Featured Union With Christ

It is utterly amazing that any professing Christian would deny the baptism of John as “Christian” (or Christ-like baptism) especially on the grounds that it was a “baptism of repentance.” Utterly amazing!


1. John demanded fruits of repentance and faith in the coming Christ as the prerequisite for baptism – Mt. 3:6-8; Acts 19:4; Jn. 3:36. That is why it is called a “baptism of repentance.” Tell me, you don’t require repentance toward God and faith in Christ for baptism??????

2. John’s baptism was “the counsel of God” (Lk. 7:29-30) and those who reject it (like you) reject the counsel of God against themselves and those who submit to it (like true Baptist congregations as it alone was the only possible baptism existing when the Great Commission was given that Jesus could say “I HAVE” commanded).

3. Jesus not only submitted to it (Mt. 3:15-17) but based the authority of his entire ministry upon it (Mt. 21:23-25) and administered it through his disciples (Jn. 4:1-2) and commissioned it until the end of the age (Mt. 28:19-20).


4. There is absolutely no record of Christ being rebaptized, or the apostles or any of his disciples ever being rebaptized.


5. Those rebaptized 19-24 years later in Acts 19 could not have possibly been baptized by John as John preached about the Holy Spirit and these did not know about him, and John baptized in reference to faith in Christ (Acts 19:4 as John 3:36 explicitly and clearly asserts) but these were baptized in reference to John. It is only when they heard how John actually baptized in reference to Christ (Acts 19:4) did they seek rebaptism – the baptism of John administered now by the church and its authorized representatives (Paul and Silas).



6. If you believe such garbage, then stop telling people to “follow Christ in baptism” as you don’t even believe Christ had “Christ-like” (Christian) baptism.


7. Only true churches of Christ identify with the Great Commission baptism of John. Those who repudiate it are advertising they are not New Testament churches and are not of New Testament origin. Oh I realize this will offend many - let it offend!

 

So, you don’t believe anyone was saved prior to Pentecost? There is no baptism in the Spirit prior to Pentecost and if being saved in Christ is "BY SPIRIT BAPTISM" then all before Pentecost are OUTSIDE of Christ and SPIRITUALLY DEAD - SPIRITUALLY SEPARATED FROM GOD. Every reference to the baptism in the Spirit prior to Pentecost is future and every reference after Pentecost refers to it in the past (Acts 11:15-16).


You said “being found in Christ BY SPIRIT BAPTISM SAVES.” Therefore, none prior to Pentecost could be saved? None could be in Christ? Is there salvation OUTSIDE of Christ prior to Pentecost? Hence, all died between Genesis and Acts 2 died OUTSIDE of Christ and thus died SPIRITUALLY SEPARATED from God and Christ. Spiritual separation is what the Bible calls SPIRITUAL DEATH and so you believe all who died between Genesis and Acts 2 were SPIRITUALLY DEAD when they were alive and when they left their bodies they were SPIRITUALLY DEAD SPIRITS separated from God. Don’t try to deny it because your belief that salvation in Christ is “BY SPIRIT BAPTISM” FORCES you to that conclusion. Your doctrine forces you to claim there is ANOTHER GOSPEL, another way of salvation OUTSIDE of Christ in a SPIRITUAL DEAD SEPARATED state for all who lived and died between Genesis and Acts 2:1.


Now, that is “complete nonsense”! That is where your church salvation leads you!

 

These posts continue unabated. Water baptism, the one commanded by Christ, symbolizes our spiritual baptism into Christ. This is basic Baptist doctrine.

Pay no attention to those who deny positional sanctification where God puts us spiritually into Christ, setting us apart within Christ. This results in our union with Christ, being immersed in Christ and Christ indwelling us.

 

We are not talking about FAITH looking forward or backwards but about how one is "in Christ" by spiritual union! So don't change the subject or confuse faith with spiritual union. You claim that being "in Christ" by spiritual union is BY THE BAPTISM IN THE SPIRIT in fact your words were "being in Christ BY SPIRIT BAPTISM SAVES." Those are your words and that is your church salvation.

