The Thief on the Cross

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by Monarchianism

Wait, what? So, a person that has never been born of water and of the Spirit, but confesses to believe in God.. all of the sudden has been born of both?
( Btw, I get that anyone can speculate on the meaning ) : O

That's basically what I am saying. I would use the phrase believes in Jesus instead of confesses to believe in God because the way you worded it seems to imply that the person doing the confessing might not be telling the truth about believing in God.

Let me ask you a question, or two, or threeeeee.

How does a person know if he or she has fully repented?
A: They bring forth fruit meet for repentance.
Matthew 3:8 - Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:

I don't believe in half-repentance. Either a person truly repents or he does not repent at all. But what do I mean by repentance? By repentance I mean turning away from sin. But how does a man turn from sin? A man turns from sin by turning toward Jesus. But how does a man turn toward Jesus? A man turns toward Jesus by having faith in Jesus. So to me repentance is simply having faith in Jesus. Does this repentance mean he will no longer sin? NO! He might still sin, BUT his faith in Jesus will cause him to sin less and less. There will be up's and down's though. The man might take 1 step forward and 2 steps back and then 2 steps forward and 3 steps back and then 3 steps forward and 1 step back and on and on but that doesn't mean the man didn't "fully repent" as you described it. He did repent by believing on Jesus even if he struggles to line up his life to Christ's teaching (as we all do to some degree. AMEN?) I do realize that this big long paragraph didn't really answer the question about "knowing if we have fully repented". I think my paragraph on baptism will answer that question.

How does a person know if he or she has been baptized?
A: By immersion in water.
John 3:23 - And John also was baptizing in Aenon near to Salim, because there was much water there: and they came, and were baptized.
( It should also be noted that the word Baptism should not be Baptism, but "Baptisma". The word Baptism was forced into the Bible by catholics. Baptisma means Immersion. Baptism alone could institute sprinkling. )

Baptism is a physical act. If a man got baptized and doesn't know he did then that would be rather strange. However, I'll assume you mean how does a man know his baptism was valid. And my answer to that question is a man can not know for sure that his baptism was valid because his baptism is valid only by his faith in Christ and since he can never absolutely verify that he has faith in Christ (not even by his works because he may produce good works for reasons other than faith. For example, even the most wicked person you know will occasionally do a good deed and also there are many people that do many good deeds that have no faith.) Repentance is similar to baptism in this respect because repentance is having faith on Christ. But since we can never verify our faith on Christ then we do not have an absolute foundation for knowing that we have actually repented and been baptized validly. This does not mean we should doubt our salvation or our faith, it simply means that absolutes are hard to come by. It means we should trust that having enough faith to say Jesus is Lord is having real faith. However, while we trust that we have faith we should also strive to do away with our bad fruit and to gain good fruit so that our trust in our faith will be that much greater by seeing our lives being visibly transformed. The visible transformation is not our faith, instead it is the result of the faith which we had before any visible transformation took place.

Now, how does a person know if he or she has received the Spirit?
A: He/She speaks in tongues. : p
Acts 10:44 - 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."

Again the ability to absolutely know is hard to come by. A person can never be sure that he/she didn't just subconsciously fake tongues so asking how one can know is a question without an answer.

II Timothy 3:5 - "Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away."

To me, anyone that does not believe that speaking in tongues is receiving the Spirit.. is denying that power. I turn away!

It amazes me that you use II Timothy 3:5 as a verse to support tongues and to disfellowship over tongues. If you want to disfellowship then disfellowship over the bolded:

II Timothy 3:2-5
2For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

Or if you must disfellowship over those that deny the power then learn who those really are that have a form of godliness but deny the power thereof. Those that deny the power are the people that deny the power of God to transform lives. It has nothing to do with tongues. It has everything to do with changing lives (most notably their own).


We should seek to be filled with the Spirit and when we are we will speak with other tongues. John 3:8 - "So is everyone who is born of the Spirit."

