Do we receive the Holy Ghost upon baptism?

[Cornelius]

The Bible is VERY clear on this. We do NOT receive the Holy Spirit at "conversion" . Nor do we receive the Holy Spirit when we are baptized with water. Just read what the Bible says and do not add your opinions to it. The baptism in the Holy Spirit is a SEPARATE event:

1) These received the Holy Spirit BEFORE water baptism (believers baptism) :

Act 10:46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
Act 10:47 Can any man forbid the water, that these should not be baptized, who have received the Holy Spirit as well as we? See? they were speaking in tongues BEFORE they even were baptized in water.

Now the other way round is also true:

These people were saved BUT ...............no Holy Spirit yet:

Act 8:14 Now when the apostles that were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, (This means they were saved already ) they sent unto them Peter and John:
Act 8:15 who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Spirit:
Act 8:16 for as yet it was fallen upon none of them: only they had been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.


See? no Holy Spirit yet, only water baptism. Again, they needed prayer, before they received the Holy Spirit.

Simple.......WE make it complicated, because we want the Bible to follow OUR traditions. It will not.

C

 

[dadof10]

The whole Catholic religion is based on tradition . You would not like to hear what I say about John 3:16. Besides that is another subject. Start a new thread.

Then I guess you'll be giving me the chapter and verse that says "baptism is merely symbolic" as opposed to salvific, as Peter says? If you can't do it then maybe it's your doctrine that is based on man-made tradition instead of ours that is based on Scripture and Tradition that was handed down from the Apostles.

 

[Benoni]

Yea you wish it was handed down by the apostles, more like the Popes. I trust no religion or man made system.

The whole Catholic religion is based on tradition . You would not like to hear what I say about John 3:16. Besides that is another subject. Start a new thread.

Then I guess you'll be giving me the chapter and verse that says "baptism is merely symbolic" as opposed to salvific, as Peter says? If you can't do it then maybe it's your doctrine that is based on man-made tradition instead of ours that is based on Scripture and Tradition that was handed down from the Apostles.

 

[dadof10]

Yea you wish it was handed down by the apostles, more like the Popes. I trust no religion or man made system.

Yet again, only rhetoric, no Biblical theology. You can easily prove your point by giving me chapter and verse. Where is water baptism called "symbolic"?

If you can't find it (and you CAN'T), then I guess it's YOU who is holding the doctrines of a "man made system", not me.

I'm sure many 1st century Gentiles said "I trust no religion", when confronted with the Apostles message of salvation.

 

[Dave Slayer]

Let's say someone just gets saved. He is on his way to the lake to be baptized. He dies in a car accident before he arrives at the lake. Will he be sent to hell because he never was dunked under water?

 

[dadof10]

Let's say someone just gets saved. He is on his way to the lake to be baptized. He dies in a car accident before he arrives at the lake. Will he be sent to hell because he never was dunked under water?

Hypothetically, no he wouldn't be sent to Hell because he obviously desired baptism. Again, like the thief on the cross, this is a rare example and doesn't speak to whether water baptism "saves" or not. Peter, on the other hand, DOES.

If you can't find a verse of Scripture that claims that Baptism is symbolic, it seems logical that you must get rid of this non-Biblical heresy and believe what Scripture actually teaches instead of what a "pastor" has taught you.

 

[Dave Slayer]

Let's say someone just gets saved. He is on his way to the lake to be baptized. He dies in a car accident before he arrives at the lake. Will he be sent to hell because he never was dunked under water?

Hypothetically, no he wouldn't be sent to Hell because he obviously desired baptism. Again, like the thief on the cross, this is a rare example and doesn't speak to whether water baptism "saves" or not. Peter, on the other hand, DOES.

If you can't find a verse of Scripture that claims that Baptism is symbolic, it seems logical that you must get rid of this non-Biblical heresy and believe what Scripture actually teaches instead of what a "pastor" has taught you.

Please show me where I said baptism is symbolic or where I stated I take what a pastor says over what the scriptures say.

Thanks and God Bless

 

[francisdesales]

Sorry you Catholic are far too off the deep end in ritualism for me.

You might even convince me in small area but overall no thanks.

I do not even consider my self a protestant because they are far too ritualistic.

Apparently, people who come to God through ritual know nothing of the Scriptures, and thus, when confronted with verses that overturn your point of view, you must tell me I am wrong because I am "too ritualistic"...???

I guess Jesus was too ritualistic for you, as well, which is why you ignore the teachings of His church.

THIS is the result of your supposed eating of "meat" rather than "milk"???

 

[francisdesales]

I agree, notice it was a sea or water in baptism. Water speaks of God's Word; in other words a baptism in His spiritual Word. Thought it might be a bit deep for my Catholic Brothers. Jesus when baptized received a dove for He is perfect. On the day of Pentecost believer received cloven tongues of fire. Why because fire purifies; we are far from perfect.

