Was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. A Saved Man As the Bible Teaches?

Was Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. Saved? This is a question that I have often asked myself. There is no doubt that he had the trappings of a â€œChristianâ€, but was he saved as the Word of Almighty God requires (Matt. 7:21-23, Rom. 10:2-4)? This is not a black or white issue but a sound biblical one, for in the END that is what life is ALL about.

Yes, Dr. King had a great dream, vision and was fearless about bringing civil rights to America tragically the lawless white and black Left in this country has hijacked and corrupted his vision with victim status and race baiting. His vision is the dream of millions of Americans (red, yellow, black or white) who are looking for "peace" in this fallen and turbulent world (Isa. 9:6, 48:22, 53:5, 57:21, Jer. 8:11, Eph. 2:14, Col. 1:20). The very world it's self is seeking to achieve this "peace", unity, harmony and oneness, but sadly they leave out one key and crucial piece to this Utopian equation... ALMIGHTY GOD and His RIGHTEOUSNESS!

**So many folks are strung up on cults, and works-based theology. Others insist you must be â€œbaptizedâ€ (the right way) to be saved.**

So many folks are strung up not doing works:

Like the Pharisees that went bonkers when Jesus healed and raised the dead on a day you weren’t suppose to work.

When the rich young ruler asks the Lord what he needed to do receive eternal life, Jesus gave him the Law checklist. The young man replied that he had kept the Law. Then the Lord told to go and sell all that he had, and distribute it to the poor, and come and follow Him.

If the fellow had walked off to go and sell his riches, would your ‘no works’ predecessors have headed him off at the pass to tell him that would be doing works for salvation?

Yet the Lord and his disciples commanded baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.

Quoting or referencing scriptures that have the word ‘believe’ in them do not necessarily go into the details of rebirth. I recommend that you do not skip those that DO.

Once again, the epistles were written to souls that already were born again, or at least knew how. The first few verses in most of them make that clear. Hebrews requires further reading, but gets there.

Once again, Acts 16:31 is followed by 32, where the word of the Lord is taught to the jailer and his household. 33 mentions that they all get baptized.

Acts 2:38.....do you believe it?

There are definitely quotes from the man that would lead an honest person to wonder if he was truly saved.

And then he said stuff like this:

“By opening our lives to God in Christ, we become new creatures. This experience, which Jesus spoke of as the new birth, is essential if we are to be transformed nonconformists ... Only through an inner spiritual transformation do we gain the strength to fight vigorously the evils of the world in a humble and loving spirit.”

— Martin Luther King, Jr.

“Like the early Christians, we must move into a sometime hostile world armed with the revolutionary gospel of Jesus Christ. With this powerful gospel we shall boldly challenge the status quo.”

— Martin Luther King, Jr.

“We need to pledge ourselves anew to the cause of Christ. We must capture the spirit of the early church. Wherever the early Christians went, they made a triumphant witness for Christ. Whether on the village streets or in the city jails, they daringly proclaimed the good news of the gospel.”

— Martin Luther King, Jr.

“In contrast to ethical relativism, Christianity sets forth a system of absolute moral values and affirms that God has placed within the very structure of this universe certain moral principles that are fixed and immutable.”

— Martin Luther King, Jr.

“The God whom we worship is not a weak and incompetent God. He is able to beat back gigantic waves of opposition and to bring low prodigious mountains of evil. The ringing testimony of the Christian faith is that God is able.”

— Martin Luther King, Jr.

Hi, Z!

Yes, Hebrews 9 tells about the Old Covenant, which is now dead, where the earthly tabernacle and its furniture (and I suppose the fleshly bodies of people) were only a shadow of the heavenly things (Heb. 8). And there is now only one Eternal, Never-to-be-displaced High Priest over the Real things of Heaven (Heb. 8), whose Incorruptible, Never-dying, Ever-fresh Blood sanctified the True Tabernacle, and is now spread on the heavenly Mercy Seat, covering and hiding the token of the Old, Dead Covenant, the Law, of which the Ten Commandments is the core. Now that The First Will/Covenant/Testimony is done away with and obliterated by His Blood, with the Second Thelema (Determined Will) firmly put in place by Him, Whose Body sanctifies the regenerated spiritual human beings, saved by faith alone, which literally came to them by hearing the Hrema--the Spoken Word of God--that is by the baptism of being washed by the Water of The Word, by the preaching of its Gospel of the Blood of Christ, that is very much like the figurative act of the sprinkling of the first tabernacle, its instruments, and the chosen people, by Moses, who was commanded to employ water and blood as the agents for remission of sins for a time.

