Answer on water-baptism

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 1
Water Baptism

GE:
I got two leads as to the marks or signs of the true New Testament Church, first from Karl Barth who said that Christianity that not totally and unreservedly is eschatology, totally and unreservedly has nothing to do with Christ! Next from Jürgen Moltmann who said that Christian Faith that is not Resurrection Faith, is neither Christian, nor faith!
And then – above all Jesus, and John and Paul – who all esteemed the suffering of the saints for Jesus' sake, their most precious Christian ‘Distinctive’.

Baptism deserves nor receives such place among the properties of true Christian Faith; not in the Scriptures whatsoever.

Water baptism is no sign of the New Testament Church though it was a sign for the FOUNDERS of the NT Church, the Apostles exclusively of their authority invested in them by Jesus Christ.

The RCC held on to the rite of baptism because it held on to Apostolic succession.


Baptism and Congregation…

The only baptism after Pentecost recorded in the New Testament that happened while believers were in Congregation, is of Paul baptising Lydia Acts 16:14,15. Except for Pentecost and Lydia’s baptism, every case of Apostles baptising recorded, is of an individual or individuals baptised under circumstances everything but Congregational.

Page 2
Baptism and Congregation and Day-of-Congregation…

All the few cases of Apostles baptising (‘water’ being mentioned or implied or not) —other than of the Sabbath of Lydia’s baptism and Pentecost (which also happened to fall on the Sabbath Day)— are recorded with no specific day of the week or season of year attached to or associated with it. Baptism needed no Congregation or Day-of-Congregation to be performed because baptism is one sign of Apostleship and no sign of the Church.

Baptism and Apostleship…

Baptism like the other "signs" which the Holy Spirit "gave" the first planters of the Christian Faith, was a "sign" or "mark" for them of their authority as the ones sent in person by the Great Commissioner, Matthew 28:18-20. To us after the founders, water-baptism is a sign of the authority invested in the Apostles, by the Lord as “the Head and Cornerstone” of the foundation of the Temple of Christ’s Body the Church. Therefore baptism with water has never been a requirement to be or to become a Christian or a member of the Church or to be saved. The initial prerogative of water-baptism, was the Apostles’ and no followers’ or feigned successors’ of them.

In the above, I supposed "baptism" 'with water' / ‘in water'.

The baptism of Jesus – which, distinct from water-baptism – is the new birth and gift of faith by the power of the Holy Spirit, today is as much a prerequisite to be a true member of the New Testament Church as it in the time of the Apostles used to be.



Page 3
JV:
Its work--getting folks saved, baptizing them (with a baptism that meets all the requirements of God's Word), teaching them ("to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you"). (Matt. 28:16-20)
GE:
Says John of Jesus' baptism and his own, "I baptise WITH WATER, but there standeth (Jesus) ... that HE should be made manifest ... therefore am I come to baptise with water ... the SAME (Jesus) is He which baptizeth with the Holy Ghost.”
There's just one baptism that "meets all the requirements of God's Word” unto salvation— Jesus Christ. It is the baptism executed by HIM unto the regeneration of the sinner through the operation of the Holy Spirit. It is the ONLY baptism the Church should believe, teach and practice through the proclamation of HIM.

DS:
At Acts 2:38, it is the repentance that leads to "remission of your sins" (ASV). Jesus taught the same at Luke 24:47 "repentance for| remission of sins" (NASB|ASV). Baptism is to follow up that repentance.

GE:
The Greek implies the opposite, namely, that the baptism of the Spirit shall go before anything else, for it literally says, "Be ye baptised INTO the Name ... unto baptism INTO forgiveness of sins". The Name is Jesus Christ; He, is the forgiveness. He who is justified is he whose sins are forgiven, is he who has been found "IN HIM". "In Him" is, in That One's, baptism. Water, and baptism "into" water (‘eis hudaton’) I cannot see there. It isn't there; it's only "into" Christ = "into forgiveness". It is a matter of by grace through faith COMPLETELY. No plusses - no Roman
Catholic heresy added.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 4
DW:
If that is true then you have a big problem GE! There was no baptism in the Spirit prior to Pentecost as every reference to the Baptism in the Spirit in the gospels is "future" tense and even Acts 1:5 is future tense "not many days hence."

Your problem is you have just denied regeneration to all Pre-Pentecost saints and yet even Jesus rebuked Nicodemus for not knowing about the New birth (Jn.3:9).

GE all the scriptures that are used in the New Testament to teach total depravity are largely taken from the Old Testament prophets. How would those depraved sinners get a new WANT TO Ge????????? One error leads to other errors and you are on the road of error.

GE:
Dr Walter, you write here as though I deny the 'rebirth' of God's elect. It's simply untrue. You conclude things about me I am a complete stranger to, sir. You put on paper ideas not mine but yours, as mine.

I say being reborn is being baptized by the Holy Spirit in the Name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit, and being thus given a new heart and eternal life. I believe the rebirth happens like the wind blows; it may even happen unconsciously. It also may happen with the reborn person being acutely aware of it happening. Any which way, because regeneration is the work of the Holy Spirit working ever effectively according to God's will AGAINST man's natural will. THIS IS THE ONLY BAPTISM OF THE CHRISTIAN FAITH THAT SAVES.

I do not deny the once for all time fulfillment of the Promise- and Prophecy-Event of Pentecost which in totality
Page 5
was an Apostolic gift to begin the Christian Church with. Never in your life. All my life have I been contending for its uniqueness and unrepeatability. And that precisely is the grounds and foundation from which I depart for my belief that water-baptism is an Apostolic Gift to the Church for its birth into the world as the Body of Christ's Own— each individual member of which Body AFTERWARDS and after the foundation of the Church had been laid, must have received the baptism of the Holy Spirit whereby he would have been reborn and become a member of the People of God … just as BEFORE the New Testament Church had come into being on the foundation of the Apostles, it had been.

HP:
Now here is one concerning the heart.
Eze 18:31 Cast away from you all your transgressions, whereby ye have transgressed; and make you a new heart and a new spirit: for why will ye die, O house of Israel?

DW most likely would respond to God in the following manner. What are you thinking? Either you chose to give them one or they of necessity remain just as you created them!

GE:
With one little BIG difference: Either you (God) chose to give them one NEW HEART, or they of necessity remain just as THEY ARE, DEPRAVED.


DL:
I was baptized forward. I am 6 feet 4 inches, and the baptistry was small. My pastor at the time thought it safer to take me forward.
But I agree that these outward details are non-essentials.
Page 6
GE:
One or three under-water-dips, backwards or forward, "these outward details are non-essentials" as water baptism as such is a non-essential and non-elemental Christian phenomenon of POST-Apostolic Christianity.

DW:
Baptism, like the Lord's Supper, like all the ceremonial external rites God ordained previously are but a "shadow" or a "sign" or a "seal" of something already performed by God alone inside man - change of heart = regeneration.

GE:
Maybe "but a "shadow" or a "sign"", but no "seal". The "Seal" is the One Who saved, sealed and secured for ever. It is no "ceremonial external rite God ordained", God-ordained or not; there is no 'but' about the Seal of or about being sealed by the Holy Spirit. The 'Something', is 'HE', the 'Seal' that seals.

ITT:
Can a Christian associate, and worship with anyone if that person believes on our Lord Jesus Christ? If they are baptized according to the great Commission as shown in scripture, are they not still Christ's? Are they still not Christians if they do not baptize as says the great Commission? I personally will not condemn anyone that is saved, and has never been baptized.

GE:
There is no 'saved' who had to be baptised to be saved; All 'saved' are saved without having been baptised, and before having been baptised OR NOT.

The 'great commission' was not yours or mine or anyone else's but the Apostles'! Water-baptism was given and

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 7
commanded the Apostles as was the 'great commission'. The prerogative of baptism with the Baptism of Christ, Jesus reserved for Himself ONLY!

CORRECTION!!! Water-baptism was NEVER given OR commanded the Apostles. They were commanded to baptise "in the NAME" --- NOT 'in water', nowhere, no how!

JR:
Romans 6:3-4
Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life.

GE:
This 'baptism' can only be an act in faith by faith of faith. There is NO WAY this 'baptism' can be done by a human being, physically or 'literally'; There consequently is NO WAY this 'baptism' can be undergone by a human being physically of literally IN OR WITH OR BY OR THROUGH _WATER_!

And after all, this 'baptism' Paul refers to here, IS CHRIST'S BAPTISM HE only underwent and which he bestows on others than himself through the operation and power of the Holy Spirit by FAITH ONLY . It is spiritual or it 'is', not at all in believers, as in Christ Jesus ONLY it was BOTH spiritual and physical.

