I think you're confusing me with another poster.
>>You, and those like minded, are determined to deny that certain instances of baptism, noted in Acts, is water, if water is not specifically mentioned.<<
Again, I have not discussed water or not water so please get you posters and who you are responding to sorted out K? Second, I have never said a persons should not be baptised. What I have said is that the salvation and forgiveness of sins preceded baptism and does not appropriate it. Come back when you can stay on topic and keep posters ans what they say separate.
**Again, I have not discussed water or not water so please get you posters and who you are responding to sorted out K?**
So many have used 1Cor. 1:17 to discount the importance, or even eliminate water baptism as the command of the Lord, and his apostles, that I perhaps thought you did as well (my bad).
But, since you disregard the sin remitting power of being baptized in the name of Jesus, then you have some more rightly dividing of the word to do.
Starting with Matthew, let’s look at the Lord’s commisions in the four gospels:
Matthew 28:19,20
Keep in mind that before ascending, Jesus Christ’s first detailed command to his apostles, was for them to “..teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; teaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you..”.
What particular command did he spell right there?...YOU BAPTIZE THEM. I think you know he is talking about water baptism, so we are in agreement about that. Besides, they (the apostles) weren’t able to perform the Holy Ghost baptism. So, the Lord wasn’t instructing them to do something they were not empowered to do.
Mark 16:16
The Lord brings up his command for baptism again, giving the command in wording that shows how serious he is about water baptism: “He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned”.
Remember again, that the Holy Ghost baptism is not the apostles responsibility. If they preach the gospel, and the listener(s) want baptized, the minister performs the water baptism. The minister may go on his way, both he and the convert having done their parts, trusting that the Lord will baptize with the Holy Ghost. The conversion of the Ethiopian eunuch (Acts 9:35-39) spells this out quite clearly.
Luke 24:47
The Lord commanded “that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his NAME among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem”. While one would ask, where’s the water baptism in THAT command? All one has to do, is see that command initiated in Acts 2:38, for it’s fulfillment.
John 20:22,23
The Lord “breathed on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost: Whose soever sins YE remit, they are remitted unto them; and whose soever sins YE retain, they are retained”.
SO....when THEY began to remit sins (Acts 2:38), THEY did it by water baptism in the name of Jesus Christ.
Those, that don’t believe their words (including: to be baptized in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins) will have their sins retained.
The commissions of all four gospels DO harmonize with Acts 2:38. It seems that your ‘salvation before water baptism’ doesn’t completely agree with the Lord’s commands to the apostles. Because, if the minister, after seeing and hearing the converts faith, doesn’t baptise (as per Acts 2:38), then the sins are not yet remitted. But, since the convert will have been instructed, he/she will request it done, for the REMISSION of SINS.
This flys in the face of many, but the Lord said “few there be that find it”. I don’t have any idea how many a ‘few’ are (in the Lord’s definition). That’s not our job anyway.