Syncan:


Did you even read that passage? Acts19:2

He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as
heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
He asked them if the received and not filled with the Holy Spirit when they believed. So I ask you again, if they were born again when they believed, how come they didn't receive the Holy Spirit?

1. Compare scripture with scripture and you'll see that Paul was actually saying that they received the Holy Spirit when they believed...bla bla

2. You lack the Spirit of knowledge and understanding. You don't have the Holy Spirit. That's why you interpreted the verse like that...bla bla

3. I have already answered this question. Go back to what I said bla bla...

4. There is a difference between "receiving the Holy Spirit" and "having the spirit". When a person believes he/she bla bla rubbish...!

Choose one!

MuttleyLaff:
I am sorry brother, if you sincerely and genuinely do not understand what Peter was saying there

Let me ask you a question though, this question applies also to Syncan and possibly Ubenedictus too
Dont worry, its not a trick question, its just a question, answers are for my benefit, are for estimating or gauging sake.
Whose baptism, do you prefer? The baptism of John or the baptism of Jesus Christ?

Please carefully read and try to understand 1 Corinthians 10:1-2 before answering. No hasty reply.

1 Corinthians 10:1-2
¹For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters,
that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.
²They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.

You definitely must have earlier read me, post that Jesus sure did instruct them albeit this instruction was before he died and resurrected, in other this was before Jesus was glorified

since I saw my name i'll answer,

I prefer ofcuz the baptism of Jesus.

Barnabaseloka:

I do not doubt the truth that one has died and risen with Christ during baptism. But what saves one is the believing on the name Jesus.

If you agree that we die and rise with Christ in baptism then what have you been argueing about?

If you agree with paul that in baptism we die with Christ and rise to a new life then why are you in the bandwagon that teaches that baptism is obsolate?

And lastly what saves one realistically speaking is grace (granted to us by the merit of Jesus Christ), with faith as a precondition and actually usually given in baptism.

MuttleyLaff:
Its not mine to give, besides it doesnt contradict/challenge, it testifes of Jesus

Jesus: 'baptize with water!'

You and your "holy spirit": 'baptizing with water is useless/obsolete.'

I don't want that your spirit. Thank you.

italo:


1. Compare scripture with scripture and you'll see that Paul was actually saying that they received the Holy Spirit when they believed...bla bla

2. You lack the Spirit of knowledge and understanding. You don't have the Holy Spirit. That's why you interpreted the verse like that...bla bla

3. I have already answered this question. Go back to what I said bla bla...

4. There is a difference between "receiving the Holy Spirit" and "having the spirit". When a person believes he/she bla bla rubbish...!

Choose one!

My belle o.

Barnabaseloka:

I have told you that I do not wish to know who Calvin was? I believe the word of God and not him. I accept aanything he had said that goes in line with the word of God.
Newness of life comes at the point of being born again not during baptism. 2 Corinth. 5:17 Therefore, if anyone is in Christ he is a new creation, old things have passed away; behold all things have become new.

read you bible well.

Yes newness of Life IS FOUND IN Christ Jesus as that passage say,

rm 6 rightly teach that when we were baptised we were baptised INTO CHRIST, it goes futher to say such a person dies with Christ and rises to NEWNESS OF LIFE.

It is easy to quote 2 cor 5:17, and say whosoever is in Christ is a new creation but Rm 6 explain how and where we become new creation it says in baptism we are united to Christ and rise to newness of life.
Again I submit that to be born again is to be "repent, believ and be baptised" and it is particularly in baptism that God works the glorious work of grace in us.

To be baptised is to be born again, as 2cor 5 say, all in Christ are new creation, Rm 6 explains that it is in baptism that we are united to Christ die with him and are raised to newness of life.

The bible has explained itself the stuff you ascribe to "born again" is actually accomplished in baptism.

MuttleyLaff:
I am sorry brother, if you sincerely and genuinely do not understand what Peter was saying there

Let me ask you a question though, this question applies also to Syncan and possibly Ubenedictus too
Dont worry, its not a trick question, its just a question, answers are for my benefit, are for estimating or gauging sake.
Whose baptism, do you prefer? The baptism of John or the baptism of Jesus Christ?