Now, in the New Covenant, the remission of sins comes by faith in Christ through the preaching of the Gospel, whose message is the shedding of Christ's Blood to wash away sins, and the delivery of which is through preaching that is a verbal washing the hearer by the water of the Word, with a subsequent visible ritual immersion in a bath of water to publicly recognize and profess commitment to what has already happened in the chronology of the believer's Spiritual life; meaning that spiritual rebirth has already taken place, forgiveness of sins and freedom from guilt has been experienced, the Holy Spirit has entered one's being, with submission to immersion signifying the redeemed one's decision to place irrevocable trust in God's Son, the Savior, Redeemer, and Master of all who come to Him for relief.

**When you’ve done that, come back and tell us what you’ve learned (Heb. 6:1-3).**

Ok, off work, and have read as fast I can the ‘seven baptisms’ article.

I will begin at the last one just to show how wrong the Dr can be at times in his presentation:

His interpretation of ‘baptism for the dead’ is just as bad as the Mormon’s. Like them, he sees it as actually being baptized in place of someone that is dead. Only he sees it as wrong, whereas they see it as right.

The confusion is that they fail to see the context:

Paul starts chapter 1Cor. 15 teaching of Christ resurrection, and shifts gears at verse 12, telling of the doubters arguments about no resurrection, and the hopelessness if Christ is not. This continues through verse 19, then he diverts for a few verses to teach of the Lord’s resurrection, and the results of it. Then.....

...in verse 29, he continues the thought from 19. He is saying that, why be baptized into Christ if he is not risen, or his saints will not rise from the dead?

That’s the context, and Dr. Wittman missed it by a mile.

Now, back to the very beginning of his article:

His introduction is such a give away to his wordy goal: discount water baptism as a command from Jesus Christ and his apostles. Then he doesn’t even mention Acts 2:38 in his first reference, Acts 2:41,42.

He moves on to another passage he thinks will discount water baptism, Heb. 6:1,2.

Context:

Paul is writing to people that have already been born again, having obeyed the same instructions as given Acts 2:38. Need proof?...

Heb. 2:3,4 How shall we escape, if we neglect so great salvation; which at the first began to be spoken by the Lord, and was confirmed unto us by them that heard him; God bearing them witness, both with signs and wonders, and with divers miracles, and gifts of the Holy Ghost, according to his own will.

If that doesn’t sound like reference to the happenings in the Gospels and Acts, I don’t what does.

Heb. 6:1,2 shows the Acts 2:28 message is known to the reader. The point being made by the writer is that the foundation is laid, and doesn’t need to be laid again in THEIR lives.

When Wittman continues his introduction, complete with his own personal interpretations, he gets to Acts 2:38, only to leave a GAPING hole in it. Guess what’s missing?... Remission of sins!!

There wasn’t much point in continuing, but I moved on to ‘Baptism of Disciples or Water Baptism’. I sped down through the scripture reading, that gave various accounts of water baptism, then got to this.........confusion:

In the intro to that segment, I see an expected dodge:

“So effective was his preaching that the question was asked by those who heard, â€œO men! Brothers! What shall we do?â€ In addition to the brief answer to, â€œRepent at once and be baptized!â€ recorded by Luke, Peter exhorted and earnestly testified â€œwith more other wordsâ€ (Acts 2:40 APT).

The brief answer; I’ll say it was brief. No mention of remission of sins, or even the name of Jesus.

