The Big Discovery [by David, former Presbyterian]

like we are making up the Trinity?

You guys claim you couldn't find the Trinity in the scriptures...Where then did your religion come up with the idea of a Trinity???

my BIBLE says BAPTISM NOW SAVES YOU.

It sure does but you pull that little sentence out of the verse to try to prove something while ignoring the biblical definition of baptism in the verse...

I think Paul got your number when he warned us about people who pull that same tactic...

2Co 4:2 But have renounced the hidden things of dishonesty, not walking in craftiness, nor handling the word of God deceitfully; but by manifestation of the truth commending ourselves to every man's conscience in the sight of God.

But anyway, here's the entire verse:

1Pe 3:21 The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:

Not a cleansing in the waters of baptism...

Baptism for the Christian is the answer of a good conscience toward God...It's Spiritual...No water...

THAT's the baptism that saves us...

Amen! And even more proof that water baptism was not meant for those who do not have the capacity to comprehend their sinfulness or the need for a savior (i.e.; babies, small children, mentally disabled, etc.). The ordinance was solely for the purpose of a public expression of faith in the Lord Jesus Christ and a commitment to follow Him in newness of life. Such a thing cannot possibly be done for another person (faith by proxy) but is entered into after careful and conscious study and determination. It is the faith in Christ that saves us - and which effects the baptism of the Holy Spirit - APART from the ordinance of water baptism.

ok, i’m ready for my test:

baptism is the sacrament where one receives the remission of sins, the gift of the Holy Spirit and is placed in Christ.
i don’t know what an “ordinance” is and i am not sure why you have “church” in quotation marks. The Church received AUTHORITY from Jesus Christ Himself in Matthew 28 to make disciples of all nations by TEACHING and BAPTIZING. Baptism does involve water.
i don’t claim baptism saves, the Holy Spirit tells us it does in 1 Peter 3:21. We either believe the Scriptures or we don’t.
if a person is baptized they are in Christ, therefore if they died they are saved. the Scriptures are clear that one can be in Christ and thru sin, lose their salvation. The Church has never taught “once saved, always saved” in 2,000 years. that is another 16th century invention.
faith is required for baptism as we see in Acts 8. if an adult is seeking baptism, they must express faith in Jesus Christ before baptism, if it a baby or child being baptized, the parents must express faith before the baptism.
Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and life, He is our salvation. We must be in Christ to be saved, outside of Christ there is no salvation. The Scriptures are clear, the only way into Christ is thru baptism. It is how we put on Christ and how our sins are forgiven. Faith is wonderful, good works are wonderful, but we are saved by grace.
The Scriptures are clear baptism is by the Holy Spirit, using the Church as the means of grace. If someone hears the Gospel, believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who became man to die for our sins and reconcile us to the Father and wishes to have their sins forgiven in baptism, this can only happen if the Holy Spirit draws that person. If the Holy Spirit starts a good work in you, He is faithful to complete, therefore the Church teaches such a person is saved. This is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than someone who rejects baptismal regeneration and wishes to be in Christ without being BAPTIZED into Christ. The former is Biblical and historical Christianity, the latter is a false 16th century doctrine invented by the devil to attack the Church and the unity of the Body of Christ.
The Scriptures don’t answer your baby question, so i hesitate to speculate.

i think i answered all your questions, so could you answer mine:

why did Jesus COMMAND baptism?
where does the Bible say baptism is symbolic?
where does the Bible say baptism is a first act of obedience?
where does the Bible say baptism is an outward sign of what has happened inwardly already?
why do Baptists teach there are two baptisms ( Spirit and water ), when Paul tells us in Ephesians there is only ONE baptism?
finally, how can you believe NO ONE understood baptism from 95ad til the 16th century, where was the Holy Spirit for these 1,500 years?

the elect can not believe false teachers, this is different than personal sins they may commit.

read Ephesians, there is ONLY ONE BAPTISM.