I don't think John 3:8 has anything to do with tongues but I'll let you speculate it might if you want. I mean that's all you really have there is speculation.

I think I have answered your questions. So let me ask you 2.

Question 1: Why did you fail to comment on almost everything from my post where I referenced 1 John 5:2 (my post that you left this one as a reply)? I mean the most you did was kind of sarcastically toss aside all my reasoning in your opening paragraph. You did so without really explaining why? I'll give you the benefit of assuming that you did have a reason to toss it aside but I must ask what your reason was?

Question 2: Consider 1 John 5:9-11 NIV

9 We accept human testimony, but God’s testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about his Son. 10 Whoever believes in the Son of God accepts this testimony. Whoever does not believe God has made him out to be a liar, because they have not believed the testimony God has given about his Son. 11 And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

To paraphrase: John says that whoever believes in the Son of God accepts God's testimony that God has given them eternal life.

So my question is: If you believe in the Son of God then why do you reject the testimony of God that both you and those who believe in the Son of God have eternal life? Or if you don't reject that testimony then can you explain how?

[onefaith2]

Originally Posted by Sam

Jesus said you must be born again.
Nicodemus confused being born again with being born of a woman.
Jesus went on to say that there are two births for us, one is our first birth or birth of water which we all have experienced, and the other is a birth of the Spirit which we all need. In my opinion, He was trying to show Nicodemus that there are two births and was trying to clear up his understanding of the difference.

Sam Jesus would have used flesh instead of water. It would uncharacteristic for him to use the word water.

One must be born the first time and then the second time to enter the kingdom.

That is redundent.. everyone has been born the first time.. there would be no reason for Jesus to say that.

He was trying to show nicodemus that the second birth is of water and of Spirit. He wasn't telling Nicodemus that every man had to be born two times to enter. Everyone is already born once. He was telling nicodemus he had to be born again to enter.

Jesus contrasted flesh with Spirit birth.. that is why the new birth is water and SPirit, not mothers womb.

[onefaith2]

Originally Posted by jfrog

.

So my question is: If you believe in the Son of God then why do you reject the testimony of God that both you and those who believe in the Son of God have eternal life? Or if you don't reject that testimony then can you explain how?

First of all there is no scriptural connotation that one that believes would not receive the Holy Ghost like in the book of acts.

The Bible says he that believeth (current) that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.

"Is" is a present term. IT did not say everyone that believed has been born of God.

It doesn't finalize the new birth with belief.

That is why Mark says what he does

He that believeth (current) and is baptized shall be saved

and Peter

Repent and be baptized everyone one of you

These were always requirement for those who said they believed in Jesus.

That is why Repentance starts the new birth, that is where it begins but it is surely not where it ends

Peter said we being born again of the word

22Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:

23Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Peter qualified new birth with a response, purifying of our souls. That is done through repentance and putting the old man down in baptism so that we may receive the Spirit.

Nowhere did the bible teach baptism was optional or receiving the Holy Ghost was optional

Baptism is a command to the believer and the holy ghost is a promise of the believer

All believers are supposed to go on to these things when they believe.

To say someone has gotten everything at repentance shows a dead work repentance, no fruit repentance, because the Bible meets fruit with action. Not works of the Law by action, a response, the ANSWER of a good conscience toward God,.

That being said I belive the new birth begins at repentance and how God judges a beginning without the proper response is his business..

don't you think?

[sandie]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Sam Jesus would have used flesh instead of water. It would uncharacteristic for him to use the word water.

One must be born the first time and then the second time to enter the kingdom.

That is redundent.. everyone has been born the first time.. there would be no reason for Jesus to say that.

He was trying to show nicodemus that the second birth is of water and of Spirit. He wasn't telling Nicodemus that every man had to be born two times to enter. Everyone is already born once. He was telling nicodemus he had to be born again to enter.

Jesus contrasted flesh with Spirit birth.. that is why the new birth is water and SPirit, not mothers womb.

