The Baptism of Violent Death (Mt. 20:22-23; 3:8-12; Mk. 10:38,39; Lk. 12:49,50.)
The Baptism of The Holy Spirit (Mt. 3:11; Jn. 1:33; 7:39; Acts 1:5; 2:1-18; 10:44-47; 1 Cor. 12:13).
Jesus baptized His first prototype local church at Jerusalem in the Holy Spirit. After Peter's sermon, the Spirit-baptized church added members into itself by water-baptizing individuals professing a belief in the Christ.
How about admitting that there are not only several different watre baptisms, but also some baptisms that do not involve water, eh? Come on, now, man up to your error.
There is no other baptism:
The Baptism of Violent Death (Mt. 20:22-23; 3:8-12; Mk. 10:38,39; Lk. 12:49,50.)
The Baptism of The Holy Spirit (Mt. 3:11; Jn. 1:33; 7:39; Acts 1:5; 2:1-18; 10:44-47; 1 Cor. 12:13).
Jesus baptized His first prototype local church at Jerusalem in the Holy Spirit. After Peter’s sermon, the Spirit-baptized church added members into itself by water-baptizing individuals professing a belief in the Christ.
How about admitting that there are not only several different watre baptisms, but also some baptisms that do not involve water, eh? Come on, now, man up to your error.
Certainly not. I have made no error.
In Mark 10 et al, my understanding is that Jesus is speaking figuratively. He wasn’t literally going to be drinking from a cup, and he wasn’t literally going to be baptized. Christianity continues to occasionally use the term Baptism of Blood, but I don’t think it’s in particularly common parlance. I also don’t think anyone thinks it’s actually a baptism, indeed, it’s used to describe the “baptism” (or rather, baptismal substitute) of one martyred who has not actually been baptized. Perhaps someone Roman Catholic can explain better than I, I think they use the term more often.
Baptism of the Holy Spirit is much easier. Of course it exists - but it is simply “water” baptism. John 3:5, Acts 2:28-29, Titus 3:5-6 come to mind. “Water” baptism IS “Spirit” baptism. One baptism.
Now you may protest, what about John’s baptism? There, you could be correct. He offered a baptism of repentance in anticipation of Jesus’s coming. However, it no longer exists today, and did not exist when Paul wrote to the Ephesians (rendering his one baptism statement correct).
Finally, your timeline in Acts 2 is incorrect. Peter preached. The people believed his preaching. They asked what shall we do? THEN they were baptized and received the Holy Spirit.
I will trust Paul’s clear writing that says there is “one baptism” and attempt to make the less clear passages comport with that; rather than set the less clear passages and try to make this clear passage go away.