Next, according to you, you have the desciples carrying on something they're not supposed to.

9/27/13 1:25pm
Water baptism is a holdover from Judiasm

According to you, WB was mikhvah.
What on earth were the desciples doing taking Christians, initiating them into some Judaistic ritual. At one time they were doing it right under Jesus's nose.
According to you Jesus had to ditch them. (Though you were set straight here too and your theory took a beating. You had to create a tension here between Jesus & appostles if they are to disagree? Oh just waffle on J4)

Anyway, NONE of them back there had the understanding and insight you have.

But you're too much of a weasel to come out and say it. You just "allow" them. They are "not wrong". (Except for when you slip up)

What about Paul. Did he WB'ise? Then he didn't get it either.

Or did he speak of Spirit baptism only. You do use 1Cor1: as proof that Paul could only have meant Spirit baptism or he'd be disobeying the GC.
Out of space here so we'll check you theory in another post & see if it holds.

You like slow moving debates because your contradictions are spread out

This call must follow a distinct act for each by which to obey.

For WB, no problem.
But there is no call for what J4 says, so he is desperate to claim PREACHING along with hands.

By hands. OK. Though that's sparse for something so important as a command to obey, especially to be able to dispense the Holy Spirit.

By preaching. But preaching is already a distinct command.

Also, in preaching baptism may or may not happen since it is out of your hands. You act by preaching. The response is out of your hands.

Using "to preach" is irrefutable proof that there was a direct command to preach.

Using "to preach" AS A SUBSTITUTE FOR BAPTIZING is irrefutable proof that there was no direct command for your kind of Spirit baptizing.

Dodo says preaching is literally baptizing and literally obeying the GC because sometimes they also laid hands.
HUH?

Points#7,8
7)They laid hands but they stopped, also thru preaching
8)God does it now

10/24/13 2:59a
No, not anymore. Though they sometimes did. The most we can do now, it seems, is preach which results in those who obey & baptized

He applies different standards at different times to get a win.

To make his whacky idea work, J4 flip/flops his way through. There isn't any place he hasn't back flipped his way through.

Here's double standard J4 telling us that no 'how to' verses for either baptism is 'strong proof' against WB. The apostles can't be followed. But 'there are verses which show how the Apostles baptized in the Holy Spirit' which support his view.

10/28/13 3:27 pg15
The whole idea of Jesus supposedly telling them to perform a water ritual is a whole different topic. I don't believe He did
Pg21
There is also no mention of a definite mode, age requirement, or purpose for water baptism in the N.T.

8/26/13 6:13PM PG 21
there isn't a place in scripture that says to be baptized in water you are to get into a river and be dunked in water while standing on one foot for the purpose of making a public confession of faith

Points 7&8 is about how you think the baptism of the Holy Spirit was. to be performed. According to you it was like this, no like this, no maybe..

We all believe that there is both, water and Holy Spirit baptism for Christians. You believe one & not the other. So where you quote scripture on baptism of the Holy Spirit, you want us to be like you, argue against the existence of the other - against your proof texts. We're not like you.

Holy Spirit bapt'm is God doing and man receiving & always spoke of in those terms. Scroll back down to YOUR post & look.
He(God) baptised.
(Men) WERE baptised

WB is always spoken of in terms of man baptised.

Mat2:2-12 Jesus tells a paralytic your sins are forgiven. Cheap talk anyone can say that. But a religious leader or rabi, that's blasphemy. Only God can! Scribes go balistic. So Jesus asks, what's easier for Him to claim, to forgive or to say walk? If He can speak life to a dead, is there any doubt to His authority?

There were many spokesmen for many gods. The apostles, like the prophets, were sent with authority to speak for The God eg laying of hands and other miracles.

The disciples did this. AND the disciples did that.

So what's the difference? It's subject to the kooks approval!!

Your great and mighty revelation for Christendom is that the bible can only be parsed through this degenerate.

UPS
Debates get heated over differences. But I cant tolerate someone who's shifty & dishonest. This guy can reach over for your wallet and deny taking it while he holds it to your face.

Woo hoo J4, in all this, your biggest gotcha moment is the word 'pout'? It wasn't in my original point because I knew you'd pout.

Here's your Jesus pouting & leaving town-
'When He hears what his disciples are doing He departs to Samaria'

I didn't engage you for you to give your garbled incoherent interpretations. You've been doing that for years. I am exposing your two faced backflip responses. Then we let you loose

Your gloating over some 'strong proof' is YOUR ALLEGED lack of verses about 'how to' WB in the bible. Your wining submission is YOUR ADMISSION that there are no verses to show how to baptise with the Holy Spirit. Are you that daft?