Bingo!
I've always thought the same exact thing. Who doesn't/didn't know that water is involved in natural birth....surely Jesus did.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

Sam Jesus would have used flesh instead of water. It would uncharacteristic for him to use the word water.

One must be born the first time and then the second time to enter the kingdom.

That is redundent.. everyone has been born the first time.. there would be no reason for Jesus to say that.

He was trying to show nicodemus that the second birth is of water and of Spirit. He wasn't telling Nicodemus that every man had to be born two times to enter. Everyone is already born once. He was telling nicodemus he had to be born again to enter.

Jesus contrasted flesh with Spirit birth.. that is why the new birth is water and SPirit, not mothers womb.

If what you say is true then it doesn't make sense that Jesus just stopped talking about being born of water if it was really part of the new birth. So next time make sure your own view makes sense before you start rejecting others for not making sense.

[jfrog]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

First of all there is no scriptural connotation that one that believes would not receive the Holy Ghost like in the book of acts.

Neither is there a scriptural connotation that one would receive the Holy Ghost as in the book of Acts. But I can do one even better than that. There are many that have repented and been baptized but never go on to receive the Holy Ghost. If what you are saying is true then they would go on to receive it.

The Bible says he that believeth (current) that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.

"Is" is a present term. IT did not say everyone that believed has been born of God.

It doesn't finalize the new birth with belief.

He that believes is born of God. What more is there to that? If you believe but have not yet been baptized then you still believe. And the verse says he that believes IS (present tense, not future tense) born of God. It doesn't say he that believes will be born of God, which is what it would need to say for the new birth not to be finalized at belief.

That is why Mark says what he does

He that believeth (current) and is baptized shall be saved

and Peter

Repent and be baptized everyone one of you

These were always requirement for those who said they believed in Jesus.

That is why Repentance starts the new birth, that is where it begins but it is surely not where it ends

The emphasis on baptism is important but it isn't the new birth. See my above paragraph for reasoning as to why the new birth is biblically accomplished before baptism.

Peter said we being born again of the word

22Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:

23Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Peter qualified new birth with a response, purifying of our souls. That is done through repentance and putting the old man down in baptism so that we may receive the Spirit.

Purifying our souls is done solely by our faith on Christ. "Our righteousness is as filthy rags". So the truth that we must obey to have our souls purified is to have faith on Christ for our righteousness because that is absolutely the only way that our souls can be purified.

Also, it sounds to me like Peter was giving a reference to Jesus by saying "the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever." So it sounds to me like Peter was saying we are born again of Jesus and if that is the case then there no contradiction in what I am saying because I am saying we must believe on Jesus, that he is the son of God and that is being born of Jesus.

Nowhere did the bible teach baptism was optional or receiving the Holy Ghost was optional

Baptism is a command to the believer and the holy ghost is a promise of the believer

All believers are supposed to go on to these things when they believe.

Yes baptism is a command to every believer! Yes all believers are supposed to go on to baptism and righteous living and good works and many other things. But that does not mean any those things are required in order to be born again.

To say someone has gotten everything at repentance shows a dead work repentance, no fruit repentance, because the Bible meets fruit with action. Not works of the Law by action, a response, the ANSWER of a good conscience toward God,.

Fruit takes time to grow and just because a new tree hasn't bore its good fruit yet doesn't mean that its the wrong kind of tree. The new birth (faith) makes us into the right kind of tree but sometimes even the right kind of tree must grow a little more to be able to produce its good fruit.

So what I am saying is this: don't be hasty to judge those trees without works or fruit. They may only be one season away from producing them. (You never know). However I will add this. That if its been a long time and a person has not went on into any works then I would urge that person to search their own heart and their own faith to see if it is true.

That being said I belive the new birth begins at repentance and how God judges a beginning without the proper response is his business..

don't you think?

You know I can't agree that belief only begins the new birth. But I do agree that God is the ultimate judge and even without works he can separate those with true faith from those without it.

