' in baptism, and the 'element ' baptized 'into') the lack of coherance, and lack of scriptural knowledge that these two 'church of christers' exhibit is pathetic

  • @sorens70601 1.Cor.12:13 validates this fact by saying; " By one Spirit," (the Holy Spirit) " are we all baptized into one body". I Cor 12: 13 doesn't validate your doctrine because it teaches that persons are baptized into the body: baptism is the doorway to the body, the church. See, the verse does not SAY that Christ is the "substance" at all - the "body" is. And the body is the church.

  • @sorens70601 now ask yourself a question......can you baptize yourself? Every example of baptism in the bible had to involve at least 2 people. Even Jesus was baptized, but he didn't do it alone.....John performed this, so water has to be involved....Matt. 3;14-17, and being baptized is necessary....Gal 3:26-27, Matt. 28:18-20. Water is the element people overlook in a lot of things. Try to wash clothes, or dishes, or your body without water, and tell me how far you'd get?

  • @jejesdad , Your assertion; " every example of baptism in the Bible had to atleast involve two people." CORRECT !!! But "every example of Baptism in scripture" does NOT involve WATER !!! This is where the discussion is "hung". John in Mt. 3:11, said, " I indeed baptize you with WATER...", but that Christ was going to perform a "baptism in the Holy Ghost and with fire". This posits a "different baptism" than that of water baptism. So to understand this, one has to look at the other..

  • ..."ingredient" necessary, besides the Candiate,(the one to be baptized) and the Agent,(the one performing the act of Baptism) and that "ingredient" is what I call the "element" into which a person is baptized. In Water baptism, clearly the "element' is Water. However, the Baptism "in" the Holy Spirit, (not "in" Water) as mentioned

    by John in Mt.3:11, qualifies the "Holy Spirit" as the "element". That such baptism exists, was witnessed from the fulfillment of Pentecost, until this day....

  • ...which in and of itself, proves that there are at least "Two different baptisms" discussed at this point, of which the "element" determines which one is discussed. So you see, "every example of Baptism in the Bible", ( that you asserted) does Not deal with WATER Baptism ! For example, your quoting Gal.3:26-27, while asserting it to be an example of "water baptism", is incorrect. The determining factor being the "element" into which we are baptized, as well as the "agent" performing such ..

  • ...baptism. In the "baptism in the Holy Spirit", The Holy Spirit becomes the "element" baptized into, and Christ is the "agent",(according to John in Mt. 3:11) who performs the "act of baptism". Now in Gal 3:26-27, we find That Christ is the "element" baptized "into" (not water) and the Holy Spirit is the "agent" who performs the "act of baptism". By no stretch of the imagination can anyone redefine the clear and plain spoken language to mean anything else. It is also clear from ALL the ...

  • ...scriptures pertaining to "redemption", "salvation", "regeneration", being "born again", etc., that Faith in the atoning work, and the redemptive power of the Blood of Christ, always precedes "water baptism". The biblical use of the words "filth of the flesh", (in context of redemption) always refers to Sin, and not litteral "dirt". It is in this context it is used for example in 1.Pet.3:21, making it clear that water (which does wash off "dirt") does NOT put away this "filth of the flesh"..

  • ...wich wording in itself indicates that we are Not dealing with "dirt". (every body knows water can clean of "Dirt")

    but here in 1.Pet.3:21, we are told that this baptism "doth also now save, But NOT the PUTTING AWAY OF THE FILTH OF THE FLESH". This very statement absolutely contradicts any argument that this "filth of the flesh" can be just plain old "dirt".(Because water DOES clean of "dirt" ) This "filth of the flesh", must be something that Water is Not capable of cleaning.

  • ...This fact is evident in the Greek, (textus receptus) as the 'koine' Gr. word for literal "dirt" is "akatharsia", whereas the Gr. word used for "moral depravity", (which really refers to "stench" or foul odor) is "Rhupos" or "Rhuparia".  So whan it comes to salvation, the "baptism that saves", is the "Baptism into Christ"(the element)

    done by the Holy Spirit. This is what is refered to as the "circumcission without hands", and called "one Baptism" in Eph.4:5. The very reason the Bible...

  • ... Eph. refers to "one Baptism", is because there are several Baptisms, (as per Heb.6:1-2) but only one "that saves". (puts away moral depravity and Sin)  Likewise, that same passage declares there is only "one Lord",

    (refering to Christ, because of His sacrificial death) Yet we Know that the scriptures declare there are Three that bear record. (that means, who "carry a testimony", which refers to the individuals in the Godhead) And Christ himself declared the Father to be"greater than I"

  • ...So, just as that passage in Eph. 4:4-6, speaks of "one Lord", when there are three persons in the trinity, ( all of which are Deity, according to 1.Jn.5:7, 'KJV' ) likewise there is "one baptism" that "regenerates us" from

    "spiritual death" , to "spiritually life", in Christ . (all before water baptism) Yet the fact that more than one baptism exists, and called "the doctrine of baptisms",(Heb.6:1-2) reffering to the New Testament doctrines of Christ, and in context with the ...