One Word stands fast, all the controversy about baptism despite: "ONE Lord, ONE baptism— the baptism whereby "there is: ONE Faith". The baptism that PRECEDES Faith. There's no such thing in Christian Faith as a 'baptism' that
page 8
'has got nothing to do with salvation'. There's no such thing in Christian Faith as a 'baptism' that FOLLOWS faith except the baptism through suffering-with in the suffering of Christ. The Christian Baptism is the ONE BAPTISM ALL believers share “IN CHRIST”, “TOGETHER WITH HIM”.

ITT:
… baptism should not be a factor if one in Christ Jesus wants to join a church, and the church refuses unless they are re-baptized.

GE:
Water-baptism “should not be a factor” to any who want to join a church! This is an enigma for me, that DHK argues water-baptism is necessary and commanded even, but denies the Spiritual Body of Christ's Own that is that 'Universal Church' of all times and nations and lands confessed in the oldest of Christian Confessions who became ‘members’ through spiritual ‘rebirth’ of having been baptised with the Holy Spirit.

Which is where DW too falters, in my opinion, because he confuses ‘baptism with the Holy Spirit’-REBIRTH by the gift of God’s all-sufficient GRACE through FAITH in Jesus Christ once for all, with the phenomenal and unique “outpouring” of the Holy Spirit “on the Day of Pentecost fully come”!

Pentecost was both the Promise of the ‘gift of tongues’ in “the prophet Joel”, and the Passover of Yahweh in Moses’ Law of the “feast of weeks” and outpouring of the Holy Spirit, “fully come”. The Two Loaves of Bread “waved” on ‘the Fiftieth Day’, “offered” – or represented – the Old and the New Testament Church united in “One Body” in Christ— CLEARLY MANIFESTED in Acts chapters 2,3,4.
Page 9
But to be baptised with the baptism of Christ who “baptizeth with the Holy Spirit” has been the modus operandi of God, IN ALL AGES by grace through faith to save lost sinners through the Power of His Holy Spirit in Christ with the gift of the rebirth.

Therefore, HOW, does God bring the Rebirth about in “true believers”? With water-baptism?

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

They were baptized with water as every believer is, as the Ethiopian eunuch was in Acts chapter 8, as the Philippian jailer was in Acts chapter 16. The word means immersion. They were immersed into water. To deny water baptism is to deny the totality of Scripture on this subject.

GE:
In Acts 2:41 "they-WELCOMING-THE-WORD-WERE-BAPTIZED", 'apodeksamenoi ebaptisthehsan'. NO 'water'— no matter how!

In Acts 8 Philip immersed the eunuch (Philip himself having been authorized directly by Apostles within the Apostolic Age) on REQUEST of the candidate and not by precept of Christ. (Philip, 'If you wish; it won't hurt anyone I guess...'. But long after the water-factor proved to have caused more harm than any could foresee.)

In Acts 16 the jailer was NOT commanded by either of Paul and Silas to be baptised, but to believe only.

Also the word for 'was baptised' may just as well apply to

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 10
the jailer's treatment for his wounds, 'he', "himself", 'autos', being the subject of all Verbs and 'he', "himself" the object both "washed", 'elousen' and 'baptised', 'ebaptistheh'. "...And all of his there and then brought them (Paul and Silas) into his house". (Where the eunuch received washing and baptizing of his wounds remains an open question; but it was before any entered the house and the family members got involved.)

DW:
Gentleman, No body can deny that John the Baptist administered water baptism. No one can deny that Jesus submitted to water baptism. No one can deny that water baptism was administered under Jesus through his disciples (Jn. 4:1; Lk. 7:29-30).

The Great Commission is a command not a request and the baptism in the Great commission is the kind that "ye" or that men administer to others (Mt. 28:29) and therefore cannot possibly be anything but water baptism. In addition, they are commanded in the Great Commission to simply administer to others what they themselves "have" submitted to and they submitted to water baptism.

Last but not least, this is a commission to administer water baptism until the "end of the age" and even if you have the warped idea that he means to the end of the Apostolic age (which he does not) that would include the whole book of Acts, the epistles and the book of Revelation and so arguing that it is not water baptism in Acts 2, 8, 16, 19, etc. is foolish.

The baptism in the Spirit was an historical act predicted in the gospels and pinpointed to occur on the day of Pentecost (Acts 1:5). It was not an individual application (Acts 11:15-16) but it was the common ordinary immersion in the
Page 11
shikinah glory that occurred AFTER the completion of every new house of God (Ex. 40; 2 Chron. 7:1-3; Acts 2:1-3) and repeated with the Gentiles (Acts 10) to accredit them as members of the new house of God. It was completed and finished and that is exactly why Ephesians 4:5 says there is now only "one baptism" and that is the baptism that is commissioned unto the end of the age (Mt. 28:19-20).

If you have an open mind, and will deal with immediate context honestly, it can be easily shown that 1 Cor. 12:13 refers to the building of the local visible congregation and water baptism as described in 1 Cor. 3:4-16 and is the immediate solution for division in the body at Corinth over spiritual gifts as well as over party divisions in 1 Cor. 1:12.

GE:
Dr Walter, if someone (Jew or Gentile who knew not the Christian Way) came to you and said, I want to join your Church because I have become a Christian, and here is my confession of Faith, and he confessed before you and your Congregation the Apostolicum, and recited by heart the Lord's Prayer and Psalm 23 and John 3:16, and even John 1:33 and Ephesians 4:5 as the confession of his faith (as was required more or less of the catechist in the days of Luther) --- and you knew this person for having been as God-fearing and upright a man as any in your Church and even yourself --- would you welcome him and introduce him to your Congregation as a new member? Or would you tell him: On condition you do not confess John 1:33 or Ephesians 4:5 and get baptised with water instead?






Page 12
Dr. Walter:
GE, your line of reasoning is ridiculous. You nor I have any right to rewrite the scriptures and make them fit your misled theology. Baptism is a command not an option and it is a command for believers (Mk. 16:16). If this man is a believer then demonstrate it by obedience to Christ's command and the first command to the new believer is to be baptized.

GE:
I believe Mark 16:16; I believe 'what is written' in Mk16:16. He who believes and is baptised is saved and sealed and shall never be lost. Because he is "baptized IN THE NAME" Matthew 28:19 of the ONE God with the ONE baptism the ONLY baptism of the Christian Faith whereby any who shall be saved IS SAVED and is brought INTO THE COMMUNION OF THE SAINTS the Church the Spiritual "Body of Christ's Own".

He who does not in the Spirit worship does not worship in Truth; he who does not worship God in the Holy Spirit under the baptism of the Holy Spirit, knows not the Truth which is Jesus Christ --- he does not worship at all but puts up a show in the works of man-made laws of ceremonies and rituals.

Men can laugh at my faith that I believe and obey Mark 16:16 if they will, but they cannot break the Seal by which the Word of God declared the Elect of God are sealed and eternally secure in their redemption.

I nor any believer needs water to believe; but no believer can or will believe without the Holy Spirit of God WHO WITHOUT FAIL SHALL BAPTISE and shall have baptised all believers in the NAME of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit. No, not ONE! No! NOT WITH THE HELP OF WATER other than the WATER OF LIFE

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 13
which is Christ Jesus.
The devil saw this coming when he saw the Christ approaching John the Baptist … ‘to be baptised by him’ … and quickly got his strategies right to confuse and destroy the Divine Order of True and Saving Baptism. He simply fixed the eyes and THOUGHTS of men on the earthly works of mere man: water and going down into and under and coming up out of water at the hand of a baptiser and baptising Church— therewith BLINDING THEIR EYES FOR READING Jesus' true baptism: John 1:32.

John the Baptist TWICE TOOK OATH JESUS WAS BAPTISED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT— he John not having as much as touched Jesus, nor any of the two of them as much as looked in the direction of water! And John TWICE UNDER OATH DENIED he baptised the Christ and Son of God or was able to BECAUSE HE BAPTISED WITH WATER!! So, that which John SAW, he TWICE SWORE was how GOD WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT BAPTISED THE SON. The Son of God "SHOULD BE MANIFESTED" never ever, through him, John the Baptist, or, through ‘holy’ water: "BUT THOU SHALT SEE THE SPIRIT DESCENDING _AND REMAINING_ ON HIM".

Now carefully and clearly SEE: that "He" who WAS thus "baptised" with the Holy Spirit, also "_IS THE SAME WHICH _BAPTIZETH_ WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT".

No! arrogates haughty man; we improve on the baptism OF AND BY the Son of God, and WE THE CHURCH your authority henceforth, o Reborn child of God --- WE DEMAND YOU SHALL BE BAPTISED WITH AND / OR IN WATER or you SHALL HAVE NO PART IN THE BODY OF CHRIST HIS CHURCH.


Page 14
Water-baptism is become the most arrogant and taunting diminishing of the All-Sufficiency of Christ.

The Church --- yes, of Jesus Christ, is which Church I believe! --- The Church, has devised two barriers wherewith to bring division and dispute between true believers and true believers: 1) Water-baptism, and 2) Sunday observance.

I believe an ever-reforming Church; it must reform on these two evils.

