Baptism +

GE this is beyond absurdity. You cannot honestly deny that Matthew 28:19 is WATER baptism! You cannot deny it because MEN ("ye") are commissioned to administer it to other men ("baptize them"). No man can administer Spirit baptism. Mark 16:15-16 is merely Mark's account of Matthew 28:19-20 and therefore the same WATER baptism. This commission is "unto the end of the world" commission and it is a commission to GENTILES ("all nations.").

You are totally confused about the baptism in the Spirit. The Baptism in the Spirit is NOT an individual experience or application and has absolutely nothing to do with individual salvation. Peter proves this in Acts 11:15-16 when the nearest reference point he could point to for the baptism in the Spirit that happened in the house of Corneilius was "AT the beginning" or Pentecost. Yet thousands had been saved since Pentecost (Acts 4; Acts 5; Acts 6 and if the baptism in the Spirit were a personal individual salvation thing he would not have had to go all the way back to "the beginning" but would have said "This is what has been happening to the saints from the beginning."

You simply do not understand that the baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with salvation but with the public accreditation of the house of God. It is the common shekinah glory immersion that occurred ONCE with each new house of God that gave public accreditation it was approved by God (Ex. 40; 2 Chron. 7:1-3; Acts 2:1-3).

 

If Christ did not command US on baptism because he said it to those he addressed - the eleven disciples and Paul, then Christ NEVER COMMANDED US ON ANYTHING because EVERYTHING He commanded and said was addressed to the audience before him or to Paul. This is the absurd and rediculous conclusion you are forced to take if you reason this way. Paul tells the Corinthians to only follow him as He follows Christ! Wouldn't this be equally true for the other eleven?????

Was Jesus baptized "in water"? Did Jesus baptize others through his disciples "in water" (Jn. 4:1-2; Lk. 7:29-30). The Great Commission demands a baptism that MEN ADMINISTER TO OTHER MEN "go YE...baptizing THEM." To say that what he commanded was not "in water" simply because he did not use the words "in water" is absurd and rediculous rationalization! The only way MEN could baptize other MEN was "in water" as no man can baptize other men "in Spirit." Hence, the Great commission is the COMMAND OF CHRIST to baptize other men "in water."

 

Jesus said this LONG BEFORE the baptism in the Spirit (Jn. 4:24). The baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with the regenerate condition of a child of God. Old Testament saints were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of God and could worship God "in Spirit and in truth." Jesus rebuked Nicodemeus for failing to understand as a teacher of Israel the doctrine of new birth (Jn. 3:10). Paul classified all mankind in two categories - those "in the flesh" and those "in the Spirit" and if you did not have the Spirit indwelling you it is because you are "in the flesh" (Rom. 8:9). The new birth was figured under the terms "circumcised in heart" in the Old Testament.

The baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with INDIVIDUAL salvation but with the "house of God" (Ex. 40; 2 Chron. 7:1-3; Acts 2:1-3; 11:15-16). It is the public accreditation and indwelling of the "house of God." It was done ONCE at the completion of every new "house of God." The new house of God - the congregation - is composed of a plurality of members and the baptism in the Spirit is an INSTITUTIONAL accreditation that occurred to the congregation on the day of Penteocost. It occurred in Acts 10 accrediting the GENTILES as approved members in the congregation at Jerusalem. It has nothing to do with individual salvation before or after Pentecost. It has only to do with public certification of the public institutional house of God as the approved place for public worship and administration of the ordinances.

This is pure fanatical imagination at its worst. John the Baptist took no such oath at any time. He was addressing the crowd before him when he spoke the words found in Matthew 3:11. He spoke to "YOU" or those he had baptized "with" (lit. "in") water as well as those Pharisees who rejected his baptism and told them that Christ would baptize "YOU" in the Spirit (baptized beleivers) or in fire (unbelievers). John most certainly did baptize Jesus Christ in water and it is clearly recorded (Mt. 3:15-17). He did place his hands upon the Son of God and did immerse him in water:

13 ¶ Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

 

GE:


I clearly stressed where I spoke about John’s story OF JESUS’ BAPTISM, “Now carefully and clearly SEE: that "He" who WAS thus "baptised" with the Holy Spirit, also "_IS THE SAME WHICH _BAPTIZETH_ WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT".