  • ... previous verses in Chapter 5:6-18, clearly indicates that the baptism into Christ,(not water) is this "one baptism" referred to,( and not water baptism) , or the Baptism "in the Holy Spirit", that John declared to be separate and distinct from his "baptism in water".(Mt.3:11)

  • @sorens70601 "Yet the fact that more than one baptism exists, and called "the doctrine of baptisms",(Heb.6:1-2) reffering to the New Testament doctrines of Christ," MORE than one baptism - but Eph 4: 4-6 says ONE baptism? The "ONE Lord" is Jesus Christ, and you know that: no need in trying to justify a dozen baptisms by just saying, "Well, there is more than ONE LORD." There is ONE baptism, and there is ONE Lord. You'll flatly contradict Eph 4: 4-6 in order to justify your doctrine.

  • @sorens70601 "Eph. refers to "one Baptism", is because there are several Baptisms" LOL! But Eph 4: 4-6 does NOT say "one baptism that saves," does it? By YOUR reasoning, there is MORE THAN ONE SPIRIT! God is SPIRIT, yet the Holy Spirit is a SPIRIT: that's TWO. But the verse REFERS to the HOLY SPIRIT, and there is ONE SPIRIT ... ONE LORD ... ONE BAPTISM. You die HARD on that fact, because your theology is ruined by those facts. And Heb 6: 1-2 doesnt help you.

  • @lllannallll ... You are so stupid, you just "hung yourself" on this your last comment with, quote: "..there is MORE THAN ONE SPIRIT ! God is SPIRIT", yet the Holy Spirit is a SPIRIT: that's TWO...." EXACTLY !!! So in the plurality of "SPIRITS", one is 'singled out' in this text, But, there is more than ONE !!!!

    Like wise BAPTISM is singled out, But, there are more than ONE. You go figure, dummy.

  • @sorens70601 "You are so stupid, you just "hung yourself" on this your last comment" The POST succeeded in pointing out YOUR stupidity: there is ONE Spirit. I think you'd have been better off if Eph 4: 4-6 was NEVER penned because YOU claim MORE than one. YOU claim there is MORE than ONE LORD, ONE SPIRIT, and ONE BAPTISM. Never seen anyone who claims to be a Christian make such an absurd claim - and all to save a doctrine with FIVE or TEN baptisms.

  • @sorens70601 "Doctrine of baptisms" really bother you, doesn't it? There ONCE was Holy Spirit baptism, Jewish washings, Christian baptism in water, and the like. We are to LEAVE those fundamental principles at some point, and Eph 4 teaches that there is ONE baptism that remains. YOU are not baptized in the Spirit; YOU can't speak Chinese if the need exists; YOU can't raise the dead - in fact, YOU can't do much of ANYTHING that characterized total immersion in the Holy Spirit.

  • @sorens70601 "Once this is clear in ones mind, the rest is very simple. Rom.6:3, and Gal.3:27" Yep, once you've decided there are about 20 baptisms in effect today with numerous administrators and elements, it's all as clear as MUD. "The baptism teaching of the 'church of christers', is un-biblical" More of your fake humility, eh? Everyone ELSE is supposed to blindly accept your tirades, but trouble is: not a person on here, member the church of Christ or not, believes what you spew.

  • @lllannallll Its simple You get baptised ONCE in water fully immsered in the name of Jesus Christ, the Lord the Father, the Son, the Holy Spirit, thats how your baptized then your sins are washed away. why is this debate so long? Why is it so complicated. So many people are confussed and turned off of religion cause of this type of stuff. When your baptized your in Christ.

  • @Mider999 "why is this debate so long?" Lots of different reasons. You see, when the Bible says "baptism doth also now save us", it kinda takes awhile to alligator around with "rupos" and "antitypes" - with the intended net effect being to say, "Baptism doth NOT now save us." When someone places himself above every translation of Acts 2:38, and says "Repent unto the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Spirit, then be baptized later because of the remission," well, you know.

  • @sorens70601 "both declare that this particular baptism spoken of here, (the "one baptism" that saves, in Eph.4:5)" To your dishonor, Eph 4: 5 simply says, "There is ONE BAPTISM, ispo facto" Take it or leave it - and you LEFT IT to venture off and say there are MANY BAPTISMS, MANY ADMINISTRATORS, MANY ELEMENTS, and ONE "VICTIM". Don't you WISH Eph 4: 5 said, "There is one baptism that saves?" but it does not SAY THAT, despite your vain attempts to force such a meaning.