Please carefully read and try to understand 1 Corinthians 10:1-2 before answering. No hasty reply.

1 Corinthians 10:1-2
¹For I do not want you to be ignorant of the fact, brothers and sisters,
that our ancestors were all under the cloud and that they all passed through the sea.
²They were all baptized into Moses in the cloud and in the sea.

You definitely must have earlier read me, post that Jesus sure did instruct them albeit this instruction was before he died and resurrected, in other this was before Jesus was glorified

I prefer the baptism that the apostles practiced on ethiopian eunuch, Paul, Cornelius, Lydia, etc. Which one was that?

sportsmaster:

this topic shd not attract much controversy,it a simple issue.
Jesus did not baptize anyone with water.the Apostles did i dont know why they did so?.
The physical water does not cleanse the heart,Notice the cases in the book of acts where the Apostles baptised people.
firstly ,they preached Christ to the People and then went ahead to baptise them with water.


study the following scriptures,
acts8:
philip preached christ to them,the Apostles(Peter and John),laid hands on them that they might receieve the Holy Ghost,i think later in that chapter,it was recorded that they were baptised,I am not too sure.
somebody help check acts8 to verify.

when Jesus was baptized by John,its a only a symbol of what was to come.which is that Jesus was going to be identified with Man as a sinner(2cor5:21).
As we all know,John the baptist baptised the Sinners and Jesus was NOT a sinner.
Jesus' baptism was only a symbol that he was going to become a sinner so that we maybe made righteous(see 2cor5:21)

Ezekiel 26:24-26:-
the water spoken about here is "figurative",it is not talking about Physical water.
1cor6:11:- notice the word "washed" then relate this scripture to Acts 22:16.

Then finally compare everything to John15:3.
You will see that, it is his Word that cleanses us.

Then all the dots will connect.
what really matters is to be washed and sanctified by the Blood of Jesus which occurs at the new birth(salvation).

I could have expantiated a lot futher but i dont have my bible here,My laptop is at home,and i use a Nokia E5 to type here.No bible for my phone.Make una no vex.

@ the bold, Oga, Any one that says Jesus was ever "a sinner" in any guise is not a Christian. I would have just ignored you, but I had to point this out. 2Cor.5:21 never had such a blasphemy.

Barnabaseloka:

Final advice to you as a friend:
Ask God to give you the spirit of knowledge and understanding to see beyond the words used in the Scriptures This helps you to compare scripture with scripture to get balanced understanding of a matter. The way you interprete the scripture here shows your level of understanding. You are in dire need of the Holy Spirit and not human reasoning. I am still a student under the Holy Spirit, but with a more open heart than yours to understand and learn from others. Have a nice day!

hehehe,


this one cracked me up, really?

The question was simple, How did Paul receive the Holysprit when his sins hadn't yet been forgiven?

This is what happen when on speaks where the scripture didn't speak, the bible never said Paul recieved the Spirit before baptism but you manage to claim you found such claim in your personally manufactured bible, now you were asked how come he recieved the Spirit before forgiveness of sins you are telling me stories.


All this na akuko, just answer the question before you start telling stories of how you've gat the greatest spirit with the highest understanding.

Syncan:




@ the bold, Oga, Any one that says Jesus was ever "a sinner" in any guise is not a Christian. I would have just ignored you, but I had to point this out. 2Cor.5:21 never had such a blasphemy.

2Cor 5:21 For he hath made him sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in him.

MuttleyLaff:
Stick to the subject and stop hinting others to learn English bro
Personally, I recommend you go over 1 Corinthians 10:1-2 to get some old school grounding on and about baptism

sorry dear, i was hinting to learning more English because you seem to be messing up a pretty clear passage.

I already read 1 cor 10 and it describes the types on baptism in the old testament, it actually wasn't discussing new testament baptism like Rm 6 and 1 pt 3, and it doesn't excuss the fact that you fluffed when you tried to give a partial quote of 1 pt 3.

Peter never said new testament baptism is a figure, he instead said the waters of noah Prefigured baptism.