“You guys claim you couldn’t find the Trinity in the scriptures”

this is news to me, who claims that?

the Bible teaches there is One God, it teaches the Father is God, it teaches Jesus is God, it teaches the Holy Spirit is God, it teaches the Father is not Jesus or the Holy Spirit, it teaches Jesus is not the Father or the Holy Spirit and it teaches the Holy Spirit is not the Father or Jesus. in short, the Bible teaches the Trinity.

what does the Bible say in Acts 10 that Cornelius and his family did prior to receiving the Holy Spirit?
did they:
repent of their sins?
express belief that Jesus is the Son of God?
ask Jesus into their heart and accept Him as their personal Savior?
what was the “gift of the Holy Spirit” that they received?

Why don't you do kind of a novel thing, and actually read the responses to your argument and interact with them, instead of just insolently asking questions as if they were not, and also in this case go and contend against far weightier Catholic sources which disagree with you. If you actually allowed yourself to see such. As you act as if you do not, then you are wasting my my time, perhaps by design. Bye.

what does the Bible say in Acts 10 that Cornelius and his family did prior to receiving the Holy Spirit?
did they:
repent of their sins? NO
express belief that Jesus is the Son of God? NO
ask Jesus into their heart and accept Him as their personal Savior? NO
what was the “gift of the Holy Spirit” that they received?
TONGUES

there, i saved you the trouble of answering them. Cornelius, his family and the brethern that accompanied Peter had the Holy Spirit fall on them and give them the gift of tongues WHILE PETER WAS STILL SPEAKING.

The Holy Spirit was showing Peter salvation was for the Gentiles, as well as physical Jews.

Cornelius and his family still needed their sins remitted and to put on Christ, the Bible says this is done by BAPTISM.

BTW- i understand your getting testy when your 16th century tradition of men beliefs are challenged by Scripture. i would be uncomfortable too if i brought a different doctrine than the Apostles taught and the Church has believed for 2,000 years.

Well, let's see if you answered my questions (it's hard to tell which question is being answered due to your lack of using paragraphs or even capital letters at the start of a sentence, but I'll try):

When you say the word "baptism", what specifically are you talking about?

baptism is the sacrament where one receives the remission of sins, the gift of the Holy Spirit and is placed in Christ.

Okay, but there is a difference in "Baptism" and "Water Baptism". That you continue to assert they mean the same thing, demonstrates ignorance or stubborn resistance to acknowledging what Scripture actually DOES say.

Do you mean the ordinance of baptism performed by the "church" that includes the use of water?

i don’t know what an “ordinance” is and i am not sure why you have “church” in quotation marks. The Church received AUTHORITY from Jesus Christ Himself in Matthew 28 to make disciples of all nations by TEACHING and BAPTIZING. Baptism does involve water.

An "ordinance" simply means an authoritative rule or law, a decree or command. That you say you are not sure what it is, is either because you want to insist upon your own religion's semantics or obtuseness. I'm pretty sure you DO know what the word means. Scripture uses the word quite a bit. For example, in Leviticus 3:17, the LORD says, “This is a lasting ordinance for the generations to come, wherever you live: You must not eat any fat or any blood.” Paul told the Corinthians in I Cor. 11:2, "Now I praise you, brethren, that ye remember me in all things, and keep the ordinances, as I delivered them to you." So, we know that there were ordinances of God as well as those passed on to Christians by the Apostles. Water Baptism, then was an ordinance. The Roman Catholic Church changed this to a "sacrament", or a "rite", used to confer grace upon the one participating in the rite. It is interesting that the term "sacrament" is used to mean "a visible sign of an inward grace". By that, we know that the rite of water baptism then is an outward, visible sign of what is spiritual. Ringing a bell?

If you are speaking of the specific act of a water baptism performed by the "church", then is it THAT act, that ordinance, that you claim "saves"?

i don’t claim baptism saves, the Holy Spirit tells us it does in 1 Peter 3:21. We either believe the Scriptures or we don’t.

Yet, you are insisting over and over again across the threads, no matter what the subject is, that water baptism is what actually does the "saving". You equate this "sacrament" to every time the word "baptism" is used in Scripture no matter the context even when the verse clearly is NOT speaking of water baptism. So, yes, you do claim - without Scriptural warrant - that, in your opinion, water baptism DOES save. You say that it is the act, itself, of being water baptized by a specific formula and by a specific person that saves rather than, as Scripture states, the faith behind the act that saves us.

