Holy Spirit baptism

[TheGloryLand]

2 minutes ago, Jim_Alaska said:

TGL, no the thief didn't get baptized, but he was not a member of any church either.

Scriptural Baptists have never accepted anyone that was not scripturally baptized as a member. This was why we were called Anabaptists (meaning re-baptizers) by the Catholic Church. We would not accept  as members, anyone that was not scripturally baptized; so we baptized them scripturally before accepting them as members. Baptism is a mandatory prerequisite to membership in a scriptural Baptist Church.

Acts 2:41 (KJV) Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

Do you see the proper sequence here? Baptized, then added.

Yes, I do support this, for membership. I’ve also support the Free Gift for Salvation, this is through the Grace and Faith in Jesus Christ Only. Making sure that works are not added. Can baptisms be forced as works? To become a member of the local church. Is there a time period or deadline. Membership should never be more important, than a person getting Saved then Baptized.

[BrotherTony]

1 hour ago, TheGloryLand said:

Yes, I do support this, for membership. I’ve also support the Free Gift for Salvation, this is through the Grace and Faith in Jesus Christ Only. Making sure that works are not added. Can baptisms be forced as works? To become a member of the local church. Is there a time period or deadline. Membership should never be more important, than a person getting Saved then Baptized.

Side note here and question...the way you've worded this about salvation makes it seem like you hold a belief in Calvinism. Is this the case? 

Edited March 14, 2023 by BrotherTony

[TheGloryLand]

6 minutes ago, BrotherTony said:

Side note here and question...the way you've worded this about salvation makes it seem like you hold a belief in Calvinism. Is this the case? 

I don’t even know what Calvinism means. 

[MikeWatson1]

This is the other thing that happens when we say baptism is a pre-requisite to join the church. 

Since most equate the church with salvation... then they think we mean getting baptised to get saved. 

But, since we believe the church has nothing to do with eternal salvation.. we definitely don't believe baptism gets someone saved.  If fact baptism to get someone saved is the mark of a cult or non-christian religion.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

Question:  Is Romans 6:3-4 talking about "water" baptism or about "Spirit" baptism? 

(Note: From my understanding "Spirit" baptism is NOT an event wherein the Holy Spirit is the agent who baptizes us.  Rather, from my understanding "Spirit" baptism should be viewed as an event wherein Jesus Christ is the agent who baptizes us in the "substance" of the Holy Spirit, as per Matthew 3:11, Mark 1:8, Luke 3:16.)

Additional question:  Is Galatians 4:26-29 (specifically verse 27 in the context) talking about "water" baptism or about "Spirit" baptism?

Another additional question:  Is Colossians 2:10-14 (specifically verse 12 in the context) talking about "water" baptism or about "Spirit" baptism?

Edited March 15, 2023 by Pastor Scott Markle

[TheGloryLand]

We already have the Spirit before the baptism. Baptisms are out of style for many churches today. The church that I’m attending haven’t had one in a long time. This is wrong in my opinion.
 

Pastor fault, since he is the head.

[Jim_Alaska]

3 hours ago, TheGloryLand said:

We already have the Spirit before the baptism. Baptisms are out of style for many churches today. The church that I’m attending haven’t had one in a long time. This is wrong in my opinion.
 

Pastor fault, since he is the head.

Not having a baptism is not always wrong. It depends very much on a newly saved person submitting themselves for baptism. If they don't ask for it there should not be one.

[MikeWatson1]

5 hours ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

Question:  Is Romans 6:3-4 talking about "water" baptism or about "Spirit" baptism? 

(Note: From my understanding "Spirit" baptism is NOT an event wherein the Holy Spirit is the agent who baptizes us.  Rather, from my understanding "Spirit" baptism should be viewed as an event wherein Jesus Christ is the agent who baptizes us in the "substance" of the Holy Spirit, as per Matthew 3:11, Mark 1:8, Luke 3:16.)

Additional question:  Is Galatians 4:26-29 (specifically verse 27 in the context) talking about "water" baptism or about "Spirit" baptism?