I have another verse I would like you to consider: 1 John 5:13

13 I write these things to you who believe in the name of the Son of God so that you may know that you have eternal life.

John writes so that those who believe may know they have eternal life. How great is that testimony! And how different is it from your claim that one knows he has eternal life only after he has repented, been baptized, and spoken in tongues as evidence of the Holy Ghost?

[NotforSale]

Originally Posted by jfrog

If what you say is true then it doesn't make sense that Jesus just stopped talking about being born of water if it was really part of the new birth. So next time make sure your own view makes sense before you start rejecting others for not making sense.

jfrog, in all the years (over 30) of studying these verses, I have never seen this; until today!! I am blown away!!

Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God.

That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit.

Jesus clarified the flesh birth (in water), then the Spirit birth. Verse 8 says nothing about water.

The wind bloweth where it listeth, and thou hearest the sound thereof, but canst not tell whence it cometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the Spirit.

I will be thinking about this today.

[mfblume]

I recently heard one preacher bring forth the idea of birth of WATER being natural birth since we were contained in WATER in the womb, he reasoned. The water breaks, and we are born. But he brought something interesting out. He said the natural birth of the mother is just as necessary as the birth of the Spirit because MANKIND, not angels, etc., alone can ENTER THE KINGDOM. To enter the Kingdom we must have a physical body which we got through natural birth of water (according to him), and then secondly the birth of Spirit. Adam kept his physical body but lost his contact with the Spirit and never consumed the fruit of Life.

So it is as though man is HALFWAY there. We are all born of water and have a physical BODY. But now we need birth of SPIRIT. Having BOTH allows us to enter.

Thoughts? Apprehended?

[Monarchianism]

JFROG -

That's basically what I am saying. I would use the phrase believes in Jesus instead of confesses to believe in God because the way you worded it seems to imply that the person doing the confessing might not be telling the truth about believing in God.

:: I say confesses, because confessing is not necessarily true faith. I can say I believe, but is it true? Even if you are truly born-again (which you'll naturally increase in faith), would you not confess? Anyone can confess. The only water I am aware of is that of wet-clear substance w/ no taste. Yet, you say that we are born of both after confessing, err.. believing. Some faith.

Baptisma = Immersion in WATER
Acts 2:38 - Peter replied, “Repent and be baptized, every one of you.."
The response of those that heard this.. read on: Immersion in water, not just believing.
( Which, if you truly believe, you will be baptized ) ::

I don't believe in half-repentance. Either a person truly repents or he does not repent at all. But what do I mean by repentance? By repentance I mean turning away from sin. But how does a man turn from sin? A man turns from sin by turning toward Jesus. But how does a man turn toward Jesus? A man turns toward Jesus by having faith in Jesus. So to me repentance is simply having faith in Jesus. Does this repentance mean he will no longer sin? NO! He might still sin, BUT his faith in Jesus will cause him to sin less and less. There will be up's and down's though. The man might take 1 step forward and 2 steps back and then 2 steps forward and 3 steps back and then 3 steps forward and 1 step back and on and on but that doesn't mean the man didn't "fully repent" as you described it. He did repent by believing on Jesus even if he struggles to line up his life to Christ's teaching (as we all do to some degree. AMEN?) I do realize that this big long paragraph didn't really answer the question about "knowing if we have fully repented". I think my paragraph on baptism will answer that question.

:: Concerning Acts 2:38 and repentance - Strong's Concordance says:
3340 - to repent, to change any or all of the elements composing one's life: attitude, thoughts, and behaviours concerning the demands of God for right living:

Repenting requires more than simple believism. It says to "change one's life, attitude, thoughts." And you think faith alone cuts it? It's not faith if you don't prove your repentance.

Matthew 3:8 - "Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance.."
Luke 3:8 - "Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance.."

Works show faith. How do we repent? By having faith? Well, I'd like to see a verse where having faith is repentance. Faith doesn't bring repentance, sorrow does:

II Corinthians 7:10 - "Godly sorrow brings repentance that leads to salvation and leaves no regret, but worldly sorrow brings death."