The apostles are our example. Except when they WB. Then they're in error.

What' are you complaining about in your last post?

DID YOU SAY THAT there's no verse showing how to baptise with the Holy Spirit.

Every Cristian believes in the baptism of the Holy Spirit. So quoting verses for that is not proof that there's no water baptism.

You were asked the question because you had gone on about there being nothing given about water bapt'm as proof against it.

You attacked WB because there's no verse showing how to do it. THERE IS NO VERSE SHOWING HOW TO BAPTIZE WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT. So much for all the hot air over that point.

We'll get to that John/uk

Back to J4's challenge for proof

Point #6 J4 admits they weren't told how

Proof
10/26/13 12:11 page16

UPS ASKED
What verse do you see the Lord teaching his disciples that they would baptize people with the Holy Spirit?

J4 responded
There are none. Just as there are none of Him teaching them to baptize in water either.

I can't tell you how much of a big deal J4 made over this point against water baptism, yet here he is admitting -

For point 4 (Jn3:22/23)

J4's theology had, when Jesus found out the disciples were baptising, He pouted and left town. But J4 was corrected, so J4 had an epiphany & left town.

10/4/13 9:14pm page17
What did Jesus have to say about baptism in those verses? That's right! Nothing. For another thing, it clearly says Jesus baptized not, but His disciples

10/5/13 4:25am page17
There is never a case in scripture where Jesus either baptized people in water directly or commanded for it to be done. When He hears what his disciples are doing He departs to Samaria

Then J4 concedes when presented with Jn 3:22

CV wrote:
2)This crackpot believes that there's no water baptism - 'John baptIZED' is in the past tense

3)Not that just us Christians got it wrong, but the apostles too

4)In fact, when Jesus was with the apostles & found out that they were baptising back then, He ditched them & left town

5)J4 says in Mat28:16, Jesus said to baptise with the Holy Spirit, not water

6)J4 admits they weren't told how

7)They laid hands but they stopped, also thru preaching

8)But nobody baptises now. God does it now

9) Mat28 wasn't for all Christians anyways. Not even for Paul

10 'Though Paul did baptise

11) Sometimes he didn't even know he was doing it

My issue was about how deceptive you are. You're already doing it.

John for JESUS wrote:
1) Okay, let's see the date and time

Points 2,5,9,10 you've answered it on this thread for me

#3 you said on this thread (and others), that Peter was in error (having an ephiphany?)

My issue with you is that you are dishonest. You will decieve and twist when you need to, to get your kooky beliefs accross.

You asked for proof. For what? To imply that you hadn't said it? Then go on to prove each one biblical?

Here it is-
There's a difference between "recall" & "realize". One is memory/rememfrance & other is to be aware that it took place.

To work your baptism of Holy Spirit into 1Cor1:16, you had to state that Paul did not always REALIZE he was baptizing.

No matter. You said something, take your pick!

CV wrote -

9) Mat28 wasn't for all Christians anyways. Not even for Paul. 10) 'Though Paul did baptise. 11) Sometimes he didn't even know he was doing it.

J4 challenges me to show where he said it, (& then defends it also!) -

10) Paul did baptize. You do understand that, right?
11) Paul didn't recall if he had baptized anyone else.

LIdough wrote:
Mohler said this just the other day that the churches lack of doctrine in these two areas alone has enabled other sins such as same sex marriage. Later this year the SBC is hosting a marriage conference to finally nail down their divorce and remarriage doctrines.

How dare the queers? OH the nerv! Only Christians should be allowed to change the bible

If it was just a matter of a different view, you would have had a point. Every view under the sun has made it's rouns before.

My beef is the dishonest way this scammer works.

Look at this, he's called for date/time to give the appearance that he's caught me out - called for proof! Why call for it if he knows what I posted is true? Because he want's to look good here and knows that later it will be forgotten!

We're not arguing bible interpretations, he's good at that game. We're laying out what he said. His posts are on record. Not much wriggle room here.

He called me to prove. Then he went on to explain rather then onject to what I said.
In all that, the best escape hole he found was that he was "corrected". Actually, he was stumped and left town for a while.

Now UPS, I'll provide the proof.

He hasn't objected to what i have said. He can't. He will give more tripe to smooth it over.

John for JESUS wrote:
1) Okay, let's see the date and time.