DHK:
To call one of the two ordinances that Christ commanded the local church to carry out until he comes again (i.e. the Lord's Supper and water baptism) "an evil" is abhorrent!!
Does Christ command us to do evil things??

GE:
Christ did not 'command US' on baptism; He commanded those He addressed, in person on baptism: they were the eleven disciples the Risen Christ thus commissioned and made Apostles --- THE ONLY Apostles of Christianity and Paul with them.

Christ did not command 'us' either to baptise, or to preach the Gospel. He commanded US THROUGH HIS APOSTLES to BELIEVE the Gospel which his Apostles preached, because they were to “baptise IN / WITH THE NAME" (and ‘we’ thus are to be “baptised-receiving-the-Word”) THROUGH THEIR TEACHING.

If Jesus commanded 'with water', He would have SAID: "with / in water". HE DID NOT.


Page 15
And of course a false accusation like that I called "one of the two ordinances that Christ commanded the local church to carry out until he comes again (i.e. the Lord's Supper and water baptism) "an evil"", is abhorrent!! I never viewed or called or implied whatsoever "water baptism", "one of the two ordinances that Christ commanded". Simple fact of the facts black on white.

"The Lord's Supper", 'Kuriakos Deipnon' is the one 'ordinance' 'ordained' by Christ himself; "The Lord's Day" Kuriakeh Hehmera' is the other of the only TWO Christian 'ordinances' Christ 'ordained' and they GO TOGETHER and cannot be divided from one another. His NAME joins and perpetuates them together for ever.

The only other REQUIREMENT of true believers as "the Body of Christ's Own", is the Baptism of the Lord which HE ministers HIMSELF "with the Holy Spirit" AS IT IS WRITTEN and no man true believers or not true believers can or may minister.

I believe the Christian Church; I believe the Christian Faith of the Christian Church; I believe the Christian Ordinances of the Christian Faith of the Christian Church. I esteem this Faith precious and gloriously beautiful and enjoyable. All else I for the sake of Jesus Christ, esteem abhorrent!

Dr. Walter:
Jesus said this LONG BEFORE the baptism in the Spirit (Jn. 4:24). The baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with the regenerate condition of a child of God. Old Testament saints were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of God and could worship God "in Spirit and in truth." Jesus rebuked Nicodemus for failing to understand as a teacher of Israel the doctrine of new birth (Jn. 3:10). Paul classified all mankind in two categories - those "in the flesh" and

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 16
those "in the Spirit" and if you did not have the Spirit indwelling you it is because you are "in the flesh" (Rom. 8:9). The new birth was figured under the terms "circumcised in heart" in the Old Testament.

The baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with INDIVIDUAL salvation but with the "house of God" (Ex. 40; 2 Chron. 7:1-3; Acts 2:1-3; 11:15-16). It is the public accreditation and indwelling of the "house of God." It was done ONCE at the completion of every new "house of God." The new house of God - the congregation - is composed of a plurality of members and the baptism in the Spirit is an INSTITUTIONAL accreditation that occurred to the congregation on the day of Pentecost. It occurred in Acts 10 accrediting the GENTILES as approved members in the congregation at Jerusalem. It has nothing to do with individual salvation before or after Pentecost. It has only to do with public certification of the public institutional house of God as the approved place for public worship and administration of the ordinances.

This is pure fanatical imagination at its worst. John the Baptist took no such oath at any time. He was addressing the crowd before him when he spoke the words found in Matthew 3:11. He spoke to "YOU" or those he had baptized "with" (lit. "in") water as well as those Pharisees who rejected his baptism and told them that Christ would baptize "YOU" in the Spirit (baptized believers) or in fire (unbelievers). John most certainly did baptize Jesus Christ in water and it is clearly recorded (Mt. 3:15-17). He did place his hands upon the Son of God and did immerse him in water:
13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
Page 17
15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:

GE:
I clearly stressed where I spoke about John’s story OF JESUS’ BAPTISM, “Now carefully and clearly SEE: that "He" who WAS thus "baptised" with the Holy Spirit, also "_IS THE SAME WHICH _BAPTIZETH_ WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT".

Does the Church baptise with the baptism OF JOHN the Baptist or with the baptism of Christ? Clearly it baptises with the baptism of JOHN! The Church is not practicing the Baptism of Christ though it claims it does. It cannot baptise with the baptism of Christ because Christ baptises with the Holy Spirit and no Church is able or qualified to baptise with the Holy Spirit. “A man can receive nothing except it be given him from heaven.” John 3:27. Written in direct context of the baptism of Christ!

The Church claims it baptises with the baptism of Christ— but it’s a lie. Since John the Baptist and the age of the Apostles the Church has “one baptism” which is the baptism with the Holy Spirit which only Christ administers. Nevertheless the Church persists in assuming the roles of the Baptist and Apostles and even Christ Jesus.

What is written in Matthew is true: John the Baptist baptised Jesus with the baptism of John.
What is written in John is true: Jesus baptised by the Father with the Holy Spirit through the baptism of Christ.
Page 18
John the Baptist did swear: twice in John,
in 1:31,32, “That He should be made manifest to Israel, therefore am I come baptising with water : INDEED WITNESSED JOHN AND BARE RECORD : I SAW THE SPIRIT DESCENDING …”;
and in 33,34, “…THE SAME IS He which baptizeth with the Holy Spirit : I MYSELF HAVE SEEN AND BARE RECORD …”

So John swore and swore twice on the Truth the Baptism of Jesus is the Baptism with the Holy Spirit. Twice did John swear that his baptism in distinction from Christ’s, is the baptism with water.

Thus simply what is written for another must needs be “… pure fanatical imagination at its worst.” So be it to and for any whosoever other; for me it is the Gospel and the Baptism of Jesus Christ in distinction from the traditions and commandments of men— a clear difference between a works-righteousness and the Righteousness of God in Jesus Christ through faith.

DW:
There is no baptism in the Spirit today. The first house of God after it was finished was baptized in the Spirit ONCE and never again (Ex. 40). The second house of God after it was finished was baptized in the Spirit ONCE and never again (2 Chron. 7:1-3). The congregation of Christ as the new house of God (1 Tim. 3:15) is composed of living stones consisting of Jews and Gentiles. The Jews in the congregation at Jerusalem was baptized in the Spirit ONCE on the day of Pentecost and never again, and the Gentiles were baptized in the Spirit ONCE in Acts 10 so that the Jews would receive them into God's house and never baptized again. Never again, because the baptism in the Spirit was the public accreditation of God's public house of

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 19
worship where the public worship of God is conducted by a properly ordained ministry and the ordinances administered (1 Tim. 3:1-15). Once publicly accredited it remains the "house of God" until it is destroyed or replaced by God Himself. The institutional congregation has been thus publicly accredited by God and will never be immersed in the Shikinah glory again on earth.

The baptism in the Spirit publicly accredits and identifies God's house
The baptism in water publicly identifies the believer with membership in God's house
The baptism in suffering publicly identifies the obedient believer with Christ's sufferings

There is now only ONE BAPTISM and it is the only baptism that has been commissioned to be administered by men to men until the end of the world (Mt. 28:19-20).

GE:
God willing I shall address your statements as soon as possible.

Let me now only remark that you, Dr Walter, are trying in vain to drown the Truth of the Baptism of Christ in technicalities and subtleties. For example, you speak of 'baptism 'IN' the Holy Spirit' and avoid using the word 'with'.

However, have you noticed how legalistic your arguments have become? E.g., "The Great Commission is a command not a request and the baptism in the Great commission is the kind that "ye" or that men administer to others..." It smacks of the autocratic Christian society that soon after the Apostolic age began to stamp its authority upon a simple common membership. Which evil persists to this day by
Page 20
the fact of the matter : 'If you don't submit (and cringe -- now a days called 'Repent!') you're out!' For the life of me I cannot see my Lord condone such attitude and usurping of his Seat of Authority. One must feel it 'to the body' (aan die lyf) to know what I'm talking about.
Anyhow, DV I'll be back...

DW:
There are a number of problems for those who advocate Spirit baptism as an inseparable aspect of salvation. According to this position, baptism in the Spirit or with the Spirit or by the Spirit unites the believer spiritually with Jesus Christ or according to the invisible church theory, places the believer in union with the mystical body of Christ.

At the very minimum such a doctrine necessarily demands that baptism in the Spirit makes the believer a participant of spiritual life found "in Christ" through the Holy Spirit. (I believe they are confusing baptism in the Spirit with regeneration by the Spirit).

However, it should be asked is there any salvation OUTSIDE of Jesus Christ? Has God ever made a provision for sin and eternal life APART from Jesus Christ? Has the human nature and problem of sin changed after Pentecost than before Pentecost? Can the human fallen nature have another cure before Pentecost than after Pentecost? Can sin be dealt with differently before Pentecost than after Pentecost? Is there another salvation before Pentecost different than after Pentecost? The Bible speaks directly to these questions both before and after Pentecost.