Is it true sorrow? The Church members will know.
See what this godly sorrow has brought in you:

II Corinthians 7:11 - "See what this godly sorrow has produced in you: what earnestness, what eagerness to clear yourselves, what indignation, what alarm, what longing, what concern, what readiness to see justice done. At every point you have proved yourselves to be innocent in this matter."

James 4:8-9 - "Draw nigh to God, and he will draw nigh to you. Cleanse your hand, ye sinners; and purify your hearts, ye double minded. Be afflicted, and mourn, and weep: let your laughter be turned to mourning, and your joy to heaviness." ::

Baptism is a physical act. If a man got baptized and doesn't know he did then that would be rather strange. However, I'll assume you mean how does a man know his baptism was valid. And my answer to that question is a man can not know for sure that his baptism was valid because his baptism is valid only by his faith in Christ and since he can never absolutely verify that he has faith in Christ (not even by his works because he may produce good works for reasons other than faith. For example, even the most wicked person you know will occasionally do a good deed and also there are many people that do many good deeds that have no faith.) Repentance is similar to baptism in this respect because repentance is having faith on Christ. But since we can never verify our faith on Christ then we do not have an absolute foundation for knowing that we have actually repented and been baptized validly. This does not mean we should doubt our salvation or our faith, it simply means that absolutes are hard to come by. It means we should trust that having enough faith to say Jesus is Lord is having real faith. However, while we trust that we have faith we should also strive to do away with our bad fruit and to gain good fruit so that our trust in our faith will be that much greater by seeing our lives being visibly transformed. The visible transformation is not our faith, instead it is the result of the faith which we had before any visible transformation took place.

:: Rather strange to not know if you were baptized? Then what was your comment?
You: "You see, I don't even have to define the exact meaning of being born of water and Spirit. I can speculate on what it means if I want. But in the end, all I must know is that by believing on God one is born of water and Spirit."
Speculating, sure, but that which is simple? Come on.
His/Her baptism should be valid if they have first repented, and are going on to be baptized. If they had not repented fully, could not God give the preacher a message to preach against that person? I have seen it happen.
Those that do "good deeds" are in a sense good, but in God's eyes it doesn't count.
Besides, how do you have "no faith" and repent?
Your faith on Christ is determined by your everyday actions, and the best evidence "experiences." No one knows where you stand, but your conscious does. Unless, God let's the man of God know where you stand. ( Which, I am a witness to this )
Absolutes are not "hard to come by."
"Making an absolute truth-claim that one cannot know anything absolutely is like saying "I cannot speak more than three words in English." If you were to ask me, "How can you only speak three words in English when you just spoke nine words in English?" you would not be evading the issue, or trying to be cute. You would be pointing out the self-refuting nature of my claim." - Jason Dulle.
We don't gain good fruit, we produce it. ::

Again the ability to absolutely know is hard to come by. A person can never be sure that he/she didn't just subconsciously fake tongues so asking how one can know is a question without an answer.

:: Absolutes are not hard to come by if you have common sense, but on this.. if God reveals it. Ever heard of "discernment?" Yeah, it's called a gift that comes through the Spirit. I've met a black woman with it. ::

It amazes me that you use II Timothy 3:5 as a verse to support tongues and to disfellowship over tongues. If you want to disfellowship then disfellowship over the bolded:

II Timothy 3:2-5
2For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy,
3Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good,
4Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God;
5Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away.

Or if you must disfellowship over those that deny the power then learn who those really are that have a form of godliness but deny the power thereof. Those that deny the power are the people that deny the power of God to transform lives. It has nothing to do with tongues. It has everything to do with changing lives (most notably their own).

We should seek to be filled with the Spirit and when we are we will speak with other tongues. John 3:8 - "So is everyone who is born of the Spirit."

I don't think John 3:8 has anything to do with tongues but I'll let you speculate it might if you want. I mean that's all you really have there is speculation.