Obsolete is not a stigma. Thought I have already responded to this before now

no it just means Useless, and when rites of a covenant become obsolate then we can safely conclude that covenant is finished. Since you have proposed that the covenantal rite of the new covenants are obsolate I am waiting for you to establish your personal covenant.

PS: If you havent yet, pick up Chess, you'll learn about vigilance, pick up preemptive, patience, alertness & watchfulness skills etc

I actually enjoy Chess in my spare time, have done so since my secondary school days, If we ever meet I'll probably bring a chess board just so you can show your prowess.

Barnabaseloka:

What of those who believed, received the Holy Spirit and were baptized?
From the words of Ananias, it is clearly seen that Paul, received his sight, was filled with the Holy Spirit and became baptized.
Cornelius and his household believed and received the Holy Spirit, before baptism.

Ananias didn't say paul received the Holyspirit before he was baptised, you are making an assumption.

Cornelius was a even totally different issue, they received the Holyspirit as Peter barely began to speak! They didn't even have the chance to believe before they receive the Spirit, peter had barely started speaking when they manifested spirit, even at that he still completed his sermon and baptised them, the cornelius case was special because God simply wanted to tell Peter that even the gentiles must receive salvation.

italo:
Lol...what is difficult to understand in

Start with how exactly were those in 1 Peter 3:20-21 baptised?
Were they water baptised, as in immersed in physical water?

italo:
1 Peter 3:20 those who disobeyed God long ago when God waited patiently while Noah was building his boat.
Only eight people were saved from drowning in that terrible flood.
21And that water is a picture of baptism, which now saves you,
not by removing dirt from your body, but as a response to God from a clean conscience.
It is effective because of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

Which water is Peter referring to as "that water?"

You're so obsessed with water, you still dont get it
Did you pause enough to think of the meaning & implication of "It is EFFECTIVE BECAUSE OF THE RESURRECTION of Jesus Christ"?
I asked because you below shrugged off where I earlier had said, water baptism was allowed by Jesus because He has yet died and resurrected
(i.e. He hasnt been glorified yet) with a post saying:
"What does it matter whether Jesus had died or not died? Almost all Jesus' recorded teachings were done before he died"

Yes almost all Jesus' recorded teachings were done before He died,
BUT according to John 16:12-13, Jesus still had more things to say which He left for later

John 16:12-13
¹²“I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
¹³“But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth;
for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak;
and He will disclose to you what is to come

italo:
There is only one baptism for Christians, that of Jesus Christ.

Thank you for your answer, waiting for Syncan and Ubenedictus' answers

italo:
What does it matter whether Jesus had died or not died? Almost all Jesus' recorded teachings were done before he died.

I've replied and answered this above

italo:
Jesus instructed his apostles to baptize with water and they kept doing it.

I've replied and answered this above

italo:
But you who knows more than Jesus and his apostles have come to teach that it is not useful.

SMH, brazenly you lie like a Persia rug again,
Unsurprisingly, you not only conveniently change how things are said
but you also enjoy leaving out important qualifying words and like concocting up your version in their place

Ubenedictus:
since I saw my name i'll answer,

I prefer ofcuz the baptism of Jesus.

I see your answer. Thank you. Waiting for Syncan's answer now

Syncan:
I prefer the baptism that the apostles practiced on ethiopian eunuch, Paul, Cornelius, Lydia, etc.
Which one was that?

You, my dear sire, I leave you with 1 Corinthians 10:2 to ruminate on

Thank you all. All answers are in,
so now, italo, Syncan and Ubenedictus, please throw light of the following, then compare and contrast them:
Moses baptism, John baptism and Jesus baptism

Ubenedictus:
sorry dear, i was hinting to learning more English because you seem to be messing up a pretty clear passage.

I already read 1 cor 10 and it describes the types on baptism in the old testament, it actually wasn't discussing new testament baptism like Rm 6 and 1 pt 3, and it doesn't excuss the fact that you fluffed when you tried to give a partial quote of 1 pt 3.

Peter never said new testament baptism is a figure, he instead said the waters of noah Prefigured baptism.

You started "Whatever Peter said" with "Peter says "baptism save you now" but you would rather teach against scripture that it is obsolate!"
https://www.nairaland.com/2383797/saved-faith-water-baptism/7#35065244

Ubenedictus what saves you?
Is it baptism of water or baptism of the Holy Ghost and Fire?