Then in his first of the seven step break down he uses, there is this:

“When Peter first preached The Gospel and opened the Kingdom to the Jews with the keys The Lord Jesus Christ had given to him,” (I agree with that part), “he preached The Gospel of Christ and the necessity of repentance for Salvation followed by the command to be baptized at once.” (maybe the APT tries to say that, but my KJV says, “Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins.) “A few days later Peter had a little better understanding of The Gospel.”

That last line?!?.....Boy, the ‘Dr’ sure throws the Lord Jesus’ teaching skills under the bus, with that interpretation. Not only that, but by Wittman’s interpretation, Peter must have backslid in his instruction giving, for he commanded that Cornelius and his household be baptized in the name of the Lord, pronto. ( a side note: how many times did you need to be told how to turn on a microwave oven? Just making a point on how often instruction have to made in detail.)

I’m not going to spend half the night pointing out how inaccurate Dr Wittman’s piece is. I think that I’ve presented enough. But, for him to start out on a poorly built foundation was not good. I will go to your comments now:

..”by faith alone in the Jesus of the Bible alone, apart from the works of man.”

How can you claim faith and deny his command? It’s the power of his name in water baptism that remits sins. Being buried with Him gets the blood on you, or there could be no remission in it.

**You don’t interpret Acts 2:38 correctly nor apply it correctly,**

That’s your opinion.

**you neglect Martha’s salvation (Jn. 11:25-26).**

Jesus kept the Law through his entire walk to the cross, and reminded other Jews to do the same. I imagine that Martha, Mary, and Lazarus were good faithful Jews, in order to be in the Lord’s inner circle of close friends. The Lord told Martha to believe in him. Do you think that included his commandments?

The John 11 passage is only days or weeks from the crucifixion, and a couple of months from the 120 meeting in the upper room, and the Spirit poured out. In hours, about 3,000 had gladly been baptized. JMO, but I wouldn’t doubt that Martha and siblings were including in that big event. For one thing it was the feast of Pentecost. And Martha’s hometown wasn’t very far from Jerusalem.

**You neglect the salvation of the thief believing in Jesus Lord alone in his death torment (Lk. 23:43).**

He was under the Law. Not only was the testator not dead when that promise was made, the thief didn’t need the Holy Ghost, because that Jesus Christ was not yet glorified.

**You bring up (and mis-apply) Hebrews 9,**

Your opinion.

..**particularly the salvation of the army of faith heroes mentioned in 11.**

Able offered a better sacrifice by faith. I’m assuming Enoch did as well, for he pleased God. The list of obedience: built an ark, left Haran, pushed out a baby while quite old, etc. Do you think that any of the OT faithful discontinued to offer sacrifices pleasing to God?

..**but you fail to shaw a complete understanding of what purpose God uses the New Testament baptisms for.**

I think that I do a much better job than Dr Wittman.

(I’m not particularly impressed with his APT version either. Searched a bit but couldn’t find it.)

You told me to read and get back to you. I have.

Rightly divide the Word. Keep in context. Keep trying.

God guide you, I pray.

God guide you, I pray.

My dear Z, what you are missing out on is that The God has guided this poor man all his life, whenever he has permitted Him to do so; and in this case, into discipleship with a man who has studied the Bible daily for years, and who has faithfully and precisely translated the entire New Testament from the Koine Greek Majority/Byzantine textform as proposed by the scholars Robinson and Pierpont, and related it also to small differences between it and Scrivener's Received Text that backed the English Crown-authorised Version, In doing so, he has addressed not only the meaning of every word in its grammar and syntax setting, but also by the style of the author in the cultural and historical context within which it was written.

Do you think I will place your estimate of what these Scriptures say, above that of my teacher and other commentators like him, which also on my own studies your assumptions ring falsely against the better, Biblically-consistent testimony? The answer is, of course, no; and it is just a little unrealistic to think otherwise.

Now, as for the baptism with which Jesus initiated His chosen students into discipleship (including Judas Iscariot), and by which they baptized other followers as committed disciples, its purpose is not to complete a believer's salvation by finally dismissing his/her errors, but rather it is a ritual for the induction by the delegated authority of the Godhead--The Father, The Son, and The Holy Ghost--of professed followers of The Christ into an irreversible commitment to a lifetime of discipleship under such disciplers as have been appointed, themselves teaching and keeping watchfully secure and without change whatsoever Jesus as the Master, Messiach, and Lord commanded His Disciple/Apostles.