Water speaks of God's Word? How does water speak??? What does water tell us about the Word of God?

Where in the Scriptures is a dove a "symbol" of perfection??? Why did a perfect Being receive a dove? Are doves perfect birds???

Yea, this is too "deep" for me, I don't get it...

I think I'll stick to the simple words of the Scriptures rather than your twisted inventions.

Regards

 

[francisdesales]

The whole Catholic religion is based on tradition .

The fact that the Bible is the Word of God is a "tradition"... Paul commanded his congregations to hold onto the traditions he taught them, BOTH in oral and in written form. Not sure what you are getting at here. Is this supposed to be an offensives statement or are you unsure of what Scriptures say on this matter, as well?

Regards

 

[dadof10]

Please show me where I said baptism is symbolic or where I stated I take what a pastor says over what the scriptures say.

Thanks and God Bless

I apologize if I mischaracterized your point of view. It sounded like you are of the opinion that the person was saved whether he was "dunked" or not, that the actual dunking has no salvific value. Please straighten me out if this is not your view.

 

[Dave Slayer]

Please show me where I said baptism is symbolic or where I stated I take what a pastor says over what the scriptures say.

Thanks and God Bless

I apologize if I mischaracterized your point of view. It sounded like you are of the opinion that the person was saved whether he was "dunked" or not, that the actual dunking has no salvific value. Please straighten me out if this is not your view.

Thanks for the apology, I figured you just misunderstood me. I was baptized in water twice actually. Once at the Church of Christ and once again at the United Pentecostal Church. The Church of Christ told me unless I was baptized in water, I would not truly be saved. The United Pentecostal Church told me I needed to be baptized in the name of Jesus only and not in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (as the Chuch of Christ did). Some say that both United Pentecostals and the Chruch of Christ are a cult, does that make my baptisms invalid?

 

[Tina]

I was baptized in water twice actually. Once at the Church of Christ and once again at the United Pentecostal Church. The Church of Christ told me unless I was baptized in water, I would not truly be saved. The United Pentecostal Church told me I needed to be baptized in the name of Jesus only and not in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (as the Chuch of Christ did). Some say that both United Pentecostals and the Chruch of Christ are a cult, does that make my baptisms invalid?

Oh man, now I'm beginning to understand why you ask a lot of questions. You poor confused dude.
Your baptisms are no longer invalid if you just combined them .. :biglaugh

Actually why is Church of Christ a cult ? How do they pervert or deviate from the Bible ?

 

[dadof10]

Thanks for the apology, I figured you just misunderstood me. I was baptized in water twice actually. Once at the Church of Christ and once again at the United Pentecostal Church. The Church of Christ told me unless I was baptized in water, I would not truly be saved. The United Pentecostal Church told me I needed to be baptized in the name of Jesus only and not in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (as the Chuch of Christ did). Some say that both United Pentecostals and the Chruch of Christ are a cult, does that make my baptisms invalid?

I am no theologian, but, as far as I understand it, (and Francis can straighten me out if I'm wrong), the Trinitarian form must be used. Baptizing in the "name of Jesus" is not valid. This goes back to the great heresies concerning the Trinity. It doesn't matter who actually performs the baptism as long as the person is "baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit", nor does it matter if one is immersed or the water is poured. Water should be used unless, of course, there is no water and death is imminent. At that point, all is dispensed with for the salvation of the soul, in other words, even a "I believe in Jesus..." or "I wish baptism..." can save you on your deathbed. But again, this is not the norm, which is why we can't point to the Thief on the cross as a universal example of salvation for people who are not in danger of death.

Your first Baptism from the Church of Christ was valid, the second one...not so much...at least as far as I understand Catholic teaching. I am open to correction, though.

One thing I do know for sure is that Baptism saves.

So, do you think Baptism has salvific value, that Baptism saves, or is it merely symbolic?

 

[francisdesales]

Thanks for the apology, I figured you just misunderstood me. I was baptized in water twice actually. Once at the Church of Christ and once again at the United Pentecostal Church. The Church of Christ told me unless I was baptized in water, I would not truly be saved. The United Pentecostal Church told me I needed to be baptized in the name of Jesus only and not in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit (as the Chuch of Christ did). Some say that both United Pentecostals and the Chruch of Christ are a cult, does that make my baptisms invalid?

I am no theologian, but, as far as I understand it, (and Francis can straighten me out if I'm wrong), the Trinitarian form must be used. Baptizing in the "name of Jesus" is not valid. This goes back to the great heresies concerning the Trinity.

