I thought the tongues was the visiable outward action on the part of the believer...LOL
I certainly hope the tongues originate with the unction of the Holy Spirit!
Baptism is solely an action of the believer.
__________________ "I think some people love spiritual bondage just the way some people love physical bondage. It makes them feel secure. In the end though it is not healthy for the one who is lost over it or the one who is lives under the oppression even if by their own choice"
Titus2woman on AFF
"We did not wear uniforms. The lady workers dressed in the current fashions of the day, ...silks...satins...jewels or whatever they happened to possess. They were very smartly turned out, so that they made an impressive appearance on the streets where a large part of our work was conducted in the early years.
"It was not until long after, when former Holiness preachers had become part of us, that strict plainness of dress began to be taught.
"Although Entire Sanctification was preached at the beginning of the Movement, it was from a Wesleyan viewpoint, and had in it very little of the later Holiness Movement characteristics. Nothing was ever said about apparel, for everyone was so taken up with the Lord that mode of dress seemingly never occurred to any of us."
Quote from Ethel Goss (widow of 1st UPC Gen Supt. Howard Goss) book "The Winds of God"
However let me ask you something about this scripture and your beliefs. Do you believe that water baptism is regenerative, that it washes away your sins?
I'm not really sure. I've always been taught that baptism is necessary for washing away the sins. That's why I'm studying this, to get an understanding for myself
.
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeatlast
I am a one stepper. I do believe eveery Christian should be baptized. 1 Pet 3:21 lets us know the water does not wash us, but rahter the blood, thru the reserection of Christ.
Major difference in one step vs three step theolgy. One steppers get baptized BECAUSE Christ has saved them thru the resurection of christ. BECAUSE they desire to proclaim their faith publicly.
Three steppers get batized to GET saved. Believing that it gives them new birth, all the while exclaiming loudly that they are NOT baptismal regenerations as are their Catholic counter parts.
So why do you think the verse states "Washing away your sins"?
Quote:
Originally Posted by tbpew
I do not think that is what the Ethiopian Eunuch was thinking when he asked of Phillip: "Here is water, what hinders me from being baptised"?
Phillip established the enabling criteria by asking him a question.
AFTER the Eunuch answered by confirming that JESUS CHRIST is the SON of God....
they both went down into the water and Phillip baptised the Eunuch.
I do not believe that Phillip thought the water washed away sins.
I do not believe the Eunuch thought the water washed away sins.
I do believe they BOTH acknowledged that WATER was involved in their burial with the one who died for them.
1 John 5:8 invites us to consider the witness, to have understanding concerning: the spirit, the water, and the blood agreeing in one.
But, same question - what about how the verse I quoted is worded?
It's His blood that remits sins. Unless someone is being very careless, there is no shedding of blood at a baptism. And where there is no shedding of blood, there is no "remission."
Also we will notice that it is by having Paul "call on the name of the Lord" that the washing takes place, not baptism (1 Peter 3:21).
Why do I equate it with remitted? Because that's what I've been taught? Scriptures that have been used are Acts 2:38 - 'for the remission of sin', and the verse I quoted in my first post.
So, back to my original question - why does it say 'be baptized and wash away thy sins'?
I'm not really sure. I've always been taught that baptism is necessary for washing away the sins. That's why I'm studying this, to get an understanding for myself...
So why do you think the verse states "Washing away your sins"?
"Saved" from what? Saved from sin. His blood, and our faith in Him has washed us from sin (Matthew 26:28).
Quote:
Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*
But, same question - what about how the verse I quoted is worded?
Same answer, only more emphatic.
Quote:
Originally Posted by *AQuietPlace*
Why do I equate it with remitted? Because that's what I've been taught? Scriptures that have been used are Acts 2:38 - 'for the remission of sin', and the verse I quoted in my first post.
So, back to my original question - why does it say 'be baptized and wash away thy sins'?