The Gospel promise is that in the moment that the Foreknowing God, Who examines the thoughts and intents of a human's heart, discerns that the decision of repentant faith is lasting, right then the human's past errors are removed from His knowledge and permanently forgotten, with justice He completely cleanses that individual's record from all sins, He judicially declares that person "Not Guilty," and frees him/her from the bondage of sin, to be securely kept and transformed by the ongoing renewal of the mind through having been given a new heart and the indwelling Spirit of The God.

In the uninspired AV translation of Acts 2:38, the proper rendering of the preposition "eis" in the minds of the first-century Greek speakers who heard it has the verbal meaning "on the basis of"; which is its use in the foundational sense, exactly as it is used in Matthew 12:41:

"The men of Nineveh shall rise in judgment with this generation, and shall condemn it: because they repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater than Jonas is here" (from the AV).

That is, sounding out the Greek,

"hoti metanoaysan eis to kayrygma Yona"

"because they repented on the basis of Jonah's proclamation as an herald"

So in that correct sense, the individuals professing repentance were to be permitted the induction rite of baptism, a public confession of having committed to be disciples of Christ, on the basis of their sins having already been forgiven and forgotten at the very moment one's belief in Him became real to him (and hence theoretically also to God), thus making them candidates for acceptance into the Company of the Committed, as fellow disciples, to join the assembly of brethren, to pray, to receive the doctrine of the apostles being in fellowship with them, and to break bread together in Remembrance, having received the Gospel with gladness of heart.

Of course, you know and have seen many individuals who have been overcome emotionally by forceful preaching, have been spiritually awakened to their pending condemnation, have grasped at the saying of a prayer of admitting their guilt, and been rushed into a water baptism without having had a true, lasting change of mind; and who, after these delirious effects have worn off in hours, days, or weeks simply gone back to their customary old ways, and not followed through. Like Judas, and Simon Magus, and Hymenaeus, and Alexander, and Diotrophes, these have swerved away and become vain janglers; or merely climbed back into their graves of spiritual death and become unresponsive; and all that after having been baptized, being wrongly told that baptism remits one's sins, and beenn defrauded such that a heavenly residence is now so secure that nothing else is required of them.

Make an account of that, if you can. Religious leaders defend their false presentations by calling that outcome "backsliding," but I simply do not believe their strategic deflection of responsibility for the phenomenon. These baptized people were simply not saved at all, IMO, but have in addition become gospel-hardened.

Now, Z, It is possible to continue to deal with the sticking points you brought up, but only if you can accept that your assumptions might be so wrong as to lead you into deep error, for my time is precious, and I am not interested in further adversarial debate on this issue.

With respect --

**..into discipleship with a man who has studied the Bible daily for years,..**

Jesus put four fisherman and a tax collector out in front of the other seven, when it came to sharing some of their personal backgrounds for us in the scriptures.

But, who had to be physically blinded, as well as scolded by an invisible source, to finally realize the error of his ways? Paul, of course, who was very well educated in the scriptures by the elite, and in other subjects as well.

Nicodemas was no slouch, yet was admonished by the Lord: “Art thou a master of Israel, and knoweth not these things?” Jn 3:10

Jesus said, “I thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, because thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent, and hast revealed them unto babes.” Matt. 10:25

Jesus also said, “Because strait is the gate, and narrow is the way, which leadeth unto life, and few there be that find it.” Matt. 7:14

Look at Apollos (Acts 18:24-28):
an eloquent man,
and mighty in the scriptures,
was instructed in the way of the Lord,
fervent in the spirit,
taught diligently the things of the Lord,

but LACKED the conversion instructions. How do I know this? because the passage tells me that he only knew the baptism of John.

It only took a couple of tent makers, Aquila and Priscilla, that had been converted under Paul, to get him straightened out. As highly educated as he was, he was still teachable.