Before Pentecost, Jesus says there is no other way to the Father but by him (Jn. 14:6). Peter says that remission of sins prior to the cross was received through faith in His
Page 21
name (Acts 10:43). Paul says there is but one gospel and it is the same gospel preached in the days of Moses as in the days of Paul (Heb. 4:2). Paul explicitly states that his gospel proclaimed "none other things" than what Moses and all the prophets preached (Acts 26:22) and in Acts 26:23 he details what the gospel they preached proclaimed.

Furthermore, Paul selects Abraham as "the father" of all who believe in the gospel (Gal. 3:6-8) and the role model or "the father" of all who are justified by faith without works (Rom. 4:11).

Jesus rebukes Nicodemus as a teacher of the Jews for being ignorant of the new birth BEFORE Pentecost - Jn. 3:10

Moreover, Peter denies that God provided any other way under heaven for men to be saved other than through Christ (Acts 4:12) in perfect keeping with Christ's own words before Pentecost (Jn. 14:6).

There is no salvation OUTSIDE of Jesus Christ before or after the cross. All the elect were chosen "in him" before the foundation of the world (Eph. 1:4) and that necessarily included the Old Testament saints as well as the New Testament saints as the election took place before either.

Paul quotes Old Testament scriptures to define the sin problem of all mankind (Rom. 3:10-18). Paul claims Isaiah preached the same gospel of salvation in Christ (Rom. 10:15). Philip took Isaiah chapter 53 and preached Christ to the Eunuch (Acts 8:32-35).

1. The Same gospel in both testaments - Heb. 4:2; Acts 10:43; Gal. 3:6-8
2. The same new birth in both testaments - Jn. 3:10

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 22
3. The same doctrine of justification by faith in both testaments - Rom. 4
4. The same Savior in both testaments - Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12; 10:43
5. The same sin problem in both testaments - Rom. 3:9-18
6. The same provision for sin in both testaments - Rom. 3:24-26
7. The same way in both testaments - Mt. 7:13-14; Jn. 14:6; Acts 4:12

In Romans 8:8-9 Paul classifies all mankind into two categories just as Jesus did and all the prophets before. All human beings are either "in the flesh" or "in the Spirit" and if they are not "in the Spirit" it is because they are "NONE OF HIS" or "children of God" as the text goes on to describe those "in the Spirit" (Rom. 8:14-16). Jesus claimed all mankind were either saved or lost, children of God or of your father the devil (Jn. 6:44). Born of the Spirit (Jn. 3:3-10) or not born of the flesh (Jn. 3:6). They are either in the kingdom of God or the kingdom of Satan; They are either spiritually dead or spiritually alive. There are no THIRD category in any of these contrasts.

There is no salvation OUTSIDE of Christ and therefore the only salvation provided by God is "in Christ" and all who are chosen unto salvation before the world began were chosen "in Him" (Eph. 1:4; 2 Thes. 2:13).

Therefore, baptism in the Spirit is the same in both Testaments or it has nothing to do with individual salvation in Christ.

This brings the Spirit baptism advocate to another problem. All the gospel accounts of the baptism in the Spirit point forward as something yet to be fulfilled (Mt. 3:11,

Page 23
Acts 1:5) on the day of Pentecost. Hence, the baptism in the Spirit cannot be identified with salvation.

In the account of the house of Cornelius Peter explicitly states that what occurred at the house of Cornelius was the baptism in the Spirit as promised by John the Baptist (Acts 11:15-16). However, the nearest reference point that Peter could give for what happened in the house of Cornelius was "AT the beginning" on the day of Pentecost - proving this was not the ordinary continuing application to all the saved as there were thousands saved between Pentecost and the house of Cornelius.

The baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with individual salvation. Nothing to do with spiritual union with Christ (regeneration). Nothing to do with individuals per se. It is the common ordinary divine accreditation of the House of God after the house was finished by the appointed builder designating it by the miraculous manifestations that this is the approved place of public worship, with the approved ordained ministry and approved administration of the ordinances to represent God publicly within the professing kingdom of God.

1. The Tabernacle: -Ex. 40:33 "So Moses finished the work.
34 Then a cloud covered the tent of the congregation, and the glory of the LORD filled the tabernacle.

2. The Temple: - 2 Chron. 7:1-3 "1 Now when Solomon had made an end of praying, the fire came down from heaven, and consumed the burnt offering and the sacrifices; and the glory of the LORD filled the house.
2 And the priests could not enter into the house of the LORD, because the glory of the LORD had filled the LORD’S house.

Page 24
3 And when all the children of Israel saw how the fire came down, and the glory of the LORD upon the house, they bowed themselves with their faces to the ground upon the pavement, and worshipped, and praised the LORD, saying, For he is good; for his mercy endureth for ever.

3. The Congregational house of God (1 Tim. 3:15) - Acts 2:1-3 " And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all with one accord in one place.
2 And suddenly there came a sound from heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they were sitting.

The baptism in the Spirit has to do with divine accreditation as the house of God for public worship, public administration of the ordinances by a qualified ministry (1 Tim. 3:1-15). It happens once to each new house of God AFTER the house has been finished by the assigned builder (Moses, Solomon, Christ) and that public institution remains God's House until HE DESTROYS it.

In Matthew 23:39 Jesus no longer called the temple in Jerusalem His house or the Father's house but "YOUR house" and claimed it was "void" and the ripping of the inner veil from top to bottom was a public disclaimer that God no longer owned the temple as His house of public prayer, worship and administration of the ordinances within the professing kingdom of God.

The baptism in the Spirit was predictive in the gospels in regard to the new house of God. It was the baptism in the Spirit of BAPTIZED BELIEVERS. Both John the Baptist and Jesus spoke of it in connection with the plural "YOU" who had believed in the gospel and submitted to baptism. It is this PLURAL "you" that had the comforter with them but "another comforter" that was now with them

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 25
INDIVIDUALLY as believers but would be "IN" them as a public temple of God (1 Cor. 3;16) as a corporate congregational body of Christ (1 Cor. 12:27) and as a visible assembly of "spiritual stones" gathered together in order to offer up "acceptable sacrifices."

GE:
I must really say, as I did before quite often, that I am prepared and willing to accept and even submit to the status quo in the Church concerning Baptism : That it is water baptism as far as the Church is concerned --- for the sake of peace and unity in the Church of Christ.

First obstacle, the Church. Although I would, the Church would not let me or accept me. E.g., Dr Walter in this discussion. Like also any Congregation anywhere; try and see!

Second obstacle, water-baptism. WHICH of the myriad of water-baptisms should I embrace for THE water-baptism that is the baptism of the Scriptures?

Third obstacle: What must I do with and about the Baptism of Jesus Christ according to the Scriptures as far as it is my honest Scriptural persuasion? Never mention it? Never study it?

Never _ALLOW IT APPLY_?! In other words, If true believers would wish to Congregate AS believers of the Regenerating-Baptism by the Holy Spirit of Jesus Christ as ONLY PREREQUISITE for The Communion of the Saints or 'Church'? WHAT THEN?

According to THIS very discussion such an Assembly of Christ's Own shall be branded and expelled into the outer darkness for being 'cult', and 'heretics' --- then and there and
Page 26
mercilessly and viciously. For such is the nature of the water-baptising Church of Christ.

End result? Believe that none belong to or in or with the Body of Christ's Own than "TRUE BELIEVERS" : i.e., reborn through the baptism by the Holy Spirit sinners, and find yourself a pye-dog alias pariah.



Dr. Walter:
Sounds like personal problems rather than Biblical problems. I have no problems with your questions but you certainly have problems answering mine.

GE:
Not to mention accounting from the Scriptures doctrinally for the Church's autocratic stance and dower attitude with regard to water-baptism as opposed to the “one baptism” of the Christian Faith that SAVES, you as before (when I mentioned Ephesians 4:5 and John 1:33), baulk at the very real 'problems' true believers are faced with personally. I have answered you; nevertheless I said, DV, I shall still answer you. My 'personal problems' are not my answer to you.

Dr. Walter:
I have proven with numerous scriptures that salvation is the same before and after Pentecost but the baptism in the Spirit is unfulfilled and predicted in the gospels not to occur until Pentecost and is therefore NEW.

I have proven the baptism in the Spirit has NOTHING to do with salvation at any time in redemptive history before or after the Cross but has to do with the public institutional house of God at its commencement and dedication.
Page 27
I have proven from CONTEXT that John the Baptist's words concerning the descending of the Spirit on Christ had NOTHING to do with the baptism in the Spirit but WAS THE HISTORICAL IDENTIFICATION MARK GIVEN TO JOHN BY THE FATHER IN ORDER TO KNOW WHO THE CHRIST WAS.

Your personal confusion about "which water baptism" is simply due to a lack of scholarship and study.