Does the Church baptise with the baptism OF JOHN the Baptist or with the baptism of Christ? Clearly it baptises with the baptism of JOHN! The Church is not practicing the Baptism of Christ though it claims it does. It cannot baptise with the baptism of Christ because Christ baptises with the Holy Spirit and no Church is able or qualified to baptise with the Holy Spirit. “A man can receive nothing except it be given him from heaven.” John 3:27.

The Church claims it baptises with the baptism of Christ— but it’s a lie. Since John the Baptist and the age of the Apostles the Church has “one baptism” which is the baptism with the Holy Spirit which only Christ administers. Nevertheless the Church persists in assuming the roles of the Baptist and Apostles and even Christ Jesus.

What is written in Matthew is true: John the Baptist baptised Jesus with the baptism of John.
What is written in John is true: Jesus baptised by the Father with the Holy Spirit through the baptism of Christ.

John the Baptist did swear: twice in John,
in 1:31,32, “That He should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptising with water : INDEED WITNESSED JOHN AND BARE RECORD : I SAW THE SPIRIT DESCENDING …”;
and in 33,34, “…THE SAME IS He which baptizeth with the Holy Spirit : I MYSELF HAVE SEEN AND BARE RECORD …”

So John swore and swore twice on the Truth the Baptism of Jesus is the Baptism with the Holy Spirit. Twice did John swear that his baptism in distinction from Christ’s, is the baptism with water.

Thus simply what is written for another must needs be “… pure fanatical imagination at its worst.” So be it to and for any whosoever other; for me it is the Gospel and the Baptism of Jesus Christ in distinction from the traditions and commandments of men— a clear difference between a works-righteousness and the Righteousness of God in Jesus Christ through faith.

 

The only past tense "baptized" in reference to Christ occurred "in Jordan" by John (Mk. 1:9). There is not one scripture that teaches that Jesus was "baptized" in the Holy Spirit as He is the one who baptizes in the Spirit and the baptism in the Spirit is always future in the gospels right up to Acts 1:5.

The Spirit lighting upon him as a dove is NEVER called a baptism and NEVER described as baptism. That is purely a figment of your imagination. The Spirit lighting upon him as a dove was the visible sign given to John that Jesus was the promised Messiah:

Jn 1:31 And I knew him not: but that he should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptizing with water.32 And John bare record, saying, I saw the Spirit descending from heaven like a dove, and it abode upon him.
33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

The Holy Spirit coming UPON him (not immersing him) and remaining on him was the sign by which God told John he could recognize the Messiah. He was the one that would baptize in the Spirit not that he himself was baptized in the Spirit or that he was baptizing anyone in the Spirit. The Baptism in the Spirit was always presented as FUTURE in the gospels right up to Acts 1:5.

The baptism of John is the baptism of Christ (Jn. 4:1-2; Lk. 7:29-30; Mt. 28:19-20; Mk. 16:15; Acts 2:41). Jesus not only submitted to the baptism of John but administered it through his disciples and then commissioned it to the end of the age, whereas your interpretation directly contradicts Matthew 28;19-20 which can only be baptism in water because it is administered by men to men and it is age long.

The facts are that the HOly Spirit came "UPON" him not that he was IMMERSED in the Spirit. The purpose for the Spirit coming "UPON" him was to reveal to John who was the Messiah as John says twice "I KNEW HIM NOT" and this was given to identify the Messiah.

 

There is no baptism in the Spirit today

There is no baptism in the Spirit today. The first house of God after it was finished was baptized in the Spirit ONCE and never again (Ex. 40). The second house of God after it was finished was baptized in the Spirit ONCE and never again (2 Chron. 7:1-3). The congregation of Christ as the new house of God (1 Tim. 3:15) is composed of living stones consisting of Jews and Gentiles. The Jews in the congregation at Jerusalem was baptized in the Spirit ONCE on the day of Pentecost and never again, and the Gentiles were baptized in the Spirit ONCE in Acts 10 so that the Jews would receive them into God's house and never baptized again. Never again, because the baptism in the Spirit was the public accreditation of God's public house of worship where the public worship of God is conducted by a properly ordained ministry and the ordinances administered (1 Tim. 3:1-15). Once publicly accredited it remains the "house of God" until it is destroyed or replaced by God Himself. The institutional congregation has been thus publicly accredited by God and will never be immersed in the Shikinah glory again on earth.

