[Zuriel]

**Dispensationalists believe that the dispensation of the grace of God began with Paul and not before. Eph. 3:2,3,5,6,9. That the Day of Pentecost does NOT mark the beginning of the Church the Body of Christ, since Paul says HE was given that ministry from Christ, and he wasn’t saved until Acts 9, so the Body of Christ could not have begun before then.**

The Lord made it clear to his disciples:

Matt. 28:19, Jesus Christ commanded THEM to teach all nations, baptizing them. Jesus Christ baptized with the Holy Ghost, so we know he wasn’t telling the disciples to do that. He was telling them to baptize souls in water, in his name.

In Mark 16:16, He commanded THEM that one must believe and be baptized. If you insist that he is talking about Spirit baptism only, then why tell the disciples that one must be baptized, since they had no power to baptize ANYBODY with the Spirit?

In Luke 24:47, He commands THEM to preach repentance and remission of sins in his name, beginning at Jerusalem.

In John 20:23, he commands THEM to remit sins.

Where are these commands first instituted?...Acts 2:38.

Peter’s own words reinforce baptism for the remission of sins:

1Peter 3:20,21 is quite plain. 20 “...eight souls were saved by water.” 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.”

“By the resurrection of Jesus Christ”.....For a little comparison, read again what Peter wrote, leaving out the words in parentheses, while following it with what Paul wrote in 1Cor. 15:29 (leaving the words in parentheses in is fine, if you prefer, for it doesn’t change the meaning).

Paul taught the same conversion as Peter:

“Else what shall they do which are baptized for the dead, if the dead rise not at all? Why are they then baptized for the dead?” 1Cor 15:29.

That’s Paul (the one who wasn’t suppose to baptize, according to the misinterpretation of 1Cor 1:17)), saying that if Christ (and the asleep in Christ) rise not, then it is all vain. If there is no resurrection, then water baptism into Christ is a waste of time. Of course, we know that is not the case, since Christ is risen, and the Spirit poured out.

Those folks in Corinth had already been born again, or at least knew how (1 Cor. 1:2). So there was no need for Paul to talk water baptism in his teaching of the gifts of the Spirit. Remember that Paul had already discussed water baptism in the first chapter. He personally baptized at least four in Corinth (probably more, depending on how many made up “the household of Stephanus”).

Water baptism is not a bath, but is done in the name of Jesus for the remission of sins. That is how one has the answer of a good conscience toward God. Being “buried with him” is where you get his blood on you, but his NAME must not be left out.

The conversion of the keeper of the prison, in Philippi, is a story that is rarely told completely. Quote 16:31, and get out of Dodge.

The story continues with Paul speaking “unto him the word of the Lord, and to ALL that were IN HIS HOUSE. And he TOOK THEM that same hour of the night, and WASHED their stripes; and was BAPTIZED, he and all his straightway. And WHEN he had BROUGHT them INTO HIS HOUSE, he set meat before them, and rejoiced, BELIEVING in God with all his house.” Acts 16:32-34

1. We see that the keeper of the prison has brought Paul and Silas into his house, because they speak “the word of the Lord” to the man and all those “IN HIS HOUSE” (unless you think that they somehow got a message to hustle on down to the prison for church service).

2. “He TOOK THEM” (took them from his house to where, pray tell?). Well, he washed their stripes somewhere besides the house. Some place where there would be plenty of water for the messy job of washing their stripes.

3. While still AWAY from home, possibly at the same location, they were BAPTIZED, he and all his straightway.
(you can insist that that is talking about Spirit baptism only, but you can’t prove it. I believe it is water baptism, or both water and Spirit baptism).

4. He brought them back INTO his house,......he and all his “rejoiced, BELIEVING in God with all his house”.

Last, but not least, we have the re-baptism in Ephesus: Paul finds certain disciples that believe SOMETHING about the Lord, for Paul asks, “Have ye received the Holy Ghost since ye believed”. To which they replied that they hadn’t even heard about the Holy Ghost. They had only been baptized “unto John’s baptism”. Paul told them that it was a baptism unto repentance.

“When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. And when Paul laid his hands on them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.” 19:5,6

[smvoice]

Yes, I understand what you're saying, Zuriel. And it perfectly makes the point of dispensationalism. Paul says there is NOW ONE BAPTISM. Show me how the Holy Spirit baptizing believers (spiritual baptism, Eph. 4:5) into the Body of Christ and water baptism are ONE baptism. They are not. And indeed John the Baptist, Christ, Peter and the 11, and Paul, in the beginning of his ministry practiced water baptism. And it WAS "for the remission of sins". But something changed when Israel was blinded and set aside. The dispensation of law was replaced by the dispensation of the grace of God. Water baptism was required in the dispensation of law. Paul was saved in that dispensation of the law and took the Gentiles and believing Jews into the dispensation of grace. He also circumcised Timothy, but he did not preach circumcision. Circumcision and water baptism (washings) were both ordinances of the law. And both were nailed to His cross, as they both were against us, and contrary to us. That's why there is NOW ONE.

I probably did not explain this very well. It's late for me and I'm sure I'm not making myself clear. Sorry! :)