And of course, as soon as that account ends, we find Paul encountering the ‘certain disciples’ that were of a similar condition to Apollos, pre-correction.

The obsession to pinpoint a precise split second of crossing to faith from unbelief is something that only God knows, so I don’t try to nail down the condition of someone’s heart. The middle two types of soil, in the parable of the sower, show seed dying, and new life coming from it, only to die by failure. That tells me that I’m not to decide who’s not ready to receive the Word of God, but to just testify of it. (the sower didn’t try to be hyper-selective about where his seed was sown.)

But again, this obsession to declare when someone has faith before even they move a muscle, is trying to be God. For even in his own testamonies, there was action shown by the person(s) involved, before their faith was acknowledged.

God’s wisdom in doing that is surely deeper than we can know. But, by having that requirement, he gets the recipient to involve himself wholely (physically and emotionally) to the matter. One of the biggest problems in Christianity (loosely speaking) is the argument that saving faith comes without action. Therefore anyone is saved, and the result is loosened morality, empty churches, etc. (after all, all one has to do is think the confession, right?)

The dogged effort by many to fight, ignore, ‘retranslate’, or devalue Acts 2:38, tells me that the devil absolutely despises it.

Continuing to discuss the Word is not a problem. How quickly I can, is variable.

Praying you don’t have any serious trouble from the snowstorm, imardmd1. I hate snow (kinda sorta).

The dogged effort by many to fight, ignore, â€˜retranslateâ€™, or devalue Acts 2:38, tells me that the devil absolutely despises it.

Peter's history showed that he did not understand NT doctrine until shown by others. particularly by the Holy Spirit after Jesus' Ascension. But both for Nicodemus and Paul, things clicked right away when the Holy Spirit integrated their study of the Word with the theme of salvation/justification by faith alone in the Person and doctrine of Jesus the Messiah alone. Do you think it is not significant that, according to John 4:1-3,

"When therefore the Lord knew how the Pharisees had heard
that Jesus made and baptized more disciples than John,
(Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)
He left Judaea, and departed again into Galilee."

Jesus baptized nobody else except His own disciples, the ones selected by Him and invited to be His inner circle of ones being personally and intimately taught by Himself, accompanying Him in waking and asleep.

The baptism He administered at that point was not a baptism unto repentance (that was within John Baptizer's purview, a symbolic mikvah-type ritual cleansing dignifying separation from a lifestyle of sinning); it as not baptism in the Holy Spirit (that was to come later, not possible until after Jesus' cross-death and ascension into Heaven, and descent of the Holy Ghost to the earthly sphere for the duration of the church age); it was not a baptism of fire (experienced by Him on the cross, a descent into Hell in our place, and yet to be experienced by unbelievers committed to the Lake of Fire); it was a baptism of ritual cleansing and separation of chosen vessels away from the world's idolatry and unto God to receive Jesus' personal teaching and individual supervised discipleship, the kind of discipleship demanded by Him, as described by (an) eyewitness(es), and recorded by Luke:

"If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother,
and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own
life also, he cannot be my disciple.
And whosoever doth not bear his cross, and come after me,
cannot be my disciple. . . .
So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all that he hath,
he cannot be my disciple" (Lk. 14:26, 27, 33 AV).

This is a ritual that He caused His disciples to administer to other adherents choosing to be students of Jesus as Rabbi and teacher of Biblical doctrine. The students they inducted were appointed by Jesus to go forth with them as an evangelistic advance crew announcing the coming of their Master (Mt. 10:1; Mk. 6:7; Lk. 10:1, 17)

What it is not, is a rite of imparting forgiveness of sins. The clear evidence is that it was administered by Jesus to Judas Iscariot, who was even the a devil (Jn. 6:70), so that even water baptism by Christ Himself does not effect remission of sins nor salvation. It is a rite, a public announcement, an official ceremony of switching allegiance to the Messiah and Master Jesus, Righteousness Personified, from one's previous master the Devil who is the personification of Sin; and from Satan's kingdom and culture of the world into The Lord Messiah Jesus and His Exclusive Culture and Company, for ever.