The baptism in the Spirit publicly accredits and identifies God's house
The baptism in water publicly identifies the believer with membership in God's house
The baptism in suffering publicly identifies the obedient believer with Christ's sufferings

There is now only ONE BAPTISM and it is the only baptism that has been commissioned to be administered by men to men until the end of the world (Mt. 28:19-20).

 

GE:

God willing I shall address your statements as soon as possible.

Let me now only remark that you, Dr Walter, are trying in vain to drown the Truth of the Baptism of Christ in technicalities and subtleties. For example, you speak of 'baptism 'IN' the Holy Spirit' and avoid using the word 'with'.

However, have you noticed how legalistic your arguments have become? E.g., "The Great Commission is a command not a request and the baptism in the Great commission is the kind that "ye" or that men administer to others..." It smacks of the autocratic Christian society that soon after the Apostolic age began to stamp its authority upon a simple common membership. Which evil persists to this day by the fact of the matter : 'If you don't submit (and cringe -- now a days called 'Repent!') you're out!' For the life of me I cannot see my Lord condone such attitude and usurping of his Seat of Authority. One must feel it 'to the body' (aan die lyf) to know what I'm talking about.

Anyhow, DV I'll be back...

 

The Greek preposition is "en" and when used with "baptizo" and its forms should be translated "in" not "with" as baptizo is immersion "in" water not "with" water just as Jesus was baptized "en" Jordan not "with" Jordan. These "technecalities" simply expose your dishonest handling of the Scriptures.

What I pointed out is so obvious and so clear that it requires intentional abuse of Matthew 28;19-20 to discredit it. This is not "legalistic" but FAITHFULNESS to the text of the Scripture.

What you are teaching is so absurd and requires such an abuse of the Biblical text that only a person with an agenda to defend would be driven to such an extreme abuse of the scriptures.

 

The Problem of Spirit Baptism Advocates

There are a number of problems for those who advocate Spirit baptism as an inseparable aspect of salvation. According to this position, baptism in the Spirit or with the Spirit or by the Spirit unites the believer spiritually with Jesus Christ or according to the invisible church theory, places the believer in union with the mystical body of Christ.

At the very minimum such a doctrine necessarily demands that baptism in the Spirit makes the believer a participant of spiritual life found "in Christ" through the Holy Spirit. (I believe they are confusing baptism in the Spirit with regeneration by the Spirit).

However, it should be asked is there any salvation OUTSIDE of Jesus Christ? Has God ever made a provision for sin and eternal life APART from Jesus Christ? Has the human nature and problem of sin changed after Pentecost than before Pentecost? Can the human fallen nature have another cure before Pentecost than after Pentecost? Can sin be dealt with differently before Pentecost than after Pentecost? Is there another salvation before Pentecost different than after Pentecost? The Bible speaks directly to these questions both before and after Pentecost.

Before Pentecost, Jesus says there is no other way to the Father but by him (Jn. 14:6). Peter says that remission of sins prior to the cross was received through faith in His name (Acts 10:43). Paul says there is but one gospel and it is the same gospel preached in the days of Moses as in the days of Paul (Heb. 4:2). Paul explicitly states that his gospel proclaimed "none other things" than what Moses and all the prophets preached (Acts 26:22) and in Acts 26:23 he details what the gospel they preached proclaimed.

Furthermore, Paul selects Abraham as "the father" of all who beleive in the gospel (Gal. 3:6-8) and the role model or "the father" of all who are justified by faith without works (Rom. 4:11).

Jesus rebukes Nicodemus as a teacher of the Jews for being ignorant of the new birth BEFORE Pentecost - Jn. 3:10

Moreover, Peter denies that God provided any other way under heaven for men to be saved other than through Christ (Acts 4:12) in perfect keeping with Christ's own words before Pentecost (Jn. 14:6).

There is no salvation OUTSIDE of Jesus Christ before or after the cross. All the elect were chosen "in him" before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4) and that necessarily included the Old Testament saints as well as the New Testament saints as the election took place before either.