Another additional question:  Is Colossians 2:10-14 (specifically verse 12 in the context) talking about "water" baptism or about "Spirit" baptism?

Well to start we can look at Romans 6:3-4:

So in other scripture we find being baptised for the remission of sins.

This is water baptism, but the 'for' in the Greek is 'eis' which means 'in regards to' 'in reference to' or 'because of'

So it's water baptism because of already having been given remission of sins at receiving eternal life.

Then to Romans.. part of this is similar where 'into' is like regarding. 'Buried with Him in baptism' ..

That's a picture of salvation at water baptism.

 

 

 

 

 

[TheGloryLand]

3 hours ago, Jim_Alaska said:

Not having a baptism is not always wrong. It depends very much on a newly saved person submitting themselves for baptism. If they don't ask for it there should not be one.

Yes sir, and when COVID was around, that caused many cancellations, also the weather and temperature, where a person lives could be an issue. But here in Florida, the weather is just fine. Baptisms should come out, I believe naturally, from up top all the way down to the person. Pastors jobs, from the pulpit should be encouraging new Christians, to get baptized. Those that have been putting it away for a long time to get baptize, now is a good time. This is just my opinion.

[Pastor Scott Markle]

3 hours ago, MikeWatson1 said:

Well to start we can look at Romans 6:3-4:

So in other scripture we find being baptised for the remission of sins.

This is water baptism, but the 'for' in the Greek is 'eis' which means 'in regards to' 'in reference to' or 'because of'

So it's water baptism because of already having been given remission of sins at receiving eternal life.

Then to Romans.. part of this is similar where 'into' is like regarding. 'Buried with Him in baptism' ..

That's a picture of salvation at water baptism.

And yet this explanation does nothing to deal with the phrase in Romans 6:4 -- "Therefore we are buried with him BY [through, by means of] BAPTISM into death . . . ." (wherein the Greek preposition for the English word "by" is NOT "eis," but "dia").

(Note: I also do not agree with your explanation concerning the grammatical intention of Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3, and Acts 2:38.  Rather, I would hold the phrase "for (Greek 'eis' - 'unto') the remission of sins" is intended as a modifier for the word "repentance" in Mark 1:4 & Luke 3:3 and as a modifier for the phrase "in the name of Jesus Christ" in Acts 2:38.  As such, it is the repentance that results in "the remission of sins" in Marke 1:4 & Luke 3:3; and it is (faith in) the name of Jesus Christ that results in "the remission of sins" in Acts 2:38.  I believe that such an explanation for these passages follows the grammar more precisely, and does not attempt to "stretch" it as the other explanation does.)

[MikeWatson1]

44 minutes ago, Pastor Scott Markle said:

And yet this explanation does nothing to deal with the phrase in Romans 6:4 -- "Therefore we are buried with him BY [through, by means of] BAPTISM into death . . . ." (wherein the Greek preposition for the English word "by" is NOT "eis," but "dia").

(Note: I also do not agree with your explanation concerning the grammatical intention of Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3, and Acts 2:38.  Rather, I would hold the phrase "for (Greek 'eis' - 'unto') the remission of sins" is intended as a modifier for the word "repentance" in Mark 1:4 & Luke 3:3 and as a modifier for the phrase "in the name of Jesus Christ" in Acts 2:38.  As such, it is the repentance that results in "the remission of sins" in Marke 1:4 & Luke 3:3; and it is (faith in) the name of Jesus Christ that results in "the remission of sins" in Acts 2:38.  I believe that such an explanation for these passages follows the grammar more precisely, and does not attempt to "stretch" it as the other explanation does.)

Ok thank you sir. I will take another look

[MikeWatson1]

On 3/16/2023 at 11:09 AM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

And yet this explanation does nothing to deal with the phrase in Romans 6:4 -- "Therefore we are buried with him BY [through, by means of] BAPTISM into death . . . ." (wherein the Greek preposition for the English word "by" is NOT "eis," but "dia").

