Apostles baptized?

I know I may be an ignorant country boy, but you are speaking of water baptism and of the baptism of the Spirit here. Of course there is a difference.

Christ did not tell the apostles to 'baptize with the Holy Ghost and with fire:' so I don't see the claim you make to the difference.

God Bless.
Bro. Dallas Eaton

 

Why did Jesus permit the disciples to baptize at this point and then change the baptism later?

IMHO, you nor anyone else has satisfactorally answered this question. I am not evading the question, if I wished to evade the question I would blindly accept what you believe and the discussion would be over, or I would discontinue answering how I believe concerning the topic.

I remarked concerning my ignorance not because I believe I am ignorant, but because your replies lead me to think you believe this of me. I am not. What ever you or others think of me does not bother me. I can see no where in scripture where the water baptism John administered is any different than that Jesus gave to the church.

We must consider what has been said here. Earlier I stated that the commission could not have been given to the church if the church was not already organized at the time of Matt. 28.18. You remarked you hoped that I said this tongue in cheek. I did not lightly make this statement.

Earlier I said that the disciples were permitted to the table as unsaved people if they were unsaved until the resurrection of Christ. No one liked this statement either.

Earlier I said these things because I believe John pointed all who received his baptism to belief in Christ, we know that none in the OT were saved any differently than we ourselves are. WE point individuals to Christ today even as John did, we require fruits of repentance even as John did. Yes, Christ verbally commanded that those baptizing do so in the name of the Father of the Son and of the Holy Spirit, no the scripture does not record that John did this, but I am confirmed in my belief that his baptism was in the name of the Trinity even as our present baptism is. I believe scripture teaches this. If this belief offends you I am sorry, but I cannot change it as I believe scripture has convinced me of its truthfulness.

I have enjoyed the discussions. I have no intention of changing you and I am certain you have no intention of changing me to something just because others believe it.

If what I have stated in these discussions is offensive to God, then I pray for His mercy upon me when I am judged. I cannot believe these are offensive to Him. IMHO, and MHO is exactly what I mean, it is more offensive to combine all the false doctrine and teaching into the bride of Christ. That all saved individuals are a part of the Family of God I believe, that all are a part of the church I cannot believe.

Bro. Dallas Eaton

 

Bro. Dallas,

Curtis Pugh in his book "Three Witnesses for the Baptist makes the following statement:

"Satan is often subtle in bringing about misrepresentations of the truth. He instigates mockery of the Bible and Bible-believers. He promotes man-glorifying freewill-ism, the Holy-Spirit-glorifying charismatic movement, doctrine-denying interdenominationalism, and the "universal invisible church" theory which denigrates the Church Jesus built. He attempts to accomplish his goal under the guise of brotherly love, unity and scholarship. After all, he argues, if all Christians are in one great "universal invisible church" and thus all part of one "mystical body" why should they not get together down here? Thus, he persuades the unthinking, and he coincidentally makes Bible-believing Baptist look like unloving, bigoted fanatics because they will not join with "evangelical Christians."

Bro. Dallas, I agree with you, as I have stated before all the saved are in the Family of God but all the saved are not in the Church of God. I will rest my statements in the grace of the Living God to who be glory and praise forever.

Richard

 

Dropped by for a quick visit and spotted this thread.

Frogman is right. His question about those baptised by the apostles prior to Christ's Resurrection has not been dealt with satisfactorily. Would they all also have to be rebaptized?

And whether one actually says, "In the name of the Father, Son and Holy Spirit," is irrelevant. Acts 19 says simply the Ephesian disciples were baptised "in the name of the Lord Jesus." Certainly the Father and the Holy Spirit were present.

So how could the Son and the Spirit be absent from the name of YHWH, in whose name John was said to have baptised?

 

For all of those who think the commission's "in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost" is the line of demarcation between John's baptism and Christian baptism, how do you reconcile these verses:

Does the formula indicate a third baptism? If not, why not? Were these non-Trinitarian references to baptism "Christian baptism"?

 

Murph, you and others are the ones who have asserted the name of Father, Son and Holy Ghost is what differentiates Christian baptism from John's baptism. Why wouldn't another formula - "in Jesus name" - differentiate it from "in the name of Father, Son and Holy Ghost"?

 

Sorry to post and run...

I believe John's baptism was Christian baptism.

John's doctrine was repentance from dead works, faith toward God, eternal judgement, and the baptism of the Holy Ghost.

All of which the Apostle in Hebrews chapter 6 names as "principles of the doctrines of Christ."

God bless.

 

It was not clear from scriptures if Christ changed the baptism of John. One thing is clear, the baptism of apostles done by John was valid as an ordinance of the church of Christ since we can not find in the scriptures that they received another water baptism before they received the Lord's supper and the great commission. What is also sure is that Christ commanded the apostles to baptize in the name of the father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. And i think no baptist (as far as i know), baptized with other baptism aside from what was commissioned. But there is danger in believing that the apostles were not properly baptized. For to believe that, is to unchurched the apostles and to allow any one who are not scripturally baptized to partake the Lord's supper.