Because it really says more than that, doesn't it? That was my point (or among my points). You're either intentionally leaving out parts of this passage on purpose or perhaps unconsciously. Either way, the Word of God is being hewn here and not "rightly divided."
Consider; why were the disciples of John rebaptized in Acts 19? It was NOT for the "remission of sins" because according to the Bible their sins were remitted with John's baptism of repentance (Mark 1:4; Luke 1:77; Luke 3:3).
So why were they baptized if they had no sins to be "washed away?" There's more to baptism than getting wet and being "washed." MUCH MORE!
Peter makes it clear that baptism is NOT a "washing" in water, though he of course may have had just the physical body in mind. Peter does emphasize that it's the "resurrection of Jesus Christ" that accomplishes the "good conscience toward God..."
Why was Paul told to "call on the name of the Lord?" WHAT DID YOU SAY WHEN YOU WERE BAPTIZED?Anything? If the preacher did all of the talking then you really WERE NOT baptized like the Apostles, were you? Just asking rhetorically. Food for thought.
Because it really says more than that, doesn't it? That was my point (or among my points). You're either intentionally leaving out parts of this passage on purpose or perhaps unconsciously. Either way, the Word of God is being hewn here and not "rightly divided."
Just want to answer this part, and then I'll go back and read your post, and ponder what you said.....
I'm not purposely doing anything, other than asking questions. I don't have an agenda, hidden or otherwise. I'm just sincerely pondering things I've been taught, seeking input from people who believe differently, and then studying the word of God, seeking a clearer understanding.
I sincerely want to know what people believe, and why. I'm not trying to anyone. Not trying to convince anyone of my point of view, because right now I'm not sure what my point of view IS.
WHAT DID YOU SAY WHEN YOU WERE BAPTIZED?Anything? If the preacher did all of the talking then you really WERE NOT baptized like the Apostles, were you? Just asking rhetorically. Food for thought.
I wasn't trying to give you a hard time there, AQP. You've always had a great spirit and I appreciate your posts. Sorry for coming across with a bunch of staccatto bursts. I was just telling my boss that I "type like a polio victim" LOL.
I think my sentences come out in little bursts of thought as well.
It's a deep subject area. And Jesus is a huge Savior. We'll never plumb the depths nor soar to all of the heights.
After walking around this puppy for years, I have come to the conclusion that the question
“Do you think baptism remits sin?” is a boondoggle.
It is the (snicker) line that gets to the next epithet: CATHOLIC! (yuck)
What no one stepper can ever get around is the fact that the bible commands baptism in Jesus Name.
The bible doesn’t say it is a good idea. It doesn’t make a kind suggestion.
Nowhere does the bible say baptism is helpful for other Christians to recognize a fellow believer.
It is commanded… repeatedly.
So at the end of the day, you can argue the semantics of when remission happens. You and argue if the word “for” (eis) means for the purpose of; or because of until you are blue in the face but what you cannot do is fine some way to launch yourself thru enough burning hoops to convince me that one can remain disobedient to scripture and remain saved at the same time.
If you ain’t baptized in Jesus name, I don’t care what you think, you have not submitted yourself to the command of scripture.
Is one washed in Baptism? Well we have a whole cloud of witnesses from Noah and his family to the Israelites in the Red Sea to Peter on the Day of Pentecost that seem to point in a direction.
But if you want to be baptized to show the world what God already did for you when you repented, good for you, at least you are being obedient to scripture. Just don’t tell me the guy that refuses is a good brother of mine who is “living the life”
I also believe the fear of God is the beginning of Wisdom. And I understand why some cannot grasp the simple wisdom of scripture.
__________________ If I do something stupid blame the Lortab!
After walking around this puppy for years, I have come to the conclusion that the question
“Do you think baptism remits sin?” is a boondoggle.
It is the (snicker) line that gets to the next epithet: CATHOLIC! (yuck)
What no one stepper can ever get around is the fact that the bible commands baptism in Jesus Name.