Consequentially, if a person is baptized in water by the "church", is that person "saved"?

if a person is baptized they are in Christ, therefore if they died they are saved. the Scriptures are clear that one can be in Christ and thru sin, lose their salvation. The Church has never taught “once saved, always saved” in 2,000 years. that is another 16th century invention.

Not really true at all but your contention is just another example of how Rome changed the understanding of the doctrine of justification by grace apart from works and which the Reformers sought to restore. Those who are "in Christ" have been redeemed by His blood and we are kept by that same grace acquired by faith in Christ. We are not saved by good works so we are not kept saved by good works either. It is truly amazing that so many fail to see that especially as they, with a straight face, claim to be saved by grace but then insist staying saved is by works.

What place does personal faith have in this act?

faith is required for baptism as we see in Acts 8. if an adult is seeking baptism, they must express faith in Jesus Christ before baptism, if it a baby or child being baptized, the parents must express faith before the baptism. Jesus Christ is the way, the truth and life, He is our salvation. We must be in Christ to be saved, outside of Christ there is no salvation. The Scriptures are clear, the only way into Christ is thru baptism. It is how we put on Christ and how our sins are forgiven. Faith is wonderful, good works are wonderful, but we are saved by grace.

There is no such thing as "Proxy Faith". A parent cannot have faith FOR the child and this is proved repeatedly in the vast number of baptized babies that do NOT go on to become Christians in their own personal faith. Each person must make that decision for Christ.

Finally, is it the act itself of baptism or the faith of the person being baptized that saves that person?

The Scriptures are clear baptism is by the Holy Spirit, using the Church as the means of grace. If someone hears the Gospel, believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who became man to die for our sins and reconcile us to the Father and wishes to have their sins forgiven in baptism, this can only happen if the Holy Spirit draws that person. If the Holy Spirit starts a good work in you, He is faithful to complete, therefore the Church teaches such a person is saved. This is COMPLETELY DIFFERENT than someone who rejects baptismal regeneration and wishes to be in Christ without being BAPTIZED into Christ. The former is Biblical and historical Christianity, the latter is a false 16th century doctrine invented by the devil to attack the Church and the unity of the Body of Christ.

Another example of saying something with absolutely NO intention of following through on what is being said. Your religion teaches that NO person can have assurance of being saved outside of them being "special" and having had a vision or being especially pious and saint-like. My point is that to be saved we must come to saving faith in Jesus Christ, believing on Him and receiving God's grace of eternal life through faith. Being "baptized into Christ" is NOT the essential act of water baptism but happens when the gift of God is received by faith. THAT is when the baptism of the Holy Spirit happens. As I Peter 3:21 says, "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ." Water baptism is symbolic, as ALL rites or sacraments are, and it is NOT the rite that affects the spiritual reality.

And, lastly, in anticipation of your answer to the last question, if both faith AND the act of baptism are necessary to "save" a person, then what happens if that person dies after his profession of faith and before his participation in the act of baptism? Is he STILL saved?

You didn't answer this question.

And I add, what happens to babies who die without baptism?

The Scriptures don’t answer your baby question, so i hesitate to speculate.

Yet, your religion baptizes babies! This question SHOULD be easy to answer, since we KNOW that God is merciful and He will not send an innocent person to hell just because he/she wasn't baptized in the Catholic Church. This is contrary to Aquinas, who insisted unbaptized babies went to hell (nice, huh?). The very idea of this proves the rule, God does NOT make water baptism a requirement for salvation. It is based upon faith and faith alone and one who is incapable of exercising faith through no fault of their own, ARE saved through the mercy and grace of God.

I'll pass on answering your redundant questions. You have proved more than a few times that no matter what answer is provided, you refuse to hear the truth. I'll not waste my or your time doing so again.