:: I never said I "disfellowship" over tongues. I know a pretty honest man that is currently seeking for the Spirit and does believe ( In a sense ), but we don't kick him out, or tell him to sit down and be quiet. He takes part, and we help him. Anyone that is doing what you posted, we don't fellowship with ( as in, they don't take part ), but we don't kick them out. It would be wrong of us to. All are welcome, but things like the "pulpit" is sacred.

The power comes from the Spirit, not tongues.
Tongues is part of the evidence of the power. ::

I think I have answered your questions. So let me ask you 2.

Question 1: Why did you fail to comment on almost everything from my post where I referenced 1 John 5:2 (my post that you left this one as a reply)? I mean the most you did was kind of sarcastically toss aside all my reasoning in your opening paragraph. You did so without really explaining why? I'll give you the benefit of assuming that you did have a reason to toss it aside but I must ask what your reason was?


:: Did you tell me to? Here's my comment, then: Everyone has love, but not everyone has the true love that comes from God. ::

Question 2: Consider 1 John 5:9-11 NIV

9 We accept human testimony, but God’s testimony is greater because it is the testimony of God, which he has given about his Son. 10 Whoever believes in the Son of God accepts this testimony. Whoever does not believe God has made him out to be a liar, because they have not believed the testimony God has given about his Son. 11 And this is the testimony: God has given us eternal life, and this life is in his Son.

To paraphrase: John says that whoever believes in the Son of God accepts God's testimony that God has given them eternal life.

So my question is: If you believe in the Son of God then why do you reject the testimony of God that both you and those who believe in the Son of God have eternal life? Or if you don't reject that testimony then can you explain how?

:: Comment: Absolutes can come through.
Sure you've heard of Atheists? Well, there's no atheist in a fox hole when in war.
So, everyone that has a measure of faith, without having the Spirit, can confess to believe.. but this particular verse is about those that are true and genuine. Anyone can say they believe and that they have eternal life. You have to HAVE the Spirit, because the Spirit IS of FAITH.

I Corinthians 12:9 - "To another faith by the same Spirit; to another the gifts of healing by the same Spirit;"
Galatians 5:22 - "But the fruit of the Spirit is love, joy, peace, longsuffering, gentleness, goodness, faith," ::

[LUKE2447]

Originally Posted by onefaith2

First of all there is no scriptural connotation that one that believes would not receive the Holy Ghost like in the book of acts.

The Bible says he that believeth (current) that Jesus is the Christ is born of God.

"Is" is a present term. IT did not say everyone that believed has been born of God.

It doesn't finalize the new birth with belief.

That is why Mark says what he does

He that believeth (current) and is baptized shall be saved

and Peter

Repent and be baptized everyone one of you

These were always requirement for those who said they believed in Jesus.

That is why Repentance starts the new birth, that is where it begins but it is surely not where it ends

Peter said we being born again of the word

22Seeing ye have purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently:

23Being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever.

Peter qualified new birth with a response, purifying of our souls. That is done through repentance and putting the old man down in baptism so that we may receive the Spirit.

Nowhere did the bible teach baptism was optional or receiving the Holy Ghost was optional

Baptism is a command to the believer and the holy ghost is a promise of the believer

All believers are supposed to go on to these things when they believe.

To say someone has gotten everything at repentance shows a dead work repentance, no fruit repentance, because the Bible meets fruit with action. Not works of the Law by action, a response, the ANSWER of a good conscience toward God,.

That being said I belive the new birth begins at repentance and how God judges a beginning without the proper response is his business..

don't you think?

I agree BUT I don't see repentance with only the context of turning away from sin. To me that is the by product of following Christ. THe context of repentance is belief/response in total unto what the context is. Thus Acts2:38 is /change/turn and be united/baptized in Christ in is name for the remission of sins... Thus repentance is contexually faith unto something. That resting place in which is complete unto context is baptism. Thus repetance and baptism are not individual components but a united statement of action.