Correct, even Scriptures point this out, as we see "re-baptisms" to include the Christ and the Spirit. Adult baptism is a recognition and acceptance of Who God is, not just what He can do for me. Thus, baptizing in the name of Jesus "only" is an insufficient declaration of the God that saves. Christ made is perfectly clear that He came to make the Father known, not to puff Himself up. Thus, the baptism in the name of Jesus "only" says the wrong message about the God described by Scriptures.

It doesn't matter who actually performs the baptism as long as the person is "baptized in the name of the Father, and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit", nor does it matter if one is immersed or the water is poured. Water should be used unless, of course, there is no water and death is imminent.

As early as the Didache, written while apostles were still alive, makes this mention of the necessity of water to be saved. One wonders what sort of obedience to God one is giving when they insist on NOT using water. Is this the right foot to start off with in a relationship with another person???

At that point, all is dispensed with for the salvation of the soul, in other words, even a "I believe in Jesus..." or "I wish baptism..." can save you on your deathbed. But again, this is not the norm, which is why we can't point to the Thief on the cross as a universal example of salvation for people who are not in danger of death.

The exception does not deny the rule, God is not bound by the Laws He imposes upon the Church as the requirments to enter the Kingdom! Ordinarily, He desires men to experience the Paschal Mystery after Baptism (as per Romans 6). However, being that the man was on the cross, no doubt God could make an exception for the thief. Furthermore, the man died before Baptism into the Trinity was made available to mankind, as this came AFTER the resurrection (such as Matthew 28).

Your first Baptism from the Church of Christ was valid, the second one...not so much...at least as far as I understand Catholic teaching. I am open to correction, though.

The second "baptism" was just a re-affirmation, it did not confer God's Spirit. Baptism is not repeatable. The first was indeed valid and are the entryway into the Church.

Regards

 

[dadof10]

As early as the Didache, written while apostles were still alive, makes this mention of the necessity of water to be saved. One wonders what sort of obedience to God one is giving when they insist on NOT using water. Is this the right foot to start off with in a relationship with another person???

Scripture itself says water baptism saves, along with faith, keeping the Commandments, etc. I think people just naturally want to take the easiest path, which is why they flock to churches who preach OSAS by a one time proclamation of faith alone. The Truth is, Jesus wants ALL of us, from conception to death. The normal way to salvation is infant Baptism, receiving the Sacraments (especially frequent confession and reception of the Eucharist),fasting, constant prayer and Scripture study throughout our lives. In short, as you so rightly said above, a relationship.

 

[Aero_Hudson]

Since we are on the topic of baptism, I have a question.

I am 37 years old. I was baptised at a very young age, young enough that I do not remember it. Since that time, I fell apart from God after my father's death and other difficult events in my life. 20 years later, I have found faith, God and Christ and I am planning on getting baptized this month. I feel that my initial baptism, since I had no idea what it meant and I truly did not understand what Christianity was all about, was invalid.

Thoughts on me getting baptized this month and whether or not the first was valid or not?

 

[Cornelius]

Let's say someone just gets saved. He is on his way to the lake to be baptized. He dies in a car accident before he arrives at the lake. Will he be sent to hell because he never was dunked under water?

Obviously not, the thief on the cross is our example.

 

[Cornelius]

Since we are on the topic of baptism, I have a question.

I am 37 years old. I was baptised at a very young age, young enough that I do not remember it. Since that time, I fell apart from God after my father's death and other difficult events in my life. 20 years later, I have found faith, God and Christ and I am planning on getting baptized this month. I feel that my initial baptism, since I had no idea what it meant and I truly did not understand what Christianity was all about, was invalid.

Thoughts on me getting baptized this month and whether or not the first was valid or not?

You will get two views here. One from those who see the ritual , and those who see the reason behind the ritual.
So it depends on you. Do you understand baptism? or are you going to just get wet again ? If you are only going to get wet, you will most probably get baptized again later. Or you can try and gain knowledge of the reason why now, and go into the water, this time, laying down your life and taking up the resurrected life of Christ.

God gave us only two things that are "things to do" . Baptism and communion. Both are visual as well, so they will help us to understand what it means in the spirit. God wants you to 'act out" the death,burial and resurrection of Jesus. Same as we have to "partake" of His body and blood. Humans are made like this, we have an imagination and its part of faith. Do something, and you will remember it better.

 

[Cornelius]

.....the acting out is because in the spirit, you have done the same. You were crucified , you died and you were resurrected.

We get baptized, because of this verse. Baptism, shows the reality of : Gal 2:20 I have been crucified with Christ; and it is no longer I that live, but Christ living in me: and that life which I now live in the flesh I live in faith, the faith which is in the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself up for me.

If you understand Gal 2:20, then get baptized for real this time. Its not the water, its you and faith in the fact , that Gal 2:20 is indeed true. Through baptism you are testifying to your faith in the truth of the gospel.

blessings
C