Secondly, you keep referring to baptism as a sacrament. What is the difference between a sacrament and an ordinance?

Secondly, JD is correct that the consecration of the priest was not done in a river but in the temple of the Lord. So the purpose of Jesus' baptism was for another reason.

If God works in you and through you as a believer in the matter of sanctification, does he not work in the heart of the non-beiever to bring him to salvation.

If it takes the power of God to do his will, why does it not take the power of God to bring one to salvation. What makes you think that the lost unregenerate man has it within himself to save himself.

Do you believe it is God which worketh
in you both to will and to do of his good pleasure? (Phil. 2:13)

Do you believe it is the will of the Father that you believe on Christ?

(John 6:28-29) "Then said they unto him, What shall we do, that we might work the works of God? 29. Jesus answered and said unto them, This is the work of God, that ye believe on him whom he hath sent."

(John 6:40) "And this is the will of him that sent me, that every one which seeth the Son, and believeth on him, may have everlasting life: and I will raise him up at the last day."

So if it not God who works in you to will and to do of his good pleasure, then salvation is not of the Lord, but of yourself.

From what I gather, supralapsarianism is the belief that by decree of the fall, God choose who he will save and chose who will be reprobate (double predestination). Infralapsarianism is the belief that by decree of the fall God chose who he will save (particular redemption) and the rest are passed over. Hypercalvinist tend to be supralapsarians, but not all supralapsarians are hypercalvinist.

Many will take Romans 9:17 to mean that God chose Pharaoh specifically for the sole purpose of sending him to Hell. All this verse is saying is that God raised him up for a sovereign purpose of hardening his heart "that I might shew my power in thee, and that my name might be declared throughout all the earth."

The promise it appears is the gift of the Holy Ghost (see verse 33). The Holy Ghost was given on condition of repentance and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ. The same promise was made to their posterity on the same condition of repentance and faith. Baptism was not the grounds of the promise, that would make salvation based on works and not by grace.

Also, it might be well to point out in verse 41. "Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls."

It says "they that gladly received his word were baptized" it does not say they and their children were baptized. Only those who received his word were baptized.

For examplle, the sacrament of baptism imparts the new birth on infants. The sacrament of communion is the actual literal eating the flesh of Christ and literally drinking his blood. However if these are both considered ordinances, then baptism symbolizes the spiritual union between Christ and his church. The ordinance of the Lord's supper memorializes the sacrificial death of Christ. Remember the words of Christ "This do in rememberance of me".

Keep in mind that the ceremonial laws (of which circumcision was a part of) as well as the dietary laws were fullfilled in Christ and done away with.

It is quite aparrent that the Lord Jesus was baptized on the first day of his public ministry. The number 8 is the number of a new beginning. Just for your info. So would it be conceivable tht one should be baptized on the 8th day after spiritual birth and not physical birth.

jago wrote:
DB What is baptism for?

Question arises, when does the circumcision of the heart take place? Arminians claim it is when they act of their own free will while they are dead in tresspasses and sin, say a sinner's prayer to invite Jesus in their heart.

Reformed claim it is a socereign act of God implanting a spiritual birth into one of his elect, thereby quickening the spirit, thus enabling him to come willingly to a saving knowledge of Christ as his Savior, Redeemer and Lord. This circumcision of the heart is manifested in repentance and saving faith.

The only problem is that there are numerous references to Jesus being called both God and Savior. Jesus also said that "I and my Father are one" meaning one in essence. So thus when clear passages are presented, it cannot be questioned by methods of hermeneutics or interpretation. It is black and white.

Apologies there mate. It is all Yamil's fault for the confusion. I think you and I can agree he is a good one to balame for this.

Then I guess I need to readdress the question to Mr. J.

__________________
Mr. J.

If you want to be consistent with the regulative principal, then you need to show me clearly from scripture where God commanded infants to be baptized. We are not talking circumcision, but a clear proof reference from scripture where God explicitly commanded parents to baptize their infants.

I am sure you will have no problem doing so, so it shouldn't take you too long.

Remember, what He did not command, He forbids.
___________

If you want to be consistent with the regulative principal, then you need to show me clearly from scripture where God commanded infants to be baptized. We are not talking circumcision, but a clear proof reference from scripture where God explicitly commanded parents to baptize their infants.

I am sure you will have no problem doing so, so it shouldn't take you too long.

It looks like he can't see the forest of God's plan because he is stadning too close to the tree of dispensationalism. When you are so confined, you can't see the clear picture. They accuse others of perverting the word of God, yet they are the ones dealing out the word of God like a card game. This one for you, this one for you and this one for me. They pick and choose which cards they want to play with and discard the rest. He is the one who maintains that the gospel books are not written to the church. Well, there goes the record of Christ dying on the cross for sinners. There goes the promise of redemtion of all who the the Father draws to him and comes to him in repentance and faith. There goes the promise of his return to gather his elect.

JD wrote:
He is not one who is "glorified", suggesting a beginning, in the eternal state, he is the one who glorifies. He is God, DB! What do you not understand about that? Are you suggesting that he was eternally man?
I do not understand your argument. He was "made" in the likeness of man, but he is the eternal God!
I think you are exposing a very uninformed view of God, Christ, and all things spiritual! I am looking at you now in a whole new light!

1Jo 3:2 Beloved, now are we the sons of God, and it doth not yet appear what we shall be: but we know that, when he shall appear, we shall be like him; for we shall see him as he is.

When Christ returns, will he come in the form of a man, or in the form of a spirit. How can we see a spirit.

JD wrote:
You need to ask yourself how the Father answered this prayer of the Son.