You are not compelled to give more grace to a man who is engaged in a soliloquy, rather than actually interacting with with what refutes him, doing so in the interest of defending his church, but contradicting approved teachers, while the basis for his belief in His Church is faith in what she said.

uh oh, you and mr 108 word 10 comma sentence are not covering yourselves in glory when it comes to answering some simple questions......more on that later.

a few comments on your grading of my “test”:

1.”Okay, but there is a difference in “Baptism” and “Water Baptism” There my be a difference in the Baptist mind, but not in the Scriptures. Ephesians 4, which i like to think of as the forerunner of the Nicene Creed tells us there is ONE BAPTISM. the Bible never uses the words “water baptism”, only baptism. you assert i am ignorant of what the Scriptures say, BUT FAIL TO POINT OUT WHERE THE SCRIPTURES TEACH TWO BAPTISMS. don’t feel bad, no Baptist can, as the Scriptures don’t teach two baptisms. there is a reason NO ONE believed this for 1,500 years, the Scriptures don’t teach it.
2. 1 Corinthians 11:2 instructs us to keep the traditions that Paul delivered, ironic no?
3. you missed my point on baptism saving us. you said i “claimed” this, i said I DON’T “CLAIM” IT, THE HOLY SPIRIT TELLS US BAPTISM NOW SAVES US IN 1 PETER 3:21.
4. it is also ironic that Ephesians 4 also calls on Christians to “maintain the unity of the Spirit in the bond of peace”, and then goes on to list the major doctrines of the Faith including “ ONE BAPTISM”. the 16th century Baptists, by INVENTING TWO BAPTISMS, had no interest in maintaining the unity of the Spirit.
5. many Scriptures can be provided that disprove that lie from hell, “once saved, always saved” Hebrews 6 for example. again, there is a reason NO ONE believed this for 1,500 years.
6. read Acts 2:39 and you will see the “promise is to you and YOUR CHILDREN”, this is why the Apostles baptized children. God honors the faith of the parents.
7. you claim i didn’t answer your question about someone dying before baptism. i did, here’s what i wrote:
The Scriptures are clear baptism is by the Holy Spirit, using the Church as the means of grace. If someone hears the Gospel, believes that Jesus Christ is the Son of God who became man to die for our sins and reconcile us to the Father and wishes to have their sins forgiven in baptism, this can only happen if the Holy Spirit draws that person. If the Holy Spirit starts a good work in you, He is faithful to complete, therefore the Church teaches such a person is saved.
8. concerning babies, we know they are sinners since Ezekiel 18:20 says the soul that sins will die, babies die all the time. if babies were sinless, Jesus would not have had to die, since babies would be automaticaly in heaven.
what happens to 3rd century american indians who never had the Gospel preached to them, did they all go to hell?

now, back to where the wheels come off the Baptist wagon:

Baptists can’t tell us WHY Jesus commanded baptism.
Baptists can’t show us anywhere where the Scriptures teach TWO BAPTISMS.
Baptists can’t point to any Scripture which teaches baptism is symbolic.
Baptists can’t point to any Scripture where someone was told to be baptized as a first act of obedience.
Baptists can’t point to any Scripture where someone was told that baptism is an outward sign of something that has happened already.

so when these questions are posed, BB and mr 108 will say the questions are redundant, or they were answered already. LOL! I POSTED #977 GIVING THE BIBLICAL BASIS FOR BAPTISMAL REGENERATION AND #978 FOR THE HISTORICAL EVIDENCE THAT ALL THE CHURCH FATHERS BELIEVED IN BAPTISMAL REGENERATION.

i await the Baptist who can answer my questions, cue the crickets.........

Nope, no crickets, unless the ones in your head have drowned out all the times IN THIS THREAD ALONE that your questions HAVE been answered already! But, just so we will not end this current thread with your false post, I'll do so ONE LAST TIME - though I highly doubt it will stop the rants:

Christians can’t tell us WHY Jesus commanded baptism.