Ubenedictus:
no it just means Useless, and when rites of a covenant become obsolate then we can safely conclude that covenant is finished.

Are you sure obsolete means "useless"?
"Finished" doesnt mean it cant be used. As previously mentioned, even consumables get eaten, after going past the stamped on "Best Before" date

Ubenedictus:
Since you have proposed that the covenantal rite of the new covenants are obsolate I am waiting for you to establish your personal covenant.

There you go again, you'll wait for ever.

Ubenedictus:
I actually enjoy Chess in my spare time, have done so since my secondary school days, If we ever meet I'll probably bring a chess board just so you can show your prowess.

Looking forward to that

MuttleyLaff:
Start with how exactly were those in 1 Peter 3:20-21 baptised?
Were they water baptised, as in immersed in physical water?

You're so obsessed with water, you still dont get it

You are dodging my question and asking yours.


1 Peter 3:20 those who disobeyed God long ago when God waited patiently while Noah was building his boat.
Only eight people were saved from drowning in that terrible flood.
21And that water is a picture of baptism, which now saves you,
not by removing dirt from your body, but as a response to God from a clean conscience.
It is effective because of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

You earlier said baptism is the picture, while the passage says that "that water is the picture of Baptism. A contradiction!

Which water is Peter referring to as "that water?"

MuttleyLaff:

Did you pause enough to think of the meaning & implication of "It is EFFECTIVE BECAUSE OF THE RESURRECTION of Jesus Christ"?
I asked because you below shrugged off where I earlier had said, water baptism was allowed by Jesus because He has yet died and resurrected
(i.e. He hasnt been glorified yet) with a post saying:
"What does it matter whether Jesus had died or not died? Almost all Jesus' recorded teachings were done before he died"

Yes almost all Jesus' recorded teachings were done before He died,
BUT according to John 16:12-13, Jesus still had more things to say which He left for later

John 16:12-13
¹²“I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
¹³“But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth;
for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak;
and He will disclose to you what is to come

I didn't see the "it's effective because..." part. what's effective? The same baptism you've been telling us is obsolete? What's the effect?

And you're that "spirit of truth" that teaches us what is contrary to what Jesus and the apostles taught by the Holy Spirit. The same "spirit" that makes hundreds of thousands, millions of protestant groups teach contradictory doctrines. The same "spirit" that the Apostle told us would bring new teachings and we must flee from them.

Some teach that abortion is good...and say the "Spirit of truth" has come. Some even engage in sexual immorality and say they are using it to anoint the women...with the "Spirit of truth." Some say baptism is now obsolete/useless...and claim to be taught by the Spirit of truth to contradict Jesus who is truth himself. may God have mercy on all of you.

MuttleyLaff:


Thank you all. All answers are in,
so now, italo, Syncan and Ubenedictus, please throw light of the following, then compare and contrast them:
Moses baptism, John baptism and Jesus baptism

Why should I throw light on those? You throw light on them and show us how it makes Jesus' baptism useless/obsolete.

MuttleyLaff:
I earlier alluded to similar with the below repost

Water baptism is a shadow of the real deal,

It is less powerful than the real baptism of the Holy Ghost and Fire.

Like tithing, it is past its "best before" date but people still use tithing as well as water baptism for sentimental or ignorance reason.

God has no problem with both, as that's the level such presently are.

Am more concerned with people such as kei144 trying to twist John 3:5 has having to do with physical or literal water baptism, which obviously it doesn't.
https://www.nairaland.com/2383797/saved-faith-baptism/1#34854769

Above is what you said about baptism.

Jesus commanded his apostles to baptize and they kept doing it...now you teach us that it is "sentimental" and "ignorant" and "expired"

italo:
You are dodging my question and asking yours.

No, am not. It is you, who is

italo:
1 Peter 3:20 those who disobeyed God long ago when God waited patiently while Noah was building his boat.
Only eight people were saved from drowning in that terrible flood.
21And that water is a picture of baptism, which now saves you,
not by removing dirt from your body, but as a response to God from a clean conscience.
It is effective because of the resurrection of Jesus Christ.