My view is we are "in Christ spiritually by regeneration in all ages" and NEVER by the baptism in the Spirit - NEVER!

It does not help you to say they looked forward by faith IF THEY WERE NOT IN SPIRITUAL UNION WITH CHRIST as that means they were SPIRITUALLY SEPARATED and thus SPIRITUALLY DEAD and incapable of faith (Rom. 8:7-9). Those "in the flesh" cannot please God (Rom. 8:8) and without faith it is impossible to please God (Heb. 11:6). So none "in the flesh" can have faith. If any man is "in the flesh" they are not "in the Spirit" and therefore are OUTSIDE OF CHRIST spiritually and SEPARATED from God spiritually and are SPIRITUALLY DEAD. So you view is self-contradictory.

Your view forces you to adopt Van's view of salvation prior to the cross. Your view denies gospel salvation is actual before Pentecost. Your view is necessitated by all who embrace Reformed Roman Catholic ecclesiology where church membership equals salvation in Christ. But you have no church, no baptism in the Spirit -prior to Pentecost as even your own position admits your church was begun on Pentecost with the baptism in the Spirit and so YOUR FALSE DOCTRINE OF SALVATION can't precede Pentecost. Your view requires/demands that conclusion.

 

You give your OPINIONS without a shed of Scripture. You make charges without a shed of factual basis. You are defending a SYSTEM that has no Biblical basis.

I give both Scripture and detailed analysis that repudiates your SYSTEM ecclesiology.

You forget that John was sent before the Savior to PREPARE A PEOPLE MADE READY.

Try dealing with the evidence placed before you!!!

1. john preached the gospel of Christ - Jn. 3:36; Acts 19:4

He that believeth on the Son hath everlasting life: and he that believeth not the Son shall not see life; but the wrath of God abideth on him. - jn. 3:36

2. john demanded fruit of repentance prior to baptism - Mt. 3:8

Bring forth therefore fruits meet for repentance:
.
3. There is no record of anyone having been baptized by John to have been rebaptized

You have to FORCE Acts 19:1-6 to fit your false theory. Who baptized the 3000 on Pentecost? UNBAPTIZED Christians?? That is what your view forces you to accept

 

Hey, instead of ad hominen attacks that center around a term "Landmarkism" try dealing with the scriptures. Do you see me claiming the term "Landmarkism" as my defense or do you see me using scriptures. You are using a dishonest and cowardly approach as you simply attack an epitaph, a term IN ORDER TO AVOID DEALING WITH SCRIPTURES! that is dishonest and cowardly

 

first, he was the last of prophet that predicted the coming Messiah as he was the FIRST to announce the king "is at hand."

second, there is no salvation by the Old Covenant. the only thing that was instituted was the visible kingdom ADMINISTRATION of the New Covenant. Salvation has always been by the same everlasting covenant, which was manifested in the new visible kingdom ADMINITSRATION (keys of the kingdom).

 

Let me put it to you this way. Salvation has always been applied as characterized by the "new" covenant as there has been only one kind, one way, one gospel, one savior and one salvation between Genesis to Revelation.

No one has ever been saved by keeping the Old Covenant.

The New Covenant provided a visible administration that is consistent with the everlasting covenant application of salvation in the sense of clear declaration. The New Covenant VISIBLE administration did away completely with the Old Covenant VISIBLE administration. The Old Covenant administration was not as clear but concealed under types the truth of the everlasting covenant and no one was saved by observing the Old Covenant. The replacement of the Old Covenant administration by the New Covenant administration provided a VISIBLE administration that was CLEARER and MORE DECLARATIVE the consistent with the application of the everlasting covenant from Genesis to Matthew.

