Replies

Acts 22:16 is an iffy procedure proposed by Ananias before Paul’s formulation of his own gospel as taught personally by the Lord Jesus Christ. Ananias’ words were not necessarily inspired words, although the history of him saying them is inspired and inerrant. This is not a verse to rest a doctrine of baptismal regeneration on, my FRiend.

Ananias is a saint and an unimpeachable witness in the book of Acts. When one casts aspersions on his veracity casts them on Saul/Paul as well, for it is Saul/Paul, not to mention the Lord Jesus who told Saul to go to him for instruction, who is giving the account here.

And I fell unto the ground, and heard a voice saying unto me, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? And I answered, Who art thou, Lord? And he said unto me, I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom thou persecutest. And they that were with me saw indeed the light, and were afraid; but they heard not the voice of him that spake to me. And I said, What shall I do, Lord? And the Lord said unto me, Arise, and go into Damascus; and there it shall be told thee of all things which are appointed for thee to do. And when I could not see for the glory of that light, being led by the hand of them that were with me, I came into Damascus. And one Ananias, a devout man according to the law, having a good report of all the Jews which dwelt there, Came unto me, and stood, and said unto me, Brother Saul, receive thy sight. And the same hour I looked up upon him. And he said, The God of our fathers hath chosen thee, that thou shouldest know his will, and see that Just One, and shouldest hear the voice of his mouth. For thou shalt be his witness unto all men of what thou hast seen and heard. And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

Acts, Catholic chapter twenty two, Protestant verses seven to sixteen,
as authorized, but not authored, by King James
bold emphasis mine

Get off it. You don't know exactly what Ananias said, nor exactly what he meant and in what order he meant things to happen from the Acts 22:16 verse.

What you need to do is read Acts 9:17-18 and see which happened first, Paul's sins being forgiven or his baptism.

Paul was healed and the Holy Ghost conferred such that baptized on the basis of sins already forgiven, as a subsequent operation.

Who says Ananias’ words were impeachable? Paul says that is what he said, and, though hearsay, Ananias did say that. But that does not have any sense of imparting a contradiction to the facts of Acts 9, does it? Nor is there any implication of what he said as being inspired. Even Peter said a lot of things that were uninspired by God, though the telling of the scenario in which he lied was inspired.