Rathe, it is biting you, as again, what cannot be denied is that despite your spin on an antitype, it still does not state baptism is the fulfillment of what the flood typified, like as the temple in Heaven is of the earthly representative, (Heb. 9:24) but that it is a “like figure.”
And as said, while it is water baptism, it saves like as “with the mouth confession is made unto salvation,” as it confesses the faith of the heart by which “man believeth unto righteousness.” (Rm. 10:10:10), as God justifies the unGodly by faith, a faith that confesses the Lord Jesus. Thus as shown, souls can and did receive the Holy Spirit prior to baptism, and were at that time baptized into the church.
“For by one Spirit are we all baptized into one body, whether we be Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to drink into one Spirit. “ (1 Corinthians 12:13)
“Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? “ (Acts 10:47)
“Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God? “ (Acts 11:17)
“And God, which knoweth the hearts, bare them witness, giving them the Holy Ghost, even as he did unto us; And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith. “ (Acts 15:8-9)
But as you cannot allow that, and like Sabellianism, cannot reconcile two apparently contradictory statements, you must insist that there can be only absolutely one baptism, and argue as if water baptism is absolutely necessary for forgiveness and regeneration, thus you must deny what has been made manifest, that God gave the Holy Spirit to souls “who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ” (Acts 11:17) “purifying their hearts by faith,” (Acts 15:9) before they were baptized.
But despite your promotion of “one faith” versus disagreements, your are at odds with your own church and its scholarship on this, but which, like other things that reprove you, you ignore and keep on asserting the same things, even saying they were not answered.
Now instead of basically dismissing things which oppose your statements and asserting the same, go find another Catholic who will argue here that Cornelius and company did NOT receive remission of sins and the Holy Spirit prior to baptism, and or that if anyone did under the New Cov. then they would not have become part of the body of Christ. As for you, you have been given is extended grace. (2Tim. 2:25) May God grant you repentance unto the acknowledging the Truth. Bye.
Relevant posts and links.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2891087/posts?page=965#965 (#s9, 10)
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2891087/posts?page=940#940
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/religion/2901137/posts?page=78#78
i often wonder if people who people who follow the 16th century tradition of men , ever really read the Scriptures they claim to follow.
case in point, the claim that Cornelius was baptized by the Holy Spirit in Acts 10. Acts 10 specifically says the Gentiles WERE NOT BAPTIZED, prior to Peter commanding it in Acts 10:48.
how do i know? V47 tells us!
Acts 10:47 “ can anyone forbid water FOR BAPTIZING these people who have received the Holy Spirit just as we have”.
there you have it, Peter says they had NOT been BAPTIZED up to that point. IF THE HOLY SPIRIT DID INDEED BAPTIZE THEM, THERE WOULD BE NO REASON FOR PETER TO BAPTIZE THEM.
There are not two baptisms for Chrsitians, for Paul tells us in Ephesians 4 there is ONLY ONE BAPTISM.
there is no record in the whole NT of anyone having received two Christian baptisms, one “spirit” and one “water” IT SIMPLY IS NOT THERE AND THAT’S WHY THE CHURCH HAS TAUGHT AND BELIEVED THERE IS ONLY ONE BAPTISM FOR 2,000 YEARS.
it would be helpful to some to take off the 16th century tradition of men glasses and actually read what the Scriptures say.
maybe, just maybe, one will see what Christians have taught and believed for 2,000 years.