Like the Old Covenant administration there were a public "house of God" and a public ministry, public ordinances, public worship but the design of each was different. The visible Old Covenant administration was designed to reveal sin and and salvation through EXTERNAL types while the sacrifices symbolized gospel truths and the coming Christ.The visible administration under the New Covenant clearly declares what the Old concealed in types, and the ministry and ordinances under the visible New Covenant administration declare as fulfilled what the old anticipated and point forward to the final application of salvation with the coming of Christ. Neither visible administration saved anyone, but only declared what saves. The salvation application under the "new Covenant" administration is NO DIFFERENT than actual individual salvation under the everlasting covenant between Genesis and Matthew. The only difference is MORE CLARITY and FULFILLED types.

 

Here is the post I would like you to deal with proving my view is wrong and providing scriptures to back up your view.

 

How can you be so dishonest with me and with God’s Word. Nobody denies the Spirit has been at work in God’s people while here on earth from Genesis to Acts 1, but scripture denies the baptizing work of the Spirit preceded Acts 2:

1. Mt 3:11 – FUTURE TENSE “shall baptized”
   
   
2. Acts 1:5 – FUTURE “not many days hence”

So the basis for your whole position, the basis for your whole post, which is all the elect from Genesis to Revelation are saved in Christ by the baptism in the Spirit is FALSE as the baptism in the Spirit NEVER existed previous to Pentecost.

So, every single one of your accusations of "Strawman" are false, because they are all based upon you proving that the BAPTIZING WORK of the Spirit preceded Pentecost which is FALSE! You are being dishonest and intentionally deceptive by claiming the generic "work" of the Spirit preceded Pentecost when we are not discussing the regenerating or filling or sealing, or empowering, or fruits, or equipping, or etc., but we are discussing being BAPTIZED IN THE SPIRIT before Pentecost - so either put up scriptural evidence that this particular work preceded Pentecost or shut up!

IF YOU DISAGREE PROVIDE SCRIPTURE THAT EXPLICTLY STATES THE SPECIFIC BAPTIZING WORK OF THE SPIRIT PRECEDED ACTS 2 or admit you are wrong!

 

IN CONTEXT this text is describing the specific concrete congregation located at Corinth using abstract language.

1. This “temple of God” is “YE” not “WE”
   
   
2. This “temple of God” can be defiled (v. 16-17) “defile”
   
   
3. This “temple of God” had its foundation laid by Paul as the “masterbuilder” – v. 10s
   
   
4. This “temple of God” described the Corinthians –“ye are God’s husbandry, ye are God’s building.” Not “we are”.

Therefore, institutional indwelling is different than individual indwelling. It is the institution that was indwelt and baptized in the Spirit (public confirmation as the new "house of God") on Pentecost – Acts 1:21-22 with 2:1. They had been habitually assembling with Christ from the baptism of John (Acts 1:21-22) and they were all assembled together “in one accord in one place” on Pentecost as His congregation when that institution was immersed in the Spirit and 3000 were “added unto them….the church” (Acts 2:1, 40, 46).


Moreover, the church with the definite article did not exist prior to the life of Christ on earth as its “foundation” consists of only New Testament materials – Eph. 2:20; 1 Cor. 12:28. The “foundation” refers to the BEGINNING of a structure.

There is no "church OF CHRIST" prior to Christ building it in his own earthly ministry (Mt. 16:18).

There is no baptism of the church of Christ prior to Pentecost - Mt. 3:11; Acts 1:5

You cannot possibly refute what I have just said by sound exegesis. You will only be able to GIVE YOUR OPINION or pit scripture against scripture, which is the hallmark of all ERROR.

 

I have reposted this post because until Iconoclast or any who take his position can PRODUCE ANY SCRIPTURAL EVIDENCE THAT THE BAPTIZING WORK OF CHRIST IN THE SPIRIT PRECEDED PENTECOST this post stands irrefutable.

Again, if being saved "in Christ" is BY BEING BAPTIZED IN THE SPIRIT then one must prove that baptism in the Spirit preceded Pentecost or else none could be saved prior to Pentecost IF this view of the baptism in the Spirit is scriptural. It is not scriptural. It is a false view of the baptism in the Spirit as much as the Charismatic view is a false view of the baptism in the Spirit.