John for JESUS wrote:
John's baptism in water is in the past (John "baptized" in the past tense)

Before we leave baptism -
This crackpot believes that there's no water baptism - 'John baptIZED' is in the past tense. Not that just us Christians got it wrong, but the apostles too. In fact, when Jesus was with the apostles & found out that they were baptising back then, He ditched them & left town.

J4 says in Mat28:16, Jesus said to baptise with the Holy Spirit, not water. J4 admits they weren't told how. They laid hands but they stopped, also thru preaching. But nobody baptises now. God does it now. Mat28 wasn't for all Christians anyways. Not even for Paul. 'Though Paul did baptise. Sometimes he didn't even know he was doing it.

ACTS 10
"27Peter went inside and found a large gathering of people. 28 He said to them: “You are well aware that it is against our law for a Jew to associate with or visit a Gentile. But God has shown me that I should not call anyone impure or unclean."
Then Peter began to speak: “I now realize how true it is that God does not show favoritism 35 but accepts from every nation..
44 While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit came on all who heard the message.
45 The Jewish believers who had come with Peter were astonished that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on Gentiles.
47Peter said,“Surely no one can stand in the way of their being BAPTIZED WITH WATER. They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have.”

GSTexas
In Acts11:16-17
Peter recalls our Lords promise of the Holy Spirit. but the gentiles too recieve the Holy Spirit. Read V:17

Acts 11:17 "If then God gave the same gift to them as he gave to us when we believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I that I could stand in God's way?”

Acts 11:16 is NOT an admission of error by Peter. It is recollection of Jesus's promise.

John for JESUS wrote:
3) Faith doesn't bring knowledge about baptism,God's Word does

But your man of fath already has knowledge of baptism.
His faith came about as a result of a lot of work. He has had the gospel preached. He was enlightened and armed with knowledge before he 'freely chose' to have faith.

So quit making stupid points to trip people. You know what T.R meant. And drop that 'faith is not works.' We'll dispose that in time too.

What would you say about a kid whose got his face and hand stuffed with cookies and the other hand in the jar, all the while denying taking any? And what of an adult over more serious matters?

Your positions are built on a method.
You start with a lie that you know will take some finessing to draw out. Buys you time until caught. Then you're forced to make an admission. But then right back to it. So why the admission then?

John for JESUS wrote:
1) Jesus was baptized with John's baptism to fulfill ..God's command for Israel to be baptized

Re: Gov. Perry' s water baptism,
His politics not withstanding, for I am clueless on current American politics, but good on Gov. Perry for acting on his faith. Who cares what you or the Reformers think on baptism. We only care what Jesus calls for. And He calls for WATER BAPTISM(immersion).

You do not need a truckload of theology or to flog yourself in repentance. A simple realisation of your need for a saviour sufficeth. Like the Ethiopian eunuch, God creates in us a desire to seek Him in truth. Our knowledge and understanding grows out our desire for Gods simple truth.

What I detest is wolves like you that have no spiritual pulse but use intellectual prowess to erect contrary doctrines that are an obstacle and upset people's faith.

John for JESUS wrote:
He isn't going to be in better standing with God for having taken an extra bath that day. If he is truly saved, baptism occurred at the moment of faith once and for all by the Holy Spirit. There is no need for an extra ceremony.

But if it's a bath, you could use it the most.
Along with rest of your stinking theology, don't you believe that Adams sin was not reckoned to us?

Why, you were born sinless just like Christ. And it was quite a horse race until you blew it. Just think, had your homemade Arminian will not failed you there, I would have been praying to you today. Up to that very point, you were sinless and immortal, but you became a slave to your free will, and fell.

On the issue of water baptism, you were slithering around with no hole to escape into - the last time we engaged.

SteveR wrote:

These are loved by my Lord. The difference between you and most of us here is that we recognise Rome for the phoney monster that it is. And you present a ready defence for that Harlot.

And no, I am not a pastor, son of a pastor, or play one on TV.
My concern is that the attack on the pastor and his family is of particular significance to the evil one.

Armins say that we are not robots. God does not force anyone. Man is free to make a decision.
I can never understand how then some Armins believe in perseverance. At least those who believe in losing your salvation are consistent to maintain their freedom to choose. Armins who say they cannot lose their salvation are half baked. Is mans will the guarantor that it will never fail God again? Nope!
Armins rely on Calvinism to bail them out here. God so worketh that man is irresistible drawn to him, removing the 'choice' to fail --something for which they opposed Calvinism for.
Ultimately, all Armins are good Calvinists when they get to heaven, Robots forced against their will. There wil be NO FREE WILL CHOICE to fail again.