Paul quotes Old Testament scriptures to define the sin problem of all mankind (Rom. 3:10-18). Paul claims Isaiah preached the same gospel of salvation in Christ (Rom. 10:15). Philip took Isaiah chapter 53 and preached Christ to the Eunuch (Acts 8:32-35).

1. The Same gospel in both testaments - Heb. 4:2; Acts 10:43; Gal. 3:6-8
2. The same new birth in both testaments - Jn. 3:10
3. The same doctrine of justification by faith in both testaments - Rom. 4
4. The same Savior in both testaments - Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12; 10:43
5. The same sin problem in both testaments - Rom. 3:9-18
6. The same provision for sin in both testaments - Rom. 3:24-26
7. The same way in both testaments - Mt. 7:13-14; Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12

In Romans 8:8-9 Paul classifies all mankind into two categories just as Jesus did and all the prophets before. All human beings are either "in the flesh" or "in the Spirit" and if they are not "in the Spirit" it is because they are "NONE OF HIS" or "children of God" as the text goes on to describe those "in the Spirit" (Rom. 8:14-16). Jesus claimed all mankind were either saved or lost, children of God or of your father the devil (Jn. 6:44). Born of the Spirit (Jn. 3:3-10) or not born of the flesh (Jn. 3:6). They are either in the kingdom of God or the kingdom of Satan; They are either spiritually dead or spiritually alive. There are no THIRD category in any of these contrasts.

There is no salvation OUTSIDE of Christ and therefore the only salvation provided by God is "in Christ" and all who are chosen unto salvation before the world began were chosen "in Him" (Eph. 1:4; 2 Thes. 2:13).

Therefore, baptism in the Spirit is the same in both Testaments or it has nothing to do with individual salvation in Christ.

This brings the Spirit baptism advocate to another problem. All the gospel accounts of the baptism in the Spirit point forward as something yet to be fulfilled (Mt. 3:11, Acts 1:5) on the day of Pentecost. Hence, the baptism in the Spirit cannot be identified with salvation.

In the account of the house of Corneilus Peter explicitly states that what occurred at the house of Corneilius was the baptism in the Spirit as promised by John the Baptist (Acts 11:15-16). However, the nearest reference point that Peter could give for what happened in the house of Corneilius was "AT the beginning" on the day of Pentecost - proving this was not the ordinary continuing application to all the saved as there were thousands saved between pentecost and the house of Corneilius.

The baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with individual salvation. Nothing to do with spiritual union with Christ (regeneration). Nothing to do with individuals per se. It is the common ordinary divine accreditation of the House of God after the house was finished by the appointed builder designating it by the miraculous manfiestations that this is the approved place of public worship, with the approved ordained ministry and approved administration of the ordinances to represent God publicly within the professing kingdom of God.

1. The Tabernacle: -Ex. 40:33 "So Moses finished the work.
34 ¶ Then a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle.

2. The Temple: - 2 Chron. 7:1-3 "1 ¶ Now when Solomon had made an end of praying, the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices; and the glory of the LORD filled the house.
2 And the priests could not enter into the house of the LORD, because the glory of the LORD had filled the LORD’S house.
3 And when all the children of Israel saw how the fire came down, and the glory of the LORD upon the house, they bowed themselves with their faces to the ground upon the pavement, and worshipped, and praised the LORD, saying, For he is good; for his mercy endureth for ever.

3. The Congregational house of God (1 Tim. 3:15) - Acts 2:1-3 " ¶ And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.

The baptism in the Spirit has to do with divine accreditation as the house of God for public worship, public administration of the ordinances by a qualified ministry (1 Tim. 3:1-15). It happens once to each new house of God AFTER the house has been finished by the assigned builder (Moses, Solomon, Christ) and that public institution remains God's House until HE DESTROYS it.

In Matthew 23:39 Jesus no longer called the temple in Jerusalem His house or the Father's house but "YOUR house" and claimed it was "void" and the ripping of the inner veil from top to bottom was a public disclaimer that God no longer owned the temple as His house of public prayer, worship and administration of the ordinances within the professing kingdom of God.