GE:
And ‘due to a lack of scholarship and study’ it should be! Thank God!

So…

Re:
Doctor Walter,
P3/4 in this reading…
“If that is true then you have a big problem GE! There was no baptism in the Spirit prior to Pentecost as every reference to the Baptism in the Spirit in the gospels is "future" tense and even Acts 1:5 is future tense "not many days hence." Your problem is you have just denied regeneration to all Pre-Pentecost saints and yet even Jesus rebuked Nicodemus for not knowing about the New birth (Jn.3:9).”

GE:
Re: “If that is true…”
If what “is true”?
If what GE said, “is true”…
What GE said, is…
“The Greek implies … that the baptism of the Spirit shall go before anything else, for it literally says, "Be ye baptised INTO the Name ... unto baptism INTO forgiveness of sins".

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 28
The Name is Jesus Christ; He, is the forgiveness. He who is justified is he whose sins are forgiven, is he who has been found "IN HIM". "In Him" is, in That One's, baptism. Water, and baptism "into" water (‘eis hudaton’) I cannot see there. It isn't there; it's only "into" Christ = "into forgiveness". It is a matter of by grace through faith COMPLETELY. No plusses – no Roman Catholic heresy added”…

Or, what Dr Walter describes as “baptism in the Spirit”, as “prior to Pentecost” in contrast with “baptism in the Spirit” in the event of Pentecost?

Whichever, “If that is true…”, says DW, “…Your problem is you have just denied regeneration to all Pre-Pentecost saints ….”

“If that…”— what GE wrote or what Dr Walter wrote of “baptism in the Spirit” as “prior to Pentecost” in contrast with “baptism in the Spirit” in the event of Pentecost— is true…”, according to Dr Walter it implies “…salvation” is not “the same before and after Pentecost”, because according to Dr Walter “that” would mean “regeneration to all Pre-Pentecost saints … is denied” by GE.

But Dr Walter does not explain HOW what GE wrote, implied denial or directly “denied regeneration to all Pre-Pentecost saints”. His accusations against GE are wild and baseless.

Does Dr Walter have in mind before or during the Apostolic Age, or before and until Pentecost? “Every reference to the Baptism in the Spirit in the gospels is "future" tense”. It simply means there was NO ‘Baptism in the Spirit’ “prior”, or, “in”, “the gospels” according to Dr Walter— whichever way one may look at it.
Page 29
Therefore, “If” what GE wrote here “is true…”, GE square against Dr Walter would maintain that the “baptism in the Spirit” existed “…prior to Pentecost”— quote, “every reference to the Baptism in the Spirit in the gospels is "future" tense and even Acts 1:5 is future tense "not many days hence"”.

It becomes clear Dr Walter tries to change the subject.
For GE the issue not at all goes over preference between different phraseologies for the historical empirical prophetic event in Acts 2 of the “baptism in the Spirit”, or, “Pentecost” (Dr Walter); or ‘baptism with’ / ‘outpouring of’ (17) / ‘filling with’ (4) “the promise of” (33) the Holy Spirit (Authorized Version). GE does not talk about Pentecost and the outpouring of the Holy Spirit then— Acts 2.

GE presupposes the RESULT of God’s faithfulness in his promise of the Holy Spirit according to Acts 2 from verse one to verse 36— the RESULT that manifested according to verses 37, 38— “Ye shall receive the GIFT of the Holy Spirit”. GE talks about the “WORK of the Holy Spirit” through ‘baptism with / in / by the Holy Spirit’ whichever— in the salvation of souls in all ages past, present and future. GE means the “work’ or ‘blowing’ or ‘baptism’, ‘with’ or ‘in’ or ‘by’ or ‘through’ the Holy Spirit in a totally spiritual and individual way in the event of any person’s ‘salvation’ and or ‘rebirth’ and or ‘regeneration’ and or ‘repentance’ and or ‘conversion’— John 3 and all the many Scriptures about ‘justification’, ‘sanctification’, ‘righteousness’— no matter what!

GE talks of and presupposes as basis of one’s irrefutable, irretrievable, eternal redemption, the ‘seven ones’ of Ephesians 4 which “ONE BAPTISM” is one of, and without which all ‘seven ones’ no one, shall be saved who shall be saved.
Page 30
But “There was no baptism in the Spirit prior to Pentecost” rants Dr Walter— Yet, says he, “Jesus rebuked Nicodemus for not knowing about the New birth” (“prior to Pentecost”)— an obvious contradiction in itself and next thing, we have NO “Baptism in the Spirit in the gospels”— a contradiction inflated into a contradiction of “the Gospels”.

So Dr Walter IDENTIFIES “baptism in the Spirit” and “the New birth”— an “error” of his, that cannot be rectified even by changing the terminology from “baptism in the Spirit” to ‘baptism with’, or, ‘baptism by the Spirit’. Because Dr Walter’s main argument is directed against the ONLY true and SAVING ‘baptism’ of true Christian Faith, the spiritual ‘baptism with the Holy Spirit’ or “baptism in the Spirit” no matter how one might call it. Because it is “the New birth” in any true believer’s language.

One does not need to be a scholar to understand that.

Re:
Dr Walter,
“GE all the scriptures that are used in the New Testament to teach total depravity are largely taken from the Old Testament prophets. How would those depraved sinners get a new WANT TO Ge????????? One error leads to other errors and you are on the road of error.”

GE:
DW makes this statement also with reference to GE’s observations quoted above.

Now does the fact that
“The Greek implies … that the baptism of the Spirit shall go before anything else, for it literally says, "Be ye baptised INTO the Name ... unto baptism INTO forgiveness of sins"”

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 31
etcetera, namely, that
“The Name is Jesus Christ; He, is the forgiveness. He who is justified is he whose sins are forgiven, is he who has been found "IN HIM". "In Him" is, in That One's, baptism. Water, and baptism "into" water (‘eis hudaton’) I cannot see there. It isn't there; it's only "into" Christ = "into forgiveness". It is a matter of by grace through faith COMPLETELY. No plusses - no Roman Catholic heresy added…” contradict or deny “…depraved sinners get a new WANT TO…?????????”

How would “depraved sinners get a new WANT TO”? is the big question to which there is but one answer, which is the baptism that AS “prior to Pentecost” created new hearts “inside men”— which changed hearts… which “ = regeneration” or ‘rebirth’— in or with or by the Spirit of God THE SAME before as after “Pentecost”.

Nothing in GE’s statement contradicts or denies “…depraved sinners get a new WANT TO. Dr Walter’s insinuations are nothing than pretence and again, are just false accusations. What is the “One error” that “leads to other errors” and what are the “other errors” and “the road of error” that “leads to” the “other errors” which GE is on, IN THIS STATEMENT OF HIS?

Dr Walter gave us the answer in the end when he blamed GE of “a lack of scholarship and study”. Well, Dr Walter is here supplying us with a good example of his “scholarship and study” like proves GE’s “lack of scholarship and study”.





Page 32
Re:
Dr Walter,
P5…
“Baptism, like the Lord's Supper, like all the ceremonial external rites God ordained previously are but a "shadow" or a "sign" or a "seal" of something already performed by God alone inside man - change of heart = regeneration.”

GE:
Christian baptism which is the “ONE baptism” of Christian Faith and the baptism that actually, really and eternally SAVES, exactly is the only ‘baptism’ which is ‘performed by God alone inside man”, which “change(s) heart = regeneration”.

THIS baptism is UNLIKE the Lord's Supper or any ceremonial external rites that God ordained previously and that is but a "shadow" or a "sign" or a "seal" of THAT “something already performed by God alone inside man - change of heart = regeneration.”

GE couldn’t have said it better although it is clear Dr Walter means the direct opposite of what GE understands as the “ONE baptism” of Christian Faith which means and in SPIRITUAL REALITY AND TRUTH, _IS_— that ‘baptism’ which is infinitely MORE and BETTER than “but a "shadow" or a "sign" or a "seal" of … all the ceremonial external rites God ordained”. Because not only ‘ordained’ God a spiritual baptism with the Holy Spirit wherewith He willed to create anew, “a heart of flesh” (spiritual ‘flesh’) in every believer, but God Himself through his Holy Spirit PERFORMED that baptism (of regeneration) with His Holy Spirit, eternally securing and SEALING every redeemed one of His through it, until the number of God’s Elect shall be made full.

Page 33
Dr Walter:
P9/10…
“Gentleman, Nobody can deny that John the Baptist administered water baptism. No one can deny that Jesus submitted to water baptism. No one can deny that water baptism was administered under Jesus through his disciples (Jn. 4:1; Lk. 7:29-30).