We have no need to single out Baptists since this is a common doctrine of Christians and has been since it began. Baptism did not start with Christianity, in fact, it was a common JEWISH ordinance that symbolized many things depending upon context. I already posted a comment linking to a site that explained this, but you must have missed it. If you remember, Jesus' cousin John was going about baptizing those who were followers of him. He called it "the Baptism of Repentance". He told his hearers that one was to come who would baptize them with "fire and the Holy Ghost". There's 3 (three) forms of baptism right there! Jesus commanded baptism - the ordinance of water baptism - to symbolically represent a "pledge of a clear conscience toward God" (I Pet. 3:21) as well as identification with the death, burial and resurrection of Christ. "We were therefore buried with him through baptism into death in order that, just as Christ was raised from the dead through the glory of the Father, we too may live a new life." (Rom. 6:4) and "having been buried with him in baptism, in which you were also raised with him through your faith in the working of God, who raised him from the dead." (Col. 2:12)

Christians can’t show us anywhere where the Scriptures teach TWO BAPTISMS.

See answer above. There were also baptisms in the Old Testament that were done for purification rites, new converts to Judaism and as part of the sacrifices. In Jesus' day people were baptized to indicate they were disciples of someone. They were "baptized in the name of...". I already posted a link to a site that explained this, but you must have missed it.

Christians can’t point to any Scripture which teaches baptism is symbolic.

You obviously haven't ever read the above verses. Go back and do so, it will help you to see that Scripture most certainly DOES teach that the ordinance of water baptism is symbolic of what happens by faith in the shed blood of Christ. We are cleansed from all sin by His precious blood and water baptism symbolizes this cleansing. This has been posted many times before in this thread, but you must have missed it.

Christians can’t point to any Scripture where someone was told to be baptized as a first act of obedience.

Okay, look at Cornelius and his peeps in Acts 10 then look at Acts 11:12-16, where Peter retells his experience with Cornelius:

The Spirit told me to have no hesitation about going with them. These six brothers also went with me, and we entered the man’s house. He told us how he had seen an angel appear in his house and say, ‘Send to Joppa for Simon who is called Peter. He will bring you a message through which you and all your household will be saved.’ “As I began to speak, the Holy Spirit came on them as he had come on us at the beginning. Then I remembered what the Lord had said: ‘John baptized with water, but you will be baptized with the Holy Spirit.’ So if God gave them the same gift he gave us who believed in the Lord Jesus Christ, who was I to think that I could stand in God’s way?” When they heard this, they had no further objections and praised God, saying, “So then, even to Gentiles God has granted repentance that leads to life.”

Whoa, no mention from old Pete that he also water baptized them???!!! How can THAT be? He DID baptize them, but only AFTER they believed on Christ and AFTER they had received the Holy Spirit. This has been said before, but you must have missed it.

Christians can’t point to any Scripture where someone was told that baptism is an outward sign of something that has happened already.

If after reading all these Scriptures (Acts 10, Acts 11, I Pet. 3:21, Col. 2:12) as well as the extra, repeated posts from others stating the same thing, it really is remarkable that you cannot see this simple truth. ALL such acts like baptism and the Lord's Supper (Eucharist) are outward signs of something that has happened within the heart of the believer participating in the ordinance. This has been stated also repeatedly, but you must have missed it.

What you seem to want to castigate Daniel1212 and I for "not covering ourselves in glory" is more than contradicted by the pure amount of patient repetition of the SAME explanations and answers across multiple threads for MONTHS. If we had no interest in glorifying Christ, would we have hung on this long? If we are not "covering ourselves in glory", then what do you call what you are doing? All I see is a stubborn refusal to really get past the rote talking points of your catechism and get to the nitty gritty of WHY they say what they say. As for those of us who left the Roman Catholic Church on exactly these grounds, it is curious, though not surprising, that you continue to say the same things but show no real understanding of the truth behind what you state. It comes across, instead, like someone reciting their Catechism in preparation for Confirmation. You have the answers memorized, but you have no idea what any of it really means. That's NOT how we Christians are supposed to live.

You have the answers memorized, but you have no idea what any of it really means.

Reading the mind of another Freeper is a form of "making it personal."

Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

You have the answers memorized, but you have no idea what any of it really means.

Reading the mind of another Freeper is a form of "making it personal." Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

Thank you for that reminder. It gets frustrating having to repeat explanations over and over again to the same person. Let me rephrase:

You sound like you have the answers memorized, but you don't seem to have any idea what they really mean.