The baptism in the Spirit was predictive in the gospels in regard to the new house of God. It was the baptism in the Spirit of BAPTIZED BELIEVERS. Both John the Baptist and Jesus spoke of it in connection with the plural "YOU" who had believed in the gospel and submitted to baptism. It is this PLURAL "you" that had the comforter with them but "another comforter" that was now with them INDIVIDUALLY as believers but would be "IN" them as a public temple of God (1 Cor. 3;16) as a corporate congregational body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:27) and as a visible assembly of "spiritual stones" gathered together in order to offer up "acceptable sacrifices."

 

Well, here's more work than for an Honours, Master's and Doctor's theses.

Any enrolments? BY YOUNG AND ENERGETIC GOOD CHRISTIANS!!

I must really say, as I did before quite often, that I am prepared and willing to accept and even submit to the status quo in the Church concerning Baptism : That it is water baptism as far as the Church is concerned --- for the sake of peace and unity in the Church of Christ.

First obstacle, the Church. Although I would, the Church would not let me or accept me. ZB Dr Walter in this discussion. Like also any Congregation anywhere; try and see!

Second obstacle, water-baptism. WHICH of the myriad of water-baptisms should I embrace for THE water-baptism that is the baptism of the Scriptures?

Third obstacle: What must I do with and about the Baptism of Jesus Christ according to the Scriptures as far as it is my honest Scriptural persuasion? Never mention it? Never study it?

Never _ALLOW IT APPLY_?! In other words, If true believers would wish to Congregate AS believers of the Regenerating-Baptism by the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ as ONLY PREREQUISITE for The Communion of the Saints or 'Church'? WHAT THEN?

According to THIS very discussion such an Assembly of Christ's Own shall be branded and expelled into the outer darkness for being 'cult', and 'heretics' --- then and there and mercilessly and viciously. For such is the nature of the water-baptising Church of Christ nou maar eenmaal.

End result? Believe that none belong to or in or with the Body of Christ's Own than "TRUE BELIEVERS" : i.e., reborn through the baptism by the Holy Spirit sinners, and find yourself a pye-dog alias pariah.

 

Sounds like personal problems rather than Biblical problems. I have no problems with your questions but you certainly have problems answering mine.

 

Not to mention accounting from the Scriptures doctrinally for the Church's autocratic stance and dower attitude with regard to water-baptism as opposed to the “one baptism” of the Christian Faith that SAVES, you as before (when I mentioned Ephesians 4:5 and John 1:33), baulk at the very real 'problems' true believers are faced with personally. I have answered you; nevertheless I said, DV, I shall still answer you. My 'personal problems' are not my answer to you.

 

I have proven with numerous scriptures that salvation is the same before and after Pentecost but the baptism in the Spirit is unfulfilled and predicted in the gospels not to occur until Pentecost and is therefore NEW.

I have proven the baptism in the Spirit has NOTHING to do with salvation at any time in redemptive history before or after the Cross but has to do with the public institutional house of God at its commencement and dedication.

I have proven from CONTEXT that John the Baptist's words concerning the descending of the Spirit on Christ had NOTHING to do with the baptism in the Spirit but WAS THE HISTORICAL IDENTIFICATION MARK GIVEN TO JOHN BY THE FATHER IN ORDER TO KNOW WHO THE CHRIST WAS.

Your personal confusion about "which water baptism" is simply due to a lack of scholarship and study.

 

And due to a lack of scholarship and study it should be! Thank God!

 

Are you serious?
It was Jesus who said:
Ye do err not knowing the Scriptures neither the power of God.

It was Paul who said:
Study to show yourselves approved unto God, a workman not needs not to be ashamed but rightly dividing the word of truth.

Are you ashamed?
Do you err?
Is this what you thank God for?

 

As we study we are to take notice to which one/s He is speaking. Jesus is speaking only to those of Israel, His sheep, but more specifically His earthly appo0inted Apostles. It is them, and those of Israel that was to carry the Great Commission to the world - NOT A GENTILE. This is what THEY were supposed to do. It did not happen.

If we correctly divide out the Word of God to the Gentile we com to ACTS 9, where Jesus Christ from heaven Chooses Paul to be THE lApostle to the Gentile, and He gives to Paul A GOSPLE of GRACE THROUGH FAITH WITHOUT WORKS. We should believe the GRACE COMMISION and not the GREAT COMMISION He gave to His People that He said He came for. Out with OLD, and in with the NEW. Are we saved by Grace Through Faith, or do are we stand by water baptism as commanded in the Great Commission, and preached by HIS earthly Apostles in Acts 2:38, in order for them to receive remission of their sins.

