Featured Two baptisms: Which is which?

There is no water baptism in this verse. You even changed the wording and inserted baptism at your own will and wish--another example of distorting the Word of God.
It means what it says: "diverse washings," not baptism.
They were ceremonial washing of hands and perhaps even feet, as Jesus did in John 13. There many different kinds (divers) washinngs that the Jews went through before temple worship. They did not baptize.

 

Ever since I arrived here! ... and 'tis bin very amusing ... pathetic, but very amusing ... the whole ride!
Praise the Lord!
.

 

You are the one that gets hung up on words. Why don't you do a bit of research for yourself. Words have more than one meaning. The KJV translation is correct. It refers to ceremonial washings. If you want to know why the Holy Spirit didn't use a different word, when you get to heaven, you can ask him. That is His prerogative. He is God. He can use the words that he chooses to use.

Since you don't study the verse for yourself you don't know what it means.
It is quite evident that the "time of reformation," is the cross when these ceremonial washings and other rituals were done away with. Another translation puts it this way:

(CEV) These rules are merely about such things as eating and drinking and ceremonies for washing ourselves. And rules about physical things will last only until the time comes to change them for something better.

Something better came at the cross. Throughout the author contrasts the OT levitical system with the NT grace--that which Christ gives at the cross. Read the chapter and see. Something better came at the cross.

 

That is the primary meaning. However it is sometimes translated "to wash." There are other references in the Bible when it refers to the washing of tables, and other things. As I said: "Words have more than one meaning." Its primary meaning is not being used here. There is no baptism here. It is speaking of ceremonial washings. The context is clear. A word is defined by its context. Look at the CEV translation I gave you. That makes it even clearer.

The verse doesn't teach that baptism saves unless you have become a Oneness Pentecostal.
The verse does not teach Holy Spirit baptism.
It starts out "In like figure" meaning that it is a picture of something already described, that is referring back to Noah and the destruction at the Flood. What did water represent. It represented total destruction. Noah was saved OUT OF the water. The water did not save him; it would have destroyed him. What saved Noah. It was the ark. And the ark was a picture of Christ. The ark was above the water, floated on the water.

In like figure, being immersed in the sea of destruction, the water that represents the world, we are saved by Christ's resurrection. Study the verse carefully. It says nothing about Spirit baptism. Water is symbolic of destruction if anything. The only thing that water can do is wash away the filth of the flesh, such as you do when you wash your hands. And that is what the verse says. It is belief in the resurrection of Christ that saves. That is also what the verse says.

 

He is probably referring to that which is received by every believer at the time of conversion. Not every believe goes on and is obedient in water baptism, but every believer is baptized by the Spirit when he is saved.

As has been noted several times before, the book of Acts is a book of transition between the Old and the New. John's baptism was an OT baptism that looked forward to the cross. Apollos preached Christ, but his teaching was incomplete. Read further. Aquilla and Priscilla had to take him aside and teach him more fully about the doctrines of Christ.

 

A book of transition; a book of history.
A book of the "acts" of the Apostles.
A book of the history of the early church.
A book of the history of the church as it transitions from the OT to the NT, but is not yet fully formed.
At the first it meets in the Temple, and then in the synagogues. By the end it is meeting in homes and in prisons.
At the first it is meeting daily, and then on the Sabbath, and at the end on the first day of the week.
At the first the church is 100% Jewish, and then it included Samaritans, and then the gospel went to the Gentiles, and at the end it spread to Rome.
This is a history book; a history of a church in transition.

No it isn't. The two are not related.
If you want to know the purpose of water baptism study Romans 6:3,4

 

what was recorded down by Dr Luke was an account that described all that actually happened, but some was just descriptive for back then, and some to still be applied right now!

Need to take the Epistles to see which are to be seen as being just back there, and what was meant to carry on forward!

 

ALL of us that were saved have been 'baptized" by the HS into the body of Christ, so NO second act of him doing anything with the saved, just need to stay refilled with Him daily basis!

 

It wasduring a transistion period in church history, for god had the Apsotles go down and lay hands on them to show that even they could be saved, not just the Jews by yeshua!

NOW, ALL receive the HS when they believe, NO delay!

 

Perfect! We are ALL under that same baptism, as the bible commands us to be refilling with the HS, NOT to seek another act of Grace "baptism in Holy Ghost"