GE:
Dr Walter, GE does not “deny that John the Baptist administered water baptism”; but GE believes and confesses as “it is also written”, that Mark (1:8) and Matthew and Luke (3:16) and John
“bare record, saying, I (John the Baptist) baptize (you, men) with water, but ONE among you … He that cometh after me (and) is mightier than I, HE, SHALL BAPTIZE YOU, WITH THE HOLY GHOST AND WITH FIRE … The same (God) that sent me to baptise with water, said unto me … He … this the Son of God … is it which baptizeth with the Holy Spirit.” Matthew 3:11 John 1:33,34.

Dr Walter, “No one can deny that Jesus submitted to water baptism”— it is true. “For THUS it becometh US (Him and the Baptist) to FULFIL (finally and once for all) ALL RIGHTEOUSNESS”: IN Jesus Christ that is— NOT in any OTHER after, ever!

No one can deny God witnessed of Him that “He … this the Son of God … is it which baptizeth with the Holy Spirit.” No one can deny this Jesus gave command “unto the eleven … Go ye into all the world and preach the Gospel to every creature … the-believing-being-baptized shall be saved (‘ho pisteúsas kai baptisthéís sohthéhsetai’).”

And yes! “No one can deny that water baptism was administered under Jesus through his disciples (Jn. 4:1; Lk.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 34
7:29-30). Who denied? GE? Not so. GE believes the Scriptures.

Dr Walter:
“The Great Commission is a command not a request and the baptism in the Great commission is the kind that "ye" or that men administer to others (Mt. 28:29)…”

GE:
Again, yes! The Great Commission is a command no request merely. Also, the baptism in the Great commission is the kind that "ye"— “the ELEVEN” APOSTLES commanded! There was no “or that men” from the lips of Jesus, no word that the baptism in the Great commission had to be administer by ‘others’. Never! And never as much as intended or implied or supposed or suggested! But the words of Jesus are, today still thw words that He then SPOKE: “Baptize ye (men) IN THE NAME”— “the Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit” for “God is Spirit” and “Christ a Life-Giving-Spirit” to whom is “GIVEN ALL POWER in heaven and in earth”— the “I-AM, with you always … even unto the end of the world.”

No ‘men’ ever were invested with the power and the authority invested in Jesus Christ through resurrection from the dead either to commission or command in own person to baptise or any to be baptized with water. Let no one dare usurp Christ’s prerogative to baptize with the Holy Spirit or be self-baptised with the Holy Spirit. Because Christ’s is the baptism that saves and seals and is a sign forever unto itself of one’s salvation— a sign of the Spirit of God, of His Work and of His Righteousness and Sufficiency.

Dr Walter:
“The Great Commission is a command not a request and the baptism in the Great commission is the kind that "ye" or
Page 35
that men administer to others (Mt. 28:29) and therefore cannot possibly be anything but water baptism.”

GE:
“…and therefore cannot possibly be anything but water baptism”?! Since when? And for what reason “water baptism”? Jesus never mentioned or even insinuated ‘water’. He expressed in words, ‘baptism’ IN WHAT: “baptize ye _IN THE NAME_”, ‘eis to όnoma tou Patrόs kai tou Wiόú kai tou Hagíou Pneumatόs’!

No ‘scholarship’; no studied attempt at some hidden, ‘deeper’ meaning; just plain, literal words accepted at face value.

Dr Walter:
“In addition, they are commanded in the Great Commission to simply administer to others what they themselves "have" submitted to and they submitted to water baptism.”

GE:
Ja truly “In addition” to what Christ “commanded in the Great Commission”, Dr Walter alleges Jesus commanded the Apostles “…to simply administer to others what they themselves "have" submitted to.” That spade must be called a spade— a lying spade! Show those lines in any Gospel, I dare you!


Dr Walter:
“Last but not least, this is a commission to administer water baptism until the "end of the age" and even if you have the warped idea that he means to the end of the Apostolic age (which he does not) that would include the whole book of Acts, the epistles and the book of Revelation…”

Page 36
GE:
First, Re: “… this is a commission to administer water baptism…”.
No; it’s not. Repetitiveness doesn’t help. Quote the word or words, ‘water baptism’ or like words or thoughts. You cannot. You cannot show it’s being presupposed in specific words or in wider context. ‘Wider context’ in context please; not absurd ‘context’ that isn’t context but reaches the idea of water-baptism from unrelated and irrelevant portions of Scripture remotely removed from the real context. Like Dr Walter fetches the words and ideas of ‘water-baptism’ from the first chapters of the Gospel to interpret the very last paragraphs of the Gospels to his own liking.

That is not ‘scholarship’; that is abuse of God’s Word.

Next, Re: “…this is a commission to administer … baptism until the "end of the age" and even if you have the warped idea that he means to the end of the Apostolic age (which he does not) that would include the whole book of Acts, the epistles and the book of Revelation… and so arguing that it is not water baptism in Acts 2, 8, 16, 19, etc. is foolish.”

The commission is to “baptise in The Name” and to “teach”… for as long as those commanded would live, naturally. But Jesus promises, “Lo, I am with you always unto the end of the world.”

The command was given coupled with the Promise “unto the end”, so the command is meant for “until the end of the world" as well. But because no one until the end of the world shall be saved without being baptized with the Baptism of Jesus Christ which is the Baptism with the regenerating and justifying and sanctifying Spirit of God, so a baptism NOT with water, but with everlasting effect, is

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 37
the presupposed ‘baptism’. Although the Apostles are all long since dead, Christ is “with you always” with “all power given” unto Him “even unto the end of the world”, and so the baptism commanded the Apostles must be the baptism that goes through to the end; which is the baptism of Jesus Christ “with the Holy Spirit” and not the baptism of John the Baptist “with water”, that ended when he died.

One won’t after as short a time-span as the Epistles of Paul were written, find water-baptism in the Christian Community of after the great commission, even if you have the warped idea that the Lord meant water-baptism “to the end of the world”. “One Lord, one Faith, one Baptism, One God and Father of all, WHO IS IN YOU all (by the baptism of Christ “with the Holy Spirit” “in The Name”) while unto everyone of us GRACE is given according to the measure of CHRIST… IN YOU all” (by the baptism of Christ “in The Name”, “with the Holy Spirit”)

The Apostolic Age would include the whole period the Apostles lived and the books of the New Testament were written, that is, until the end of the first century.

Jesus addressed the Apostles specifically after He resurrected, having commanded them and no one besides because of the authority He invested in them only to baptize converts “in the Name of God”. It is another matter that Jesus promised that He spiritually would be “with you” … “you”… spiritually the Church. “I will be with you” IN THE SPIRIT “until the end of the age / world", which naturally must be much longer than to the end of the Apostolic age.

GE did not deny Jesus’ promise ever; nor his command to “baptise in The Name…”. What GE denies is a command to baptise ‘in water’.
Page 38
Dr Walter:
“The baptism in the Spirit was an historical act predicted in the gospels and pinpointed to occur on the day of Pentecost (Acts 1:5). It was not an individual application (Acts 11:15-16) but it was the common ordinary immersion in the shikinah glory that occurred AFTER the completion of every new house of God (Ex. 40; 2 Chron. 7:1-3; Acts 2:1-3) and repeated with the Gentiles (Acts 10) to accredit them as members of the new house of God. It was completed and finished and that is exactly why Ephesians 4:5 says there is now only "one baptism" and that is the baptism that is commissioned unto the end of the age (Mt. 28:19-20).”


GE:
Now Dr Walter, please point out to GE where GE does not believe and ‘teach’ exactly like Dr Walter does, here? Dr Walter will not be able to point out any difference between HIS VIEW OF PENTECOST AND GE’S VIEW OF PENTECOST.

GE will only ask, What is the relevance, Dr Walter? What is the correlation between Pentecost and the ‘great commission’? You see, Dr Walter, you IDENTIFY Pentecost and ‘the great commission’; you make Jesus’ command before He ascended into the heavens, the fulfilment of the Prophecies of the day of Pentecost ten days later! You say Jesus’ baptism with the Holy Spirit was the outpouring of the Holy Spirit and “waving before the LORD” of the “two loaves first-fruit offering” of passover’s fiftieth day …fiftieth day after Abib 16, “the day after the (annual) sabbath” of the passover’s Feast Day. You couple the work of the Holy Spirit “in you” the individual believer, to one date, on the religious calendar “for you” the congregation of “all Israel”.

Page 39
Dr Walter:
“If you have an open mind, and will deal with immediate context honestly, it can be easily shown that 1 Cor. 12:13 refers to the building of the local visible congregation and water baptism as described in 1 Cor. 3:4-16 and is the immediate solution for division in the body at Corinth over spiritual gifts as well as over party divisions in 1 Cor. 1:12.

GE:
“For by one Spirit are we … Jews and Gentiles … bond or free … ALL, baptised into ONE Body (of Christ’s Own) … and ALL been made to drink into ONE Spirit.” Yes, it can easily be seen that 1 Cor. 12:13 refers to the building of the local visible congregation into the one spiritual Body of Christ the Church. “The local visible congregation”, yes. But never “the local visible congregation” to the EXCLUSION of the ‘universal’, Congregation of “_ALL_ baptised into one Body (of Christ’s Own)” the ‘invisible’ ‘Communion of the saints’ of all times and places “INTNE BODY”.