Better?

Yes, much better.

You have the answers memorized, but you have no idea what any of it really means.

Reading the mind of another Freeper is a form of "making it personal." Discuss the issues all you want, but do not make it personal.

Thank you for that reminder. It gets frustrating having to repeat explanations over and over again to the same person. Let me rephrase, another way, just in case the last one wasn't okay:

It comes across, instead, like someone reciting their Catechism in preparation for Confirmation. He has the answers memorized, but has no idea what any of it really means. That's NOT how we Christians are supposed to live.

Better?

2. 1 Corinthians 11:2 instructs us to keep the traditions that Paul delivered, ironic no?

What traditions are those, specifically, and how do you know? How is the source verified and how do we know that it was passed down accurately?

Catholics can't point to any Scripture that commands us to baptize infants.

Catholics can't point to any Scripture that says that being baptized puts us into the church.

read Ephesians, there is ONLY ONE BAPTISM.

Don't kid yourself, I've read Ephesians numerous times...

Act 19:1 And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul having passed through the upper coasts came to Ephesus: and finding certain disciples,
Act 19:2 He said unto them, Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed? And they said unto him, We have not so much as heard whether there be any Holy Ghost.
Act 19:3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.
Act 19:4 Then said Paul, John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.
Act 19:5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
Act 19:6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

Now as one can simply see, Paul made a reference to John's baptism where people came up short...They were baptized in water just like you Catholics do but it wasn't good enough...Those people, contray to the Catholic religion had to be baptized twice...

And what does it say??? Did Paul re-dunk them into some water??? Nope...He laid his hands on them and they were then baptized with the Holy Ghost...No water...They were baptized without water...

And how do we know the Holy Spirit came upon them??? Did anyone see it??? Nope...

They spoke with tongues so people would see something internally happened to them...There wasn't a drop of water involved...Baptism does not mean water...

Mat 3:11 I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance: but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear: he shall baptize you (again)??? with (water)??? Nope...(He will baptize you with) the Holy Ghost, and with fire:

Well look at that...John baptized with John's baptism of water but he recognized that when God did the baptizing, it was something else...

Of course you guys don't believe that...But why would John tell you that you have to be baptized 2 times in water???

And again,

Joh 1:33 And I knew him not: but he that sent me to baptize with water, the same said unto me, Upon whom thou shalt see the Spirit descending, and remaining on him, the same is he which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.

Now it's pretty clear that Catholics get baptized with the baptism of John...But then it's not really even the baptism of John...It's more of a forgery...

Mar 1:4 John did baptize in the wilderness, and preach the baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.

John's baptism was the baptism of repentance...That's certainly not the Catholic baptism, is it??? Repentance is not a requirement in your ritual, at least not for small children...

I've talked to Catholics who claim that belief in Jesus Christ is optional...As long as you get that sacrament of baptism, you're good to go...

So how does John's baptism fit in within the church age??? Here's the result of baptism in the church age...

Rom 6:5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
Rom 6:6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

When you were baptized, were you physically planted in death??? Was your body physically crucified???

Col 2:12 Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead.
Col 2:13 And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses;

Again, was your body buried??? And then your body rose from the grave???

And how about being DEAD in your sins??? And forgiven you ALL trespasses??? Not just those that are past...

Col 2:11 In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ:

I tried to get you to respond to this verse recently but it apparently went so high over your head you couldn't reach it...

What's that mean to put off the body of the sins of the flesh???

Col 2:14 Blotting out the handwriting of ordinances that was against us, which was contrary to us, and took it out of the way, nailing it to his cross;

The baptism of the Holy Ghost is completely Spiritual...When WE go into the water, we do not die...We are not buried...Our baptism is a Spiritual circumcision, not a physical one...

When we go into the water for baptism, it SIGNIFIES the Spiritual death and resurrection that we have gone thru...

Does that at all sound like John's baptism of repentance??? Sure doesn't...

There is so, so much in that bible that is completely foreign to you guys...You continue to post the same out of context few verses and don't have a clue what God really says about, anything...

Sunday, October 4, 2009

The Big Discovery