From that initiation of the Twelve, they were commissioned to continue recruiting more individuals, not with John's baptism unto repentance, but enlisting them with the rite of water-immersion, thus signifying giving up all, including their former lives, and dying to the old life to follow Jesus, accompanying the Twelve (Acts 1:2-3, 22-23). Through this practice obviously the Twelve, and others with them, became quite used to conferring the mark of their acceptance of disciples into their Company of fellowshipping students, a community of believers.

And sometime in the last forty days with them, the Risen Jesus delegated to these Apostles to go forth, to recruit more committed students, and initiate them into the School of Disciples in the same fashion they had practiced for over three years; but also finally Jesus conferred upon them the divine authority to conduct the office of teaching The Master's doctrine and commandments--including getting new disciples spiritually mature enough to themselves be qualified evangelists. Trained teachers like John Mark, Silvanus, Timothy, Titus, and many others were expected expand and perpetuate the ministry of sharing and and applying Jesus' teachings by planting local assemblies of regularly congregating disciples. ******

Getting back to John 4, Jesus' encounter with the Samarian woman, where wet water was involved as a literal thirst-quencher but not as a figurative medium of conferring salvation, the whole chapter is given not unto baptism at all, but unto believing in Him as the source of forgiveness of sins, of salvation, and sanctification--to being a fountain of spiritual water of life, rising up out of one's inner being, an experience able to be transmitted to and for others to invite them to the same belief.

The omission of baptismal immersion as salvific was implicit, and the explicit execution of the two-sided coin of repentance/belief as the route to eternal life being made clear, the doctrine of assurance of abundant absolute eternal life through abiding faith alone in Jesus, the Redeeming Messiah of God alone. was fixed. ******

Now, leaping ahead to the moment in Acts 2, the baptism spoken of in verse 38 was not a rite re-administered to Peter (for who wold be preeminent or superior to immerse him?) or any of the other of the Company of the Committed--120-member strong--who were already admitted prior to Spirit-baptism into the Company of Disciples, having exercised confession of and repentance from sins, publicly professed allegiance to the Messiah Jesus of Nazareth, and demonstrating ongoing belief in the Saving and Redeeming Risen Lord.

However, on the day of Pentecost they all together at once experienced the unique descent on them of the Holy Spirit, being Baptized by the Spirit into becoming the first visible earthly Body of Christ; by the power, the exousia, the delegation of authority by The God-Head, to extend membership to other saved individuals into the same company, to be members of the ekklesia, the local church, on the basis of their gladness in receiving the Word, being saved by faith, and added to the church membership by the ritual ceremony of soul-cleansing immersion on the basis of the same visible illustration of profession of salvation and allegiance to Christ that was the .

That is the Gospel of Paul (Rom. 2:16, 16:25; 2 Tim. 2:8), given to him by Christ (Gal. 1:11-12); agreed to by Peter (Gal. 1:18-19); and commended by him in later years (2 Pet. 3:15-16); of which we are warned by Peter (verse 17) "lest we be led away by the error of the wicked," which doctrinal error is promulgating salvation by works of the candidate. Over and over, the admission into the fellowship of--and baptism by the delegated authority of--the brethren, always always follows a profession of salvation, not vice versa.

That is the cause, context, conduct,and consequences of this particular implementation of literal water immersion to the life, function, and rejoicing of the local Christian church. Be advised.

"But grow in grace, and in the knowledge of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ. To him be glory both now and for ever. Amen" (verse 18).

Drive those big rigs safely, my FRiend.

**Peter’s history showed that he did not understand NT doctrine until shown by others. particularly by the Holy Spirit after Jesus’ Ascension.**

Are you still, like many others, trying to show Jesus Christ as a poor instructor in righteousness?

Jesus Christ put Peter at the forefront because he was what he wanted in leadership. The Lord told him that after he would be converted to strengthen the brethren.

