You are not being honest. You know also that I invited your views from Scripture from any part of the entire word of God after you objected to my request to provide them in connection with the current dispensation.
The Holy Spirit never refered to a human priesthood outside of Israel when giving by inspiration over half of the New Testament to the Apostle Paul. Paul uses the Aaronic priesthood when illustating its differencet from the he priestly office of Jesus Christ, but never refers to believers as priests when writing either to the churches or to ministers (Timothy, Titus).
Although Paul did baptize some folks, his commission did not include any necessity of water baptism (1 Corinthians 1:17)-—rather strange if water baptism is necessary for believers to have any form of priesthood.
If believers are priests (not all Old Testaments saints are spoken of as priests), then the only baptism necessary to obtain that priesthood would be the one baptism of Ephesians chapter 4, which is by the Holy Spirit into Christ, our High Priest.
If water baptism is necessary to have priesthood conferred, then some believers are priests and some are not.
Or, by extension, you are teaching that no person not baptized in water is saved.
I am quite familiar with the Aaronic priesthood spoken of throughout the OT. But that was limited to certain men of a certain tribe of Israel, and more specific rules qualification even prevented many of the sons of Aaron from assuming the office.
So, you are either teaching baptismal regeneration wherby all believers are priests by water baptism, or you are teaching that some Christians are priests and some are not.
Since the ceremonial washings (which we concur were OT baptisms) were only performed on males, what about Christian sisters today? Are Christian women not priests?
Where does your paradigm change to allow for women priests, or lame priests, or blind priests, etc.?
You yourself would have to make some changes that are quite dispensational.
You are not being honest.
"You know also that I invited your views from Scripture from any part of the entire word of God after you objected to my request to provide them in connection with the current dispensation."
And you know that priestly ceremonial-washing (baptism) before approaching God in the function of 'priest' is throughout the Old Testament. You know this, I already posted this and you conceded as much when you originally wrote, "You would have to do some sufficient accurate cross-referencing between water baptism and priesthood in the post-resurrection dispensation to make this point."
"The Holy Spirit never refered to a human priesthood outside of Israel when giving by inspiration over half of the New Testament to the Apostle Paul."
So you reject "As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him— you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." as the inspired Word of God?
And reject "But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light." as the inspired Word of God?
And reject "To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father—to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen." as the inspired Word of God?
Or are you simply parsing Scripture into nonsense in order to 'support' the paradigm you prefer.
"Paul uses the Aaronic priesthood when illustating its differencet from the he priestly office of Jesus Christ, but never refers to believers as priests when writing either to the churches or to ministers (Timothy, Titus)."
So you reject "As you come to him, the living Stone—rejected by men but chosen by God and precious to him— you also, like living stones, are being built into a spiritual house to be a holy priesthood, offering spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God through Jesus Christ." as the inspired Word of God?
And reject "But you are a chosen people, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a people belonging to God, that you may declare the praises of him who called you out of darkness into his wonderful light." as the inspired Word of God?
And reject "To him who loves us and has freed us from our sins by his blood, and has made us to be a kingdom and priests to serve his God and Father—to him be glory and power for ever and ever! Amen." as the inspired Word of God?
Or are you simply parsing Scripture into nonsense in order to 'support' the paradigm you prefer.
"If water baptism is necessary to have priesthood conferred, then some believers are priests and some are not."
"Then Jesus came from Galilee to the Jordan to be baptized by John. But John tried to deter him, saying, "I need to be baptized by you, and do you come to me?" Jesus replied, "Let it be so now; it is proper for us to do this to fulfill all righteousness." Then John consented."
"So, you are either teaching baptismal regeneration wherby all believers are priests by water baptism, or you are teaching that some Christians are priests and some are not."
Fallacy of the false dichotomy is noted.
"Where does your paradigm change to allow for women priests, or lame priests, or blind priests, etc.? You yourself would have to make some changes that are quite dispensational."
You are badly confused by your 'a priori' assumption of dispensationalism.