Jesus Christ's last gospel to us was revealed directly to Paul, over time. God got Paul to Rome, but had to have him chained d to do so. God got Paul to the Center of the Gentile world, for He Knew the Gentile would Hear Paul, and carry that GRACE COMMISION to the World. This Gospel He gave to Paul has been preached to the world by Gentiles, and not Jews.

Do you scoff when you see The Gospel of Paul? How dare those that do! Do you scoff when you read the Gospel of Moses? God gave to Moses the Law, and scripture says it is Moses' Law, plus the laws Moses put into place. We know Moses didn't make up this stuff, and we accept it. We know Paul did not make up this stuff, so why will so many not accept the Gospel of Paul he received from God?

 

To the Jew first and then to the Gentiles! Jesus came to the Jews first and therefore the first congregation of Christ at Jerusalem began with Jewish membership. However, the commission to this Jewish congregation was to "make disciples" OF ALL NATIONS (Mt. 28;19) and to "the uttermost parts of the earth (Acts 1:8). THIS WAS A COMMISSION TO GO TO THE GENTILES GIVEN THE JEWISH CONGREGATION BEFORE THERE WAS A PAUL. It did not start with Paul as Peter went to the Gentiles BEFORE Paul did (Acts 10). What began with Jewish believers was to be taken and include Gentile believers.

In Galatians 1:8-9 condemn any "other gospel" preached by "any" other human or angel! Paul went to Jerusalem to share and confirm that the gospel He preached was the same gospel given to them by Christ (Gal. 2:1-9) the only difference was that he was sent to the gentiles and they to the Jews (Gal. 2:9). They gave him "the right hand of fellowship" which signified they were in agreement in the same gospel. Paul (Saul) helped Barnabas preach the SAME gospel in Antioch (Acts 11). Paul claims twice that His gospel is the same gospel preached by all the prophets of the Old Testament:

Acts 26:22 Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day, witnessing both to small and great, saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come:
23 That Christ should suffer, and that he should be the first that should rise from the dead, and should shew light unto the people, and to the Gentiles.

Heb. 4:2 For unto us was the gospel preached, as well as unto them: but the word preached did not profit them, not being mixed with faith in them that heard it.

In the same book that Paul places a curse on any man or angel from heaven that preaches another gospel he confirms that the gospel preached to Abraham is the same gospel he preached to the GENTILE Galatian congregations and that is preached to "ALL WHO ARE OF FAITH"

Gal. 3:6 ¶ Even as Abraham believed God, and it was accounted to him for righteousness.
7 Know ye therefore that they which are of faith, the same are the children of Abraham.8 And the scripture, foreseeing that God would justify the heathen through faith, preached before the gospel unto Abraham, saying, In thee shall all nations be blessed.

In Romans 4:11 he sets for the OLD TESTAMENT Abraham as the "father" or role modely for ALL who are of faith and All who are justified by faith.

Peter told the GENTILES in Acts 10:43 that the gospel being preached to them as GENTILES was the same gospel preached by all the prophets:

Acts 10:43 To him give all the prophets witness, that through his name whosoever believeth in him shall receive remission of sins.

You are doing exactly what Paul said was "accursed"! You are claiming that Paul was sent to preach "another gospel" where he says there is "no other gospel" and those who make such a claim are "accursed"

GAl. 1:6 ¶ I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel:
7 Which is not another; but there be some that trouble you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ.
8 But though we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let him be accursed.9 As we said before, so say I now again, If any man preach any other gospel unto you than that ye have received, let him be accursed.

Jesus said BEFORE the cross, BEFORE Pentecost, BEFORE Saul was commissioned:

"I am the way the truth and the life NO MAN cometh to the Father but by me" - Jn. 14:6

Peter said BEFORE Saul was saved:

Acts 4:12 Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved.


You are spouting out complete ignorance of God's Word! Worse, you are placing yourself under the very curse Paul intentionally applied to those who would come preaching the gospel you are claiming!

The Law was never given to save anyone, to justify anyone. It was ADDED to teach what sin is and lead them to "repent of dead works" and come to faith in Christ and receive him when He appeared. We preach the same gospel today, the gospel of grace that looks back at the cross by faith as the prophets preached looking forward to the coming of Christ (Acts 10:43).