You earlier said baptism is the picture, while the passage says that "that water is the picture of Baptism. A contradiction!

On the contrary, no contradiction but so on point. Pity you deflected the Moses baptism, John baptism and Jesus baptism question

italo:
Which water is Peter referring to as "that water?"

Very good question and that exactly ewhat am trying to get you find out by yourself

italo:
I didn't see the "it's effective because..." part. what's effective? The same baptism you've been telling us is obsolete? What's the effect?

Obsolete is not a stigma and if you're truthful and fair, I did say "God has no problem using it" and neither do I

italo:
And you're that "spirit of truth" that teaches us what is contrary to what Jesus and the apostles taught by the Holy Spirit. The same "spirit" that makes hundreds of thousands, millions of protestant groups teach contradictory doctrines. The same "spirit" that the Apostle told us would bring new teachings and we must flee from them.

Some teach that abortion is good...and say the "Spirit of truth" has come. Some even engage in sexual immorality and say they are using it to anoint the women...with the "Spirit of truth." Some say baptism is now obsolete/useless...and claim to be taught by the Spirit of truth to contradict Jesus who is truth himself. may God have mercy on all of you.

You havent learned, that all these steam you've let off, are off point, they wont and dont make a difference

italo:
Why should I throw light on those? You throw light on them and show us how it makes Jesus' baptism useless/obsolete.

because
#1 you dont know, and your ego wouldnt allow you to admit it
#2 you're intimidated of the truth and so playing hide and seek with the truth
#3 you're so OK in your cocooned comfort zone, you dont want to make any effort to step out or away from it
#4 you're afraid of heights, so climbing a mountain to see the views is a challenge you cant handle
#5 you're having a round of crab mentality, that needs taken care of
#6 the list goes on

italo:
Above is what you said about baptism.

Jesus commanded his apostles to baptize and they kept doing it...now you teach us that it is "sentimental" and "ignorant" and "expired"

What I said there wasnt happenstance, you have chosen not to add the connection to the post I made that comment to.

I gave that remark when you posted and asked:

"Your point is that Baptism saves, but not water baptism.

What then is the use of water baptism?"

MuttleyLaff:
No, am not. It is you, who is

On the contrary, no contradiction but so on point. Pity you deflected the Moses baptism, John baptism and Jesus baptism question

Very good question and that exactly ewhat am trying to get you find out by yourself

I already know that the flood water is a picture of baptism which now saves.

Scripture says "that water" is the picture of baptism. You contradict it saying baptism is the picture.

You still can't tell what Peter meant by "that water?"

MuttleyLaff:

Obsolete is not a stigma and if you're truthful and fair, I did say "God has no problem using it" and neither do I

You said baptism is effective. What is its effect?

MuttleyLaff:


You havent learned, that all these steam you've let off, are off point, they wont and dont make a difference

Yes, they don't. Just like your contradiction of Jesus and the apostles. Makes no difference to the truth.

MuttleyLaff:


because
#1 you dont know, and your ego wouldnt allow you to admit it
#2 you're intimidated of the truth and so playing hide and seek with the truth
#3 you're so OK in your cocooned comfort zone, you dont want to make any effort to step out or away from it
#4 you're afraid of heights, so climbing a mountain to see the views is a challenge you cant handle
#5 the list goes on

Are these the reasons you can't throw light on all those baptisms?

MuttleyLaff:
What I said there wasnt happenstance, you have chosen not to add the connection to the post I made that comment to.

I gave that remark when you posted and asked:

"Your point is that Baptism saves, but not water baptism.

What then is the use of water baptism?"

So you're saying 'baptism is only used sentimentally/ignorantly. It is expired.'

Same thing. Jesus commanded his apostles to do it. And they kept doing it.

But then, you're the "spirit" that is to come and teach new things contrary to truth himself.

Syncan:




This much was all that was recorded he told them in his visit. But verse 44 made it clear that he had hadly said these before the Holy Spirit fell on them
While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.

And like I pointed out earlier, Peter confirmed this 10:44 when he spoke in 11:15-17. Peter was very clear with regards to when the Holy Spirit came on them " As I began to speak...". Again note that in verse 17 he differentiated them at this point, from "...us, who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ". And this was why peter decided immediately to baptize them without further talks. For God had Chosen them to be saved.