Exactly the same applies to your ‘open minded’ and ‘honest dealing’ with the exposition of Scriptures like John 1:33 Luke 3:16 et al trying to make the ‘baptism’ there defined ‘baptism’, “in The Name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit”, ‘baptism with water’— “…water baptism as described in 1 Cor. 3:4-16.

“…water baptism as described in 1 Cor. 3:4-16”?!
How presumptuous of you; what haughty “scholarship”!

The acme of your arrogance, Dr Walter, is your claim that “…water baptism as described in 1 Cor. 3:4-16 … is the immediate solution for division in the body” of Christ the Church of God wherever. What do you think did Paul say he thanked God for that he “BAPTIZED NONE OF YOU”?

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 40
See the effects of “water baptism as described” in 1 Corinthians 1:10-13, and see the CAUSE of “division in the body” of Believers!!

But Dr Walter finds it commendable and recommends “water baptism” for “the immediate solution for division in the body at Corinth OVER”, quote: “spiritual gifts”! And, quote, “…as well as over party divisions in 1 Cor. 1:12”— as if “water baptism” would bring an end to “party divisions” in God’s Church?!

It’s crazy! Kick you own feet bloody against the pricks, Dr Walter; don’t torture others for your own, VERY WEIRD, misconceptions.

Dr Walter:
[Refer p 11 of this conversation…]
GE, your line of reasoning is ridiculous. You nor I have any right to rewrite the scriptures and make them fit your misled theology. Baptism is a command not an option and it is a command for believers (Mk. 16:16). If this man is a believer then demonstrate it by obedience to Christ's command and the first command to the new believer is to be baptized.

GE:
Pass please; I’m too wearied already… this now to answer will kill me.

Dr Walter:
[Refer pp 14, 15 of this conversation…]
Jesus said this LONG BEFORE the baptism in the Spirit (Jn. 4:24). The baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with the regenerate condition of a child of God. Old Testament saints were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of God and could worship God "in Spirit and in truth."”

Page 41
GE:
Can’t you see how you contradict yourself, ?
Quote:
“The baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with the regenerate condition of a child of God.”
Quote:
“Old Testament saints were regenerated and indwelt by the Spirit of God and could worship God "in Spirit and in truth."”


Dr Walter:
Jesus rebuked Nicodemus for failing to understand as a teacher of Israel the doctrine of new birth (Jn. 3:10). Paul classified all mankind in two categories - those "in the flesh" and those "in the Spirit" and if you did not have the Spirit indwelling you it is because you are "in the flesh" (Rom. 8:9). The new birth was figured under the terms "circumcised in heart" in the Old Testament.

GE:
Correct. Salvation is unimaginable without the baptism of Christ— without “circumcised in heart”; without “the new birth”. And baptism with water if exacted from believers whom Christ never gave it to, is an act purely "in the flesh" quite simply. “For other foundation can no man lay THAN THAT IS LAID WHICH IS JESUS CHRIST”. Paul said he “laid the foundation”, “which is Christ” “according to the grace of God WHICH IS GIVEN UNTO ME”— Paul, an apostle! “Let every (other) man (after) take heed how he buildeth THEREON.” 1Cor. 3:10,11. The foundation cannot be laid again; the foundation of the New Testament Church had been laid once for ever by the APOSTLES. Christ appointed them and commissioned them with ‘the great commission’— no others, ever.

Page 42
Dr Walter:
The baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with INDIVIDUAL salvation but with the "house of God" (Ex. 40; 2 Chron. 7:1-3; Acts 2:1-3; 11:15-16). It is the public accreditation and indwelling of the "house of God." It was done ONCE at the completion of every new "house of God." The new house of God - the congregation - is composed of a plurality of members and the baptism in the Spirit is an INSTITUTIONAL accreditation that occurred to the congregation on the day of Pentecost. It occurred in Acts 10 accrediting the GENTILES as approved members in the congregation at Jerusalem. It has nothing to do with individual salvation before or after Pentecost. It has only to do with public certification of the public institutional house of God as the approved place for public worship and administration of the ordinances.”

GE:
Yes! And why would GE have even tried to object? I can only see one aspect I should protest about, and that is that Dr Walters re-phrased the terminology of the Pentecostal outpouring of the Holy Spirit so as to create the FALSE impression “baptism in the Spirit has nothing to do with INDIVIDUAL salvation”. In other words, as I said before, Dr Walters obfuscates meaning and events of the baptism with the Holy Spirit. And he ignores the eschatology of the events of the baptism by the Holy Spirit in the hearts of men— Always in the hearts of men individually unto salvation, and Once in history in the event of Pentecost which made it a unique and unrepeatable event. But everybody can see, individual salvation requires someone being born again through the grace of the Spirit of God in his heart without requiring or claiming it must be Pentecost! Yes, the ‘Pentecostals’ do it; and they err. Reformation Faith does not include water-baptism under the ‘5 only’s’.

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 43
Dr Walter:
Re: GE having said, (p13) “John the Baptist TWICE TOOK OATH JESUS WAS BAPTISED BY THE HOLY SPIRIT— he John not having as much as touched Jesus, nor any of the two of them as much as looked in the direction of water! And John TWICE UNDER OATH DENIED he baptised the Christ and Son of God or was able to BECAUSE HE BAPTISED WITH WATER!! So, that which John SAW, he TWICE SWORE was how GOD WITH THE HOLY SPIRIT BAPTISED THE SON. The Son of God "SHOULD BE MANIFESTED" never ever, through him, John the Baptist, or, through ‘holy’ water: "BUT THOU SHALT SEE THE SPIRIT DESCENDING _AND REMAINING_ ON HIM".”

“This is pure fanatical imagination at its worst. John the Baptist took no such oath at any time. He was addressing the crowd before him when he spoke the words found in Matthew 3:11. He spoke to "YOU" or those he had baptized "with" (lit. "in") water as well as those Pharisees who rejected his baptism and told them that Christ would baptize "YOU" in the Spirit (baptized believers) or in fire (unbelievers). John most certainly did baptize Jesus Christ in water and it is clearly recorded (Mt. 3:15-17). He did place his hands upon the Son of God and did immerse him in water:
13 Then cometh Jesus from Galilee to Jordan unto John, to be baptized of him.
14 But John forbad him, saying, I have need to be baptized of thee, and comest thou to me?
15 And Jesus answering said unto him, Suffer it to be so now: for thus it becometh us to fulfil all righteousness. Then he suffered him.
16 And Jesus, when he was baptized, went up straightway out of the water: and, lo, the heavens were opened unto him, and he saw the Spirit of God descending like a dove, and lighting upon him:”

GE:
Very little again, GE cannot agree with! GE only wants to know why Dr Walter said, “Christ would baptize "YOU" in
Page 44
the Spirit (baptized believers) or in fire (unbelievers)”, even though that need not be impossible. GE though prefers Paul’s interpretation, where he wrote, “I REMEMBERED THE WORD OF THE LORD, how that HE said, John indeed baptised WITH WATER; but ye shall be baptised with the Holy Spirit; FORASMUCH then as God gave them THE LIKE GIFT as He did on us who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ.” In other words, Christ would baptize "YOU" “in the Spirit AND in fire” as the word of the Lord actually goes. ‘You’— ‘true believers’, whether baptized-in-with-water-believers or not baptized-in-with-water-believers. Which is much easier, much more safer, and much more truer than Dr Walter’s pure fanatical imagination at its water-baptism-scholarship worst.

Dr Walter:
[Re; pp 17/18…]
“There is no baptism in the Spirit today. The first house of God after it was finished was baptized in the Spirit ONCE and never again (Ex. 40). The second house of God after it was finished was baptized in the Spirit ONCE and never again (2 Chron. 7:1-3). The congregation of Christ as the new house of God (1 Tim. 3:15) is composed of living stones consisting of Jews and Gentiles. The Jews in the congregation at Jerusalem was baptized in the Spirit ONCE on the day of Pentecost and never again, and the Gentiles were baptized in the Spirit ONCE in Acts 10 so that the Jews would receive them into God's house and never baptized again. Never again, because the baptism in the Spirit was the public accreditation of God's public house of worship where the public worship of God is conducted by a properly ordained ministry and the ordinances administered (1 Tim. 3:1-15). Once publicly accredited it remains the "house of God" until it is destroyed or replaced by God Himself. The institutional congregation has been thus publicly accredited by God and will never be immersed
Page 45
in the Shikinah glory again on earth.

The baptism in the Spirit publicly accredits and identifies God's house
The baptism in water publicly identifies the believer with membership in God's house
The baptism in suffering publicly identifies the obedient believer with Christ's sufferings

There is now only ONE BAPTISM and it is the only baptism that has been commissioned to be administered by men to men until the end of the world (Mt. 28:19-20).