The bible doesn’t say it is a good idea. It doesn’t make a kind suggestion.
Nowhere does the bible say baptism is helpful for other Christians to recognize a fellow believer.
It is commanded… repeatedly.
So at the end of the day, you can argue the semantics of when remission happens. You and argue if the word “for” (eis) means for the purpose of; or because of until you are blue in the face but what you cannot do is fine some way to launch yourself thru enough burning hoops to convince me that one can remain disobedient to scripture and remain saved at the same time.
If you ain’t baptized in Jesus name, I don’t care what you think, you have not submitted yourself to the command of scripture.
Is one washed in Baptism? Well we have a whole cloud of witnesses from Noah and his family to the Israelites in the Red Sea to Peter on the Day of Pentecost that seem to point in a direction.
But if you want to be baptized to show the world what God already did for you when you repented, good for you, at least you are being obedient to scripture. Just don’t tell me the guy that refuses is a good brother of mine who is “living the life”
I also believe the fear of God is the beginning of Wisdom. And I understand why some cannot grasp the simple wisdom of scripture.
For the most part I would wholeheartedly agree.
Baptism in Jesus' Name is a commandment and not a suggestion.
There have been vicious fruitless wars fought here over the question of why when there was no disagreement as to whether.
As long as one is buried in His name, filled with His Spirit the exact machinations are irrelevant.
After walking around this puppy for years, I have come to the conclusion that the question
“Do you think baptism remits sin?” is a boondoggle.
It is the (snicker) line that gets to the next epithet: CATHOLIC! (yuck)
What no one stepper can ever get around is the fact that the bible commands baptism in Jesus Name.
The bible doesn’t say it is a good idea. It doesn’t make a kind suggestion.
Nowhere does the bible say baptism is helpful for other Christians to recognize a fellow believer.
It is commanded… repeatedly.
So at the end of the day, you can argue the semantics of when remission happens. You and argue if the word “for” (eis) means for the purpose of; or because of until you are blue in the face but what you cannot do is fine some way to launch yourself thru enough burning hoops to convince me that one can remain disobedient to scripture and remain saved at the same time.
If you ain’t baptized in Jesus name, I don’t care what you think, you have not submitted yourself to the command of scripture.
Is one washed in Baptism? Well we have a whole cloud of witnesses from Noah and his family to the Israelites in the Red Sea to Peter on the Day of Pentecost that seem to point in a direction.
But if you want to be baptized to show the world what God already did for you when you repented, good for you, at least you are being obedient to scripture. Just don’t tell me the guy that refuses is a good brother of mine who is “living the life”
I also believe the fear of God is the beginning of Wisdom. And I understand why some cannot grasp the simple wisdom of scripture.
Are you talking about unbelievers? If so - it is their lack of faith that is the root cause.
Or are you speaking of those who who have been converted calling on the name of the Lord Jesus (even at baptism) yet the minister's invocation does not match ours?
__________________ "It is inhumane, in my opinion, to force people who have a genuine medical need for coffee to wait in line behind people who apparently view it as some kind of recreational activity." Dave Barry 2005
I am a firm believer in the Old Paths
Articles on such subjects as "The New Birth," will be accepted, whether they teach that the new birth takes place before baptism in water and Spirit, or that the new birth consists of baptism of water and Spirit. - THE PENTECOSTAL HERALD Dec. 1945
"It is doubtful if any Trinitarian Pentecostals have ever professed to believe in three gods, and Oneness Pentecostals should not claim that they do." - Daniel Segraves
Scriptures that have been used are 
That was my point (or among my points). You're either intentionally leaving out parts of this passage on purpose or perhaps unconsciously. Either way, the Word of God is being hewn here and not "rightly divided." 
anyone. 
Not trying to convince anyone of my point of view, because right now I'm not sure what my point of view IS. 
Hybrid Mode