Peter could not have continued preaching after the Holy Ghost came! Those words were recorded because he uttered them before the descent of The Spirit on the gathering, not after! Acts 15:8,9 specifically states that they believed! What did they believe?! And for what intent did the angel command Cornelius to send for Peter?! Is it not that the latter might preach the Gospel (as recorded) to them? Acts 10:44 shows that Peter was still on his message when the Divine interruption took place but it will be illogical to claim Peter did not say all that was recorded! Were those his thoughts?

As per the highlighted, its interesting that you appear to be introducing a new (but needless) idea.

Peter spoke all that was recorded, the people gathered believed, God saw the faith in their hearts and bestowed a double blessing! That simple!

italo:
@scholar8200,

Me

You


Seeing that Paul was only baptized and had his sins washed away Acts22:16, when Ananias got to him, are you saying a person can be saved, and remain with his previous sins?

Saved and remain with sins is like saying healed and remained with the sickness.

Acts 22:16
16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.


Ananias gave this exhortation to Paul but it did not mean Paul had not done them! He had been calling on the Name of the Lord with fasting (3 days)prior to this time and the Lord confirmed this! (and Romans 10:13 says For whosoever shall call upon the name of the Lord shall be saved.)
Besides, your perspective subtly changes that verse to read thus: "arise, and be baptized 'to' wash away your sins!" This is not true!

Each clause in that verse stands on its own and this view is confirmed by scripture. If you claim that wash away thy sins depends on baptism then I can logically say he cant call on the Lord except his sins are washed away , but the Lord Himself confirmed that Paul had been praying when Ananias was sent!

Just like it happened to Isaiah, Paul's encounter with Jesus was a time of both cleansing and commissioning:

Acts 26:14-18 confirms this. In fact, by the time Ananias was sent to Paul the Lord called him a chosen vessel (meaning he had been purged and was fit for the Master's use)

Acts 9:15

15 But the Lord said unto him, Go thy way: for he is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear my name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel:

MuttleyLaff:
Start with how exactly were those in 1 Peter 3:20-21 baptised?
Were they water baptised, as in immersed in physical water?

You're so obsessed with water, you still dont get it
Did you pause enough to think of the meaning & implication of "It is EFFECTIVE BECAUSE OF THE RESURRECTION of Jesus Christ"?

lol,

it is effective because of the life death and resurrection on Jesus, nobody is argueing that.

OUr point is that "IT IS EFFECTIVE"

I asked because you below shrugged off where I earlier had said, water baptism was allowed by Jesus because He has yet died and resurrected
(i.e. He hasnt been glorified yet) with a post saying:
"What does it matter whether Jesus had died or not died?
Almost all Jesus' recorded teachings were done before he died"

Yes almost all Jesus' recorded teachings were done before He died,
BUT according to John 16:12-13, Jesus still had more things to say which He left for later

John 16:12-13
¹²“I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
¹³“But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth;
for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak;
and He will disclose to you what is to come

even after resurrection Jesus still commanded baptism, what is your point?

Thank you all. All answers are in,
so now, italo, Syncan and Ubenedictus, please throw light of the following, then compare and contrast them:
Moses baptism, John baptism and Jesus baptism

that is you job, you are d guy trying to disprove baptism. I'll not do your work for you.

I'll simply say the baptism on Moses was a figure, that of John was in anticipation for repentance. That of Jesus make us partakers in him.

Jesus said: Luke 18:16 let the little children come to me, for they are the kingdom of heaven-Why would Jesus say such a thing before he laid His hands on them, is it because He as a child came into the world sinless, just like every other child who is born sinless.
Could you shed some light on the new born infants and children under the age, that you believe were baptised under the roof of Cornelius and the jailers household.

To make this clear, Since we are both Christians, and to support your theory could you show me in scripture, without guessing' where have you retrieved this Idea, about infant baptism.

So if you were baptised as a child who gave the authority for you to be saved-saved unto whom-you didn't make that decision to be baptised.