 

You take no account of Acts 2:41. 'Then those who gladly received His [Peter's] word were baptized, and that day about 3,000 souls were added to them.' Now we are told that 'Jerusalem, all Judea and all the region......' were baptized by John (Matthew 3:5-6). We allow for some hyperbole, but it must be the case that many of those 3,000 who were baptized at Pentecost had been previously baptized by John. Concerning the Apostles, there is much we don't know. Were Matthew, James the son of Alphaeus and Simon the Zealot baptized by JTB? I don't know and nor do you. Were they re-baptized? Who can say? There is no record of them being baptized at all.

Whether these people had been baptized personally by JTB or by one of his followers we cannot know, but we do know that on John's own account his baptism was not the same as that of the Lord Jesus. "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but He who is coming after me is mightier than I........He will baptize you with the Holy Spirit and fire" (Matthew 3:11). Likewise Paul describes John's baptism in the same way: '"John indeed baptized with a baptism of repentance, saying to the people that they should believe on Him who would come after him, that is, the Christ." When they heard this they were baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus' (Acts 19:4-5). They realised, on the prompting of Paul, that John's baptism was somehow deficient.

 

Like much of our discussion in the past you rely on SILENCE and INFERENCES to overthrow plain and explicit scriptures like Lk.7:29-30; JN.4 :1-2; Acts 1:21-22 and especially Mt. 28:19-20 where no other possible baptism existed or could be included in the "have" commanded administration of Johns' baptism directly under Christ's authority in Jn. 4:1-2.

Your view invalidates God even sending John to introduce believers baptism. It invalidates the multitude baptized by him. Jesus is said to have baptized MORE than John (Jn. 4:1-2) and your theory invalidates all of those baptism. Your theory makes the "counsel of God" (Lk. 7:29)look foolish as it ends up to be worthless and need of replacement.

NOT TRUE as JTB is discussing a baptism that is NOT IN WATER in Matthew 3:11 whereas Jesus administered baptism in water in John 4:1-2 through his disciples and commanded baptism in water in Matthew 28:19-20 which refers to baptism in water they "HAVE" already been commanded as in Jn. 4:1-2 and Lk. 7:29-30

NOT TRUE as there baptism was not John's baptism as JTB preached the Holy Spirit and the baptism in the Spirit which these disciples KNEW NOTHING. When they heard their baptism was not the baptism of John as described by Paul in verse 4, they knew they without Great Commission water baptism, which again could only be John's baptism as no other existed when the commission was given and no other was possible to be included in the "have" commanded you of this commission (jn. 4:1-2; Lk. 7:29-30).

In addition, the Great commission gospel is presented by Luke as preaching "Repentance" (Lk. 24:47) and therefore any baptism following it would identify with that gospel of repentance, making it the "baptism of repentance" or gospel baptism (mt. 3:8).

 

Yes, but there is still but "one baptism" with regard to the church and the Great commission and the "one baptism" follows the "one faith" in Ephesians 4:5 just as it does in Mk 16:15-16.

Moreover, you don't have baptism in the Spirit prior to PENTECOST thus proving that the only baptism related to "one faith" can only be water baptism BECAUSE otherwise you have to demonstrate that same relationship prior to Pentecost and THAT CANNOT BE DONE using scripture.

But unless you believe in transubstantiation it is NOT REPEATED EITHER! Your doctrine demands it is repeated.

Second, the fact that it is a one time event proves THE EVENT did not precede Pentecost but the event of personal salvation did precede Pentecost.

Third, it is THE EVENT that your doctrine requires for an individual to be "in Christ" as your doctrine demands they are "In CHrist" BY THE ACTION/EVENT of baptism.

No one disputes that, but the Bible does not call that work the baptism in the Spirit, but calls it REGENERATION.

They are irrefutable facts and totally annihilate your doctrine by exposing it as unscriptural, thus a FALSE doctrine that actually perverts the gospel of Christ BECAUSE it demands some other way of salvation before Pentecost OUTSIDE of Christ OR condemning all pre-Pentecost people as spiritually dead - spiritually separated from God.