(Note: I also do not agree with your explanation concerning the grammatical intention of Mark 1:4, Luke 3:3, and Acts 2:38.  Rather, I would hold the phrase "for (Greek 'eis' - 'unto') the remission of sins" is intended as a modifier for the word "repentance" in Mark 1:4 & Luke 3:3 and as a modifier for the phrase "in the name of Jesus Christ" in Acts 2:38.  As such, it is the repentance that results in "the remission of sins" in Marke 1:4 & Luke 3:3; and it is (faith in) the name of Jesus Christ that results in "the remission of sins" in Acts 2:38.  I believe that such an explanation for these passages follows the grammar more precisely, and does not attempt to "stretch" it as the other explanation does.)

 

Well, with Acts 2:38.. the baptism here must surely be water baptism. The admonishment to 'be baptized'...  if that were salvation.. it wouldn't be an action on the part of the sinner.. to do.. to be.. but the work of the Holy Spirit on their soul not by works. They would still 'believe on the Lord Jesus Christ'.. but that isn't a work.. a to do.. a to be.

Acts 2:41-- they were saved first and then baptised.  Baptism and salvation seperate. That's not Holy Spirit baptism for the individual. The adding-- is to the church at Jerusalem.  Added to as members.

Aside from this, the receiving of the Holy Spirit.. is for the entire gathering.  That isn't individually being saved.. but the whole group receiving the Holy Spirit as a church.

 

[Pastor Scott Markle]

8 hours ago, MikeWatson1 said:

Well, with Acts 2:38.. the baptism here must surely be water baptism. The admonishment to 'be baptized'...  if that were salvation.. it wouldn't be an action on the part of the sinner.. to do.. to be.. but the work of the Holy Spirit on their soul not by works. They would still 'believe on the Lord Jesus Christ'.. but that isn't a work.. a to do.. a to be.

Acts 2:41-- they were saved first and then baptised.  Baptism and salvation seperate. That's not Holy Spirit baptism for the individual. The adding-- is to the church at Jerusalem.  Added to as members.

Aside from this, the receiving of the Holy Spirit.. is for the entire gathering.  That isn't individually being saved.. but the whole group receiving the Holy Spirit as a church.

Hmmm.  I am not exactly sure why you engaged in this explanation, since I never presented a single word to deny that the baptism in Acts 2:38 was water baptism.  It is contextually obvious that it was indeed water baptism.  What I said concerning Acts 2:38 was not about the nature of the baptism, but about the grammatical meaning of the prepositional phrase "for the remission of sins," as follows:

On 3/15/2023 at 6:09 PM, Pastor Scott Markle said:

(Note: I also do not agree with your explanation concerning the grammatical intention of . . . Acts 2:38.  Rather, I would hold the phrase "for (Greek 'eis' - 'unto') the remission of sins" is intended . . . as a modifier for the phrase "in the name of Jesus Christ" in Acts 2:38.  As such, . . . it is (faith in) the name of Jesus Christ that results in "the remission of sins" in Acts 2:38.  I believe that such an explanation for these passages follows the grammar more precisely, and does not attempt to "stretch" it as the other explanation does.)

 

[MikeWatson1]

In regards to Galatians 4:26 to 29

 

The Spirit regenerating at salvation.. is often called Holy Spirit baptism, but the baptism I have found is of entire groups.. aka the baptism of Holy Spirit and fire in Acts.

Those baptised then we're a whole gathering. Not individual salvation there.

 

So in Galatians it is salvation being said.. but is it a kind of baptism?  Maybe figuratively.. but it doesn't match the other kind.

[Jerry]

Hm, please show where the Bible teaches someone was baptized by the Holy Spirit AND fire in the book of Acts. John the Baptist indicated that being baptized by fire was eternal judgment (unless I am misunderstanding these passages). No one can be baptized by both of these. All true believers are baptized by the Holy Spirit; whereas all who die lost are in effect baptized by fire.

Luke 3:16-17 John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you with water; but one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I am not worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire: Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his floor, and will gather the wheat into his garner; but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.