And if you believe you belong to Christ, then why do you worship another? {Mother of God-Queen of heaven}
And why do you kiss the feet of the statue of Mary when you enter into the Church?
If you believe in Christ, Him you shall serve and Him only-so why do you call Mary your mediator, when Christ is our mediator.
So you see-if you want people to believe you are saved in Christ, then at least follow, what Christ has written, in word and in truth.

Syncan:


Jesus never said little children are "sinless". He came to die for them too. "All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God".

Anyway, Without beating about the bush, do you mind giving me the number of people in Cornelius household, the jailer's household and lydia's household. Please include their various ages and the scripture passage showing that the minors there were excluded.

Scholar8200:

Peter could not have continued preaching after the Holy Ghost came! Those words were recorded because he uttered them before the descent of The Spirit on the gathering, not after! Acts 15:8,9 specifically states that they believed! What did they believe?! And for what intent did the angel command Cornelius to send for Peter?! Is it not that the latter might preach the Gospel (as recorded) to them? Acts 10:44 shows that Peter was still on his message when the Divine interruption took place but it will be illogical to claim Peter did not say all that was recorded! Were those his thoughts?

As per the highlighted, its interesting that you appear to be introducing a new (but needless) idea.

Peter spoke all that was recorded, the people gathered believed, God saw the faith in their hearts and bestowed a double blessing! That simple!

Peter never said the Holy Ghost came after his talk, he said He had hadly started when the Holy Ghost came. I am not introducing anything new, don't dodge facts, Verse 35 tells you that they were accepted by God already But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.
It is you who said Peter couldn't have continued after the Holy Ghost came, but You agree that Peter was interrupted, yet you say that all that was written was said before the interruption. This is Peter who possibly stayed more than one day with them, as seen in the last verse of acts 10. The angel told cornelius to send for peter that Peter may bear witness to the teachings of christ and baptize them for their salvation, a function he made sure to perform.

Ubenedictus:
lol,

it is effective because of the life death and resurrection on Jesus, nobody is argueing that.

OUr point is that "IT IS EFFECTIVE"

See yourself now, what about before He died and resurrected?

Ubenedictus:
even after resurrection Jesus still commanded baptism, what is your point?

This is interesting, care to reproduced verbatim, word for word, chapter by chapter, verse for verse, where Jesus commanded baptism, obviously you meant "water baptism" but you're being coy to write it out in full

Ubenedictus:
that is you job, you are d guy trying to disprove baptism. I'll not do your work for you.

On the contrary, I am not brother. Dont know why you find that hard to know and get that I am not

Ubenedictus:
I'll simply say the baptism on Moses was a figure, that of John was in anticipation for repentance. That of Jesus make us partakers in him.

Upon all the "I'll not do your work for you" gra-gra, see yourself now

brocab:
Jesus said: Luke 18:16 let the little children come to me, for they are the kingdom of heaven-Why would Jesus say such a thing before he laid His hands on them, is it because He as a child came into the world sinless, just like every other child who is born sinless.
Could you shed some light on the new born infants and children under the age, that you believe were baptised under the roof of Cornelius and the jailers household.

To make this clear, Since we are both Christians, and to support your theory could you show me in scripture, without guessing' where have you retrieved this Idea' Jesus said one must baptised infant's and little children at a certain age.


So if you were baptised as a child who gave the
authority for you to be saved-saved unto
whom-you didn't make that decision to be
baptised.
And if you believe you belong to Christ, then
why do you worship another? {Mother of God-
Queen of heaven}
And why do you kiss the feet of the statue of
Mary when you enter into the Church?
If you believe in Christ, Him you shall serve and
Him only-so why do you call Mary your
mediator, when Christ is our mediator.
So you see-if you want people to believe you
are saved in Christ, then at least follow, what
Christ has written, in word and in truth.

I take it you have no answer to my questions. Ok, a much simpler one, Rom.3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. Does the above scripture exclude infants? I still have quite a number of things to say but I need to see how truthful you are. Please stay in line with topic.

So you are making up your own words, very religious. So babies are sinners now, when Jesus entered into the world was He a sinner too. And maybe you haven't got the answers to the above questions, how many babies was their in the jailers and Corniles household.
Romans is more on the fact about those who have sin. Even those who believe have fallen short of the sinful nature.