GE:
Yes, There is no second Pentecost—Acts 2, and no second ‘public identification’ and incorporation or ‘accreditation’ into the One Body of Christ’s Own of the Gentiles (Acts 10) through having been “immersed in Shikinah glory”. Agreed!

There is no second Pentecost or “baptism in the Spirit”. True. But there has always been the work of the regenerating Holy Spirit in the hearts of men unto their salvation; as Dr Walter himself explained: “The new birth was figured under the terms "circumcised in heart" in the Old Testament.”

But just so, is there no second or more generations of Apostles (unless one is a Roman Catholic), and just so after the Apostles there shall never be another bestowal of Apostolic GIFT or sign or seal or guarantee— one of which – and one not that very important as it happened –, was baptism in or with water, as is very clear in Acts 10:45-48. “They of the circumcision (Jews) who believed (in Jesus Christ) were surprised, in fact all of them who accompanied Peter, BECAUSE ON THE GENTILES indeed was poured

 

[Gerhard Ebersoehn]

Page 46
out the GIFT OF THE HOLY SPIRIT.” That was the important thing because the HOLY SPIRIT, was the Power of God that saves both Jews and Gentiles, used to save Jews and Gentiles and will save Jews and Gentiles, once for ever. But that was the Power of God manifested and confirmed on STRENGTH OF THIS: That “Him (Christ), God RAISED UP the third day (of the Passover of Yahweh) and
showed Him openly— NOT, to ALL people, BUT, unto WITNESSES— WITNESSES chosen before of God— even to US WHO did eat and drink with Him after his resurrection.” Those “witnesses” were the Apostles and NONE other. Jesus never after He had risen showed Himself to others than the Apostles! For forty days says Luke, did He communicate with the disciples and that, gave them their authority as Apostles of Christ. So, when Peter and everybody else saw God’s CONFIRMATION of Peter’s Apostolic AUTHORITY … “for they heard them speak in tongues and magnify God— THEN, confirmed Peter: Can ANYONE… (Look and see everybody for yourself, God’s accreditation of our Apostleship!) …can anyone forbid WATER that these should not be baptised? NOW he (the Apostle Peter) COMMANDED them to be baptised (with water-baptism) in the Name of the Lord.”

Now let I declare here and now, I, have NEVER denied ANY of this.

But it is Dr Walter who denies everything in that he EXTENDS this (—according to his OWN validation—) ONCE FOR ALL PENTECOSTAL ‘water-baptism’ of the APOSTLES’ prerogative, to all and every generation after them!

Therefore,
Dr Walter’s claim, “The baptism in the Spirit publicly accredits and identifies God's house” is true but too
Page 47
narrowly described.

And therefore,
Dr Walter’s claim, “The baptism in suffering publicly identifies the obedient believer with Christ's sufferings” is also true; but again is too narrowly defined as “the obedient believer’s” or believers’ “sufferings”; and as though the “sufferings” cannot be invisible and private or secret in one’s own heart or own circle of family and or friends or fellow believers.

And therefore,
Dr Walter’s claim, “The baptism in water publicly identifies the believer with membership in God's house” on the one hand is an artificial limitation of the water-baptism of Apostolic times— a limitation to the benefit of the ‘public’ ‘candidate’ and a limitation to the deprivation of the Apostles of their Apostolic right to water-baptism as a sign of their exclusive received or gifted authority; and on the other hand an illegitimate extension and opening up of the water-baptism of Apostolic times and authority to “the only baptism that has been commissioned to be administered by (ANY) men to (ANY) men” and, “until the end of the world…” on which last aspect I have already answered (above in this discussion, pp 36/37.)

Dr Walter:
[P25…]
“I have proven with numerous scriptures that salvation is the same before and after Pentecost but the baptism in the Spirit is unfulfilled and predicted in the gospels not to occur until Pentecost and is therefore NEW.”

GE:
Which says nothing about water-baptism of the present day.

Page 48
Dr Walter:
“I have proven the baptism in the Spirit has NOTHING to do with salvation at any time in redemptive history before or after the Cross but has to do with the public institutional house of God at its commencement and dedication.”

GE:
Which is grave and irresponsible under-appreciation of the significance and importance of the Pentecostal fulfilment of the prophetic event of the Passover of Yahweh.

Dr Walter:
“I have proven from CONTEXT that John the Baptist's words concerning the descending of the Spirit on Christ had NOTHING to do with the baptism in the Spirit but WAS THE HISTORICAL IDENTIFICATION MARK GIVEN TO JOHN BY THE FATHER IN ORDER TO KNOW WHO THE CHRIST WAS.

Your personal confusion about "which water baptism" is simply due to a lack of scholarship and study.

GE:
Dr Walter says GE is ‘confused’, “about "which water baptism"”. But Dr Walter seems to be the one who is confused about the baptism of the Holy Spirit! For just WHO, is ‘personally confused about’ and obsessed with correlating the irrelevant “descending of the Spirit on Christ” and “… the baptism in the Spirit” on Pentecost?

How – for example – could “… the descending of the Spirit on Christ ha[ve] NOTHING to do with the baptism in the Spirit”? And isn’t the personal “receiving” of the Holy Spirit the work of the Holy Spirit to ‘circumcise the heart’? Then did not the Holy Spirit in fact “PRICK” the Pentecostal celebrators “IN THEIR HEART” at the
Page 49
“hearing” of the words of the Gospel of Christ?— weren’t they all “pricked in their hearts” unto their eternal salvation?! But Dr Walter insists, “the baptism in the Spirit has NOTHING to do with salvation at any time in redemptive history before or after the Cross”?! Unbelievable!

I think some people have too much “scholarship” and aren’t enough, “of little faith”.


END PART ONE OF ANSWER TO DR WALTER ON WATER-BAPTISM

 

[Dr. Walter]

Page 28
“The Greek implies … that the baptism of the Spirit shall go before anything else, for it literally says, "Be ye baptised INTO the Name ... unto baptism INTO forgiveness of sins"”

So, you turn a PRESENT tense participle into an AORIST tense verb, you completely ignore the direct object of the participle "autois" "them" and turn into a first person plural "ye"!

Tell me GE why don't you be consistent then and do it with the second present tense participle also???????? Let me see, that would require you to render it:

"Be ye taught..whatsoever I have commanded you."

This is such a foolish and absurd translation that it is hardly worth the time and effort to refute. The KJV and almost every other English version in existence has it correct:

"Ye...baptizing THEM" and no human can administer the baptism in the Spirit. This is water baptism.

 

[Dr. Walter]

Matthew 28;19-20 contains one primary verb found in the Aorist tense imperative mode "make disciples".

The three participles are no "dangling" participles but they are adverbial and modify the main verb describing HOW such disciples are to be made. That is there is both a logical and grammatical connection between the participles and the main verb.

1. The first participle is Aorist assuming that they have already gospelized "them" previous to administering baptism and teaching "them"

2. The object of the first participle is not "ye" but "all nations"

3. The object of the second and third participles is not "ye" but "them" (autois).

In regard to the second and third present participles, they are actions commanded of the "ye" to take upon "them"

"YE...baptizing THEM"
"Ye...teaching THEM"

Neither of these actions are by SELF-ADMINISTRATION. Neither of these actions are actions by God or by Christ or by the Holy Spirit but all of these actions are commanded to be administered to "them" by "YE."

The very grammar demands that the baptism in question is a baptism that "YE" can administer to "THEM." Only Jesus Christ administers the baptism in the Spirit. Therefore this cannot refer to the baptism in the Spirit. The ONLY other baptism administered by men is the baptism of John. This is the ONLY baptism administered by this contextual "YE" previously (Jn. 4:1-2; Lk. 7:29-30).

By grammatical and historical context the only baptism this can possibly be commanded and commissioned in Matthew 28:19 unto the end of the world is immersion IN WATER. Jesus nor the apostles need say "in water" or "with water" because it has already been said of this baptism and therefore it requires COMMON SENSE in reading the context concerning those things Jesus had already "COMMANDED". They would not have administered water baptism in John 4:1-2 apart from Christ's command. They would not have administered water baptism in Lk 7:29-30 apart from Christ's command. In fact Luke 7;29-30 necessarily requires that water baptism is GOD's COMMAND.

New birth by the Spirit HAS NEVER BEEN a "baptism" of the Spirit and never will be as it is a REGENERATION - NEW BIRTH but never a "baptism."

Old Testament saints were REGENERATED, CIRCUMCISED IN HEART by the Spirit of God but never BAPTIZED by the Spirit. Peter makes it clear in Acts 11:15-16 that the promised baptism in the Spirit had nothing to do with regeneration or reception of the Spirit as the nearest reference point he could point to where this happened before the house of Corneilius was "at the beginning" or on Pentecost. However, THOUSANDS had been born of the Spirit SINCE Pentecost.