Folks like to point out Peter’s denying the Lord three times as proof of a weak disciple, forgetting:

-that he was the only one to pull a sword in defense of the Lord. When told by the Lord to put his sword away, he obeyed. He followed the group from a distance, and surely felt helpless at that point. Even though John had connections to get inside the palace of the high priest, there is no record of him coming forward in defense/allegiance to the Lord. So, even John, along with the rest, denied the Lord by their inaction.

-that Peter was the one with faith enough to walk on water. That after conversion was unafraid of arrest and imprisonment. With the exception of chapters 6 and 7, Peter is mentioned a little or a lot through the first twelve chapters of Acts. And with exception of 6,7, and 8, is the face and voice of the church leadership, God giving witness by signs and wonders (his last recorded miracle being the messenger to raise Dorcas from the dead).

-that he was doing just what the Lord instructed, when the vision from the Lord told him when to go to the Gentiles. He reaffirmed his obedience to that instruction in Acts 15:6-11, testifying in defense of the dissension and disputation from Paul and Barnabas. As far as following the leading of the Spirit, folks forget that the Spirit forbade Paul and Silas from proceeding into Asia. God lets one know where to go and when, if one is under the guidance of the Spirit.

**But both for Nicodemus and Paul, things clicked right away when the Holy Spirit integrated their study of the Word with the theme of salvation/justification by faith alone in the Person and doctrine of Jesus the Messiah alone.**

I don’t recall any word of Nicodemas, after being taught by Jesus, leaving his position as a ruler of the Jews, and joining the group of disciples (perhaps joining the seventy). I know he became a believer, but he showed no unwavering vocal support at the trial either. But, I wouldn’t be surprised if he WAS part of the 120, or the 3,000 on the day the Spirit was poured out.

Paul was led by the Spirit to a preacher (Ananias), who told him: “....The God of our fathers hath chosen thee,....thou shalt be his witness...And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.” Acts 22:16

I’m sure that Paul was well aware of what the disciples of Jesus Christ taught. He knew they were being converted daily, and was convinced that they were heretics (Acts 24:14). The book of Acts shows him preaching and baptizing folks, without needless delay, all over the place.

**Do you think it is not significant that, according to John 4:1-3,**

Jesus Christ simply was prophesying of the Holy Ghost being poured out, and with that, things would change, with people worshipping the Father in spirit and in truth. He, as throughout the four gospels, right up to the cross, did not ever tell the Jews to stop obedience to the Law. If he had, the Pharisees would have had something concrete to charge him with.

In several of the records of His miracles, the Lord acknowledged the recipient’s faith, AFTER they SHOWED that they had faith. God told Abraham, after stopping him from sacrificing Isaac, that “..for now I know that thou fearest God....”. Gen. 22:12. Did God know in advance how Abraham would do?..I believe He did. But, he didn’t let Abraham know when he got up that morning to start getting ready for the sacrifice, nor when he bound up Isaac, nor when he laid him on the altar. Only when he took the knife in hand did God stop him.

**(Though Jesus himself baptized not, but his disciples,)**

I don’t buy your interpretation of that passage. The Lord was wise, in that he made sure nobody could go and brag that they had been baptized in water by none other than Jesus Christ. Paul would actually have to deal with such vanity, thanking God that he personally only baptized Cripus, Gaius, and the household of Stephanas (however many that was).

Remember that Andrew was already a disciple of John the Baptist before meeting Jesus. Did Peter already know of John’s baptism through Andrew, even before Andrew’s meeting of Jesus? Did James and John also know of John’s baptism before meeting Jesus? (James and John were fishing partners of Peter. Lk 5:10)

I believe that Jesus had his disciples performing the same baptism into repentance as John, else there would have been a clarification otherwise (Jn 3:22-24).

**What it is not, is a rite of imparting forgiveness of sins.**

You’re interpreting things from the wrong side of Calvary. After the resurrection, with the new covenant now in force, the Lord commanded baptism, in the NAME (’Son’ is not a name, but a title). HE told THEM (his disciples)that THEY go forth and remit sins (Jn 20:23). Hence the following of the commissions by the Lord, with the Acts 2:38 intructions.

Could go much longer, but past bedtime. Hopefully you didn’t get snowed in or lose electricity.

God bless, FRiend.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.