Syncan:


I take it you have no answer to my questions. Ok, a much simpler one, Rom.3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God. Does the above scripture exclude infants? I still have quite a number of things to say but I need to see how truthful you are.

MuttleyLaff:
Start with how exactly were those in 1 Peter 3:20-21 baptised?
Were they water baptised, as in immersed in physical water?

You're so obsessed with water, you still dont get it
Did you pause enough to think of the meaning & implication of "It is EFFECTIVE BECAUSE OF THE RESURRECTION of Jesus Christ"?
I asked because you below shrugged off where I earlier had said, water baptism was allowed by Jesus because He has yet died and resurrected
(i.e. He hasnt been glorified yet) with a post saying:
"What does it matter whether Jesus had died or not died? Almost all Jesus' recorded teachings were done before he died"

Yes almost all Jesus' recorded teachings were done before He died,
BUT according to John 16:12-13, Jesus still had more things to say which He left for later

John 16:12-13
¹²“I have many more things to say to you, but you cannot bear them now.
¹³“But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes, He will guide you into all the truth;
for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever He hears, He will speak;
and He will disclose to you what is to come

Thank you for your answer, waiting for Syncan and Ubenedictus' answers

I've replied and answered this above

I've replied and answered this above

SMH, brazenly you lie like a Persia rug again,
Unsurprisingly, you not only conveniently change how things are said
but you also enjoy leaving out important qualifying words and like concocting up your version in their place

I see your answer. Thank you. Waiting for Syncan's answer now



You, my dear sire, I leave you with 1 Corinthians 10:2 to ruminate on

Thank you all. All answers are in,
so now, italo, Syncan and Ubenedictus, please throw light of the following, then compare and contrast them:
Moses baptism, John baptism and Jesus baptism

Ubenedictus may continue expounding on allusions and prefigures used by the apostles to teach. For me, The apostles, obeying Jesus baptized with water and the Holy Spirit's presence was made manifest. In this baptism I die with Christ and rise with Him a new man. I am born again.

brocab:
So you are making up your own words, very religious. So babies are sinners now, when Jesus entered into the world was He a sinner too. And maybe you haven't got the answers to the above questions, how many babies was their in the jailers and Corniles household.

You see how deceptive you are? So Rom.3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God is now my own words abi. Carry on.

Syncan:


Peter never said the Holy Ghost came after his talk,

I didnt say he said so either. Neither does Acts suggests Peter had ended all he had to say! Acts 10:44 shows that the event occurred while Peter was still speaking!

he said He had hadly started when the Holy Ghost came.

That qualifier is not in the Bible. Acts 11:14 shows that Peter's terms of reference was to preach which he indeed started doing.

I am not introducing anything new, don't dodge facts, Verse 35 tells you that they were accepted by God already But in every nation he that feareth him, and worketh righteousness, is accepted with him.

First you said they were chosen to be saved, now you say they were already accepted! Pray, Peter did not go there to assure/flatter them! He went to ," tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved."(Acts 11:14)

It is you who said Peter couldn't have continued after the Holy Ghost came, but You agree that Peter was interrupted, yet you say that all that was written was said before the interruption. This is Peter who possibly stayed more than one day with them, as seen in the last verse of acts 10.

Hear Acts 10:44
While Peter yet spake these words... Which? the one recorded from verse 34-43

The angel told cornelius to send for peter that Peter may bear witness to the teachings of christ and baptize them for their salvation, a function he made sure to perform.

Now you rephrase the Word to justify your church's tradition! They were soundly converted when they believed and God Who saw their hearts responded to their faith that came by hearing!

For the records"

Acts 11:13,14
13 and he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter; 14 who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved

Babies can't sin-and they can't be baptised for the remissions of sins, either.
For all have sinned, those who believe have fallen short of sin.

So when you were born-what was your sin, that your parents had to have you baptised as a child at birth.And who spoke for you, to claim you are saved, and answer the question unto whom are you saved?

Syncan:



You see how deceptive you are? So Rom.3:23 For all have sinned, and come short of the glory of God is now my own words abi. Carry on.