 

The gospel is defined for us in 1Cor.15:1-4 where it is given to a church primarily composed of gentile Christians.
Secondly, are you denying that the Apostles were not Christians? Were they heathen? Just what are you implying here? The Great Commission was given to Christians--whether of Jewish or of Gentile background, for we are all one in Christ. This is the great mystery that Paul explains for us in the book of Ephesians. The gospel is not confined to any ethnic group, and that includes Jews. BTW, Philip (one of the Apostles) was a Greek.
Judas, (not Iscariot) was a Zealot.
These were not all devoted Jews who were chosen to be Apostles, contrary to popular thought. Jesus chose from a cross-section of society.

The gospel has always been without works. What Bible have you been reading??

Now if you can't rightly divide the word of truth you have a problem. The gospel is always of grace. The gospel is never by baptism--is not, never has been:

I thank God that I baptized none of you, but Crispus and Gaius; (1 Corinthians 1:14)
--Paul thanks God that he didn't baptize any of them except for just a couple of them. He didn't put a lot of importance on baptism in the light of gospel.

For Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel: not with wisdom of words, lest the cross of Christ should be made of none effect. (1 Corinthians 1:17)
--Clearly baptism was not part of the gospel nor was it part of Paul's plan. But the gospel has always remained the same from the beginning of the Book of Genesis to the end of the book of Revelation.

"Last gospel"??? There is and always has been but ONE gospel!!

What did Thomas preach when he reached India?
What did James preach from Jerusalem?
What did John preach?
But these are written, that ye might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name. (John 20:31)
--Sounds like a gospel message to me.

No, do you? It is the same gospel that is in the rest of the Bible.

Behold, his soul which is lifted up is not upright in him: but the just shall live by his faith. (Habakkuk 2:4)
--This OT verse is quoted 3 times in the NT--Romans 1:17; Gal.3:11; and Heb.10:38. All teach about being justified by faith. The OT teaches it; the NT teaches it.

God gave Moses the Law. The Law does not save. The Law is a school-master that leads us to Christ. It teaches us that we are sinners in need of a Saviour. It cannot save.

We do; we just don't accept your interpretation of it.

 

The High Priest is not new, nor is the coming of The King of the Jews, and neither was the Son of God to come? II Samuel, chapter 7, so we see this is in prophecy.

What was new? His name, and Now we know His Name is Jesus.

Do you believe the gospel of Paul?

Haven't you left out something? John knew when Jesus came to him, who Jesus was - (MNT)Matthew 3:14-15 "But he tried to prevent him. "It is I," he said, "who need to be baptized by you, and are you coming to me?"
15. But Jesus answered, "Permit it now, for so it is fitting for us to fulfill every religious duty." Then he consented."


Your personal confusion about "which water baptism" is simply due to a lack of scholarship and study.[/QUOTE]What is your difintion of "scholarship and study"?

 

I was talking about the baptism in the Spirit not Jesus Christ or the Person of the Holy Spirit. Please reread my statement in its context.

I certainly do, but it is obvious you don't (Acts 26:22-23).

There is a thing called "context" and chronological order. I was quoting the passage in chapter one of John which occurred BEFORE Jesus came to be baptized in Matthew 3:14-15. God had told John he would know the Messiah by the Spirit of God descending and remaining upon him. That confirmation did not happen until after John baptized Jesus. However, the mothers of John and Jesus knew each other and discussed the promises given to each of them (Luke 1-3) and no doubt John knew the things about Jesus and believed they were true but there was no absolute confirmation by God that Jesus was the Messiah until the manifestation of the Spirit at his baptism.

Biblical Scholarship is inclusive of training in hermeneutics and how one approaches and deals with the scripture. A basic distinction in regard to method outcome in hermeneutics is the distinction between exegesis and eisegesis. Study is the personal application of those methods to the Scripture.

Anyone making the presumption that Matthew 28:19-20 is not a commission to the GENTILES ("all nations") or does not characterize this age ("until the end of the world") is practicing eisgesis not exegesis. Anyone who presumes that the gospel of grace did not begin until Paul was commissione is practicing eisgesis to the extreme.