Christ sent Paul to preach the gospel, not to baptize.

all4Him

Active member
I've seen 3 explanations for that verse. What is the waters?

Some say the water is a reference to amniotic fluid from the womb. I never agreed with that.

Some say the water is in reference to baptismal waters. I never agreed with that....as water baptism is never expressed by water only. Some say it refers to the waters of Johns baptism.

Some say the water is in reference to the Holy Spirit. You must be born again...from above. Baptism waters don't come from above. The Spirit does.

5 Jesus answered, “Truly, truly, I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless he is born of water and the Spirit. 6 Flesh is born of flesh, but spirit is born of the Spirit.

The bottom line....there is no hard conclusion that can be drawn from this verse as to what the water is.

What is typically over looked in this passage is the timeline, and the person Jesus was speaking to.

1. This conversation took place around A.D. 27, around the same time as the wedding in Cana. This around the start of Jesus' ministry. The point
is, Christian baptism had not been instituted until a later date. In Oneness terms, "Jesus name baptism was instituted in Acts 2 (A.D. 30).

2. Who is Nicodemus?

Joh 3:1 Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews;

Joh 3:10 Jesus answered and said to him, “You are the teacher of Israel, and yet you do not understand these things?

The question I would ask Kade is this. If Nicodemus is "the" teacher of Israel, what would he have known about Christian baptism?
Jesus also used the Definite article, indicating that Nicodemus was not simply one of many teachers, but "The teacher of Israel."
As the teacher of Israel, he was well versed in the OT scripture. So whatever Jesus was asking him would have been something he should have known from the Hebrew text. The bottom line, Jesus was not referencing water baptism.
 

all4Him

Active member
I dont believe baptism saves.

My question is, does justification precede faith/belief, repentance and baptism?

As we read in scripture, justification takes place at the moment of belief. For example, the thief on the cross, but also Cornelius. Peter returns to Jerusalem and has a pow-wow with the other disciples.

Act 11:2 And when Peter came up to Jerusalem, the Jewish believers took issue with him

Act 11:14 and he will speak words to you by which you will be saved, you and all your household.’
Act 11:15 “And as I began to speak, the Holy Spirit fell upon them just as He did upon us at the beginning.

When hearing the gospel, God filled them.

11 years later.....

Act 15:8 “And God, who knows the heart, testified to them giving them the Holy Spirit, just as He also did to us;
Act 15:9 and He made no distinction between us and them, cleansing their hearts by faith.
 

Kade Rystalmane

Active member
What is typically over looked in this passage is the timeline, and the person Jesus was speaking to.

1. This conversation took place around A.D. 27, around the same time as the wedding in Cana. This around the start of Jesus' ministry. The point
is, Christian baptism had not been instituted until a later date. In Oneness terms, "Jesus name baptism was instituted in Acts 2 (A.D. 30).

2. Who is Nicodemus?

Joh 3:1 Now there was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews;

Joh 3:10 Jesus answered and said to him, “You are the teacher of Israel, and yet you do not understand these things?

The question I would ask Kade is this. If Nicodemus is "the" teacher of Israel, what would he have known about Christian baptism?
Jesus also used the Definite article, indicating that Nicodemus was not simply one of many teachers, but "The teacher of Israel."
As the teacher of Israel, he was well versed in the OT scripture. So whatever Jesus was asking him would have been something he should have known from the Hebrew text. The bottom line, Jesus was not referencing water baptism.
He should have known quite a bit, truly.

Jesus taught much about the kingdom/church that would not be instituted until after His DBR. He is in effect writing the Testament that would not go into effect until the death of the Testator (Heb. 9:16). So teaching about NT immersion into Christ was necessary and proper before it went into effect.

Nicodemus should have understood NT water immersion very well if he studied the Old Testament because there are many types pointing to the antitype. He would have known about the Flood that destroyed sin and saved Noah and Noah's family from sin (1 Peter 3:20-21). He would have known about the crossing of the Red Sea surrounded by water on all sides that transitioned the entire nation of Israel from slave to free. He would have known about the washings in Leviticus such as the Water of Separation. He would have known about the cleansing of Naaman. There are a host of types referenced throughout the OT that pointed forward to the NT antitype, each teaching an aspect of what NT immersion would be about. The destruction of sin, the point of being freed from sin, the point we come into contact with the blood of Christ, the point we are transformed into a new creature, the point we are cleansed, and so many others. It is absolutely about water immersion and Nicodemus as well as all the other Pharisees and Jewish leaders should have known that very well.
 

all4Him

Active member
He should have known quite a bit, truly.

Jesus taught much about the kingdom/church that would not be instituted until after His DBR. He is in effect writing the Testament that would not go into effect until the death of the Testator (Heb. 9:16). So teaching about NT immersion into Christ was necessary and proper before it went into effect.

Nicodemus should have understood NT water immersion very well if he studied the Old Testament because there are many types pointing to the antitype. He would have known about the Flood that destroyed sin and saved Noah and Noah's family from sin (1 Peter 3:20-21). He would have known about the crossing of the Red Sea surrounded by water on all sides that transitioned the entire nation of Israel from slave to free. He would have known about the washings in Leviticus such as the Water of Separation. He would have known about the cleansing of Naaman There are a host of types referenced throughout the OT that pointed forward to the NT antitype, each teaching an aspect of what NT immersion would be about. The destruction of sin, the point of being freed from sin, the point we come into contact with the blood of Christ, the point we are transformed into a new creature, the point we are cleansed, and so many others. It is absolutely about water immersion and Nicodemus as well as all the other Pharisees and Jewish leaders should have known that very well.

You are welcome to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.

2Ki 5:13 Then his servants approached and spoke to him, saying, “My father, had the prophet told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it? How much more then, when he says to you, ‘Wash, and be clean’?”
2Ki 5:14 So he went down and dipped himself in the Jordan seven times, in accordance with the word of the man of God; and his flesh was restored like the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.

Naaman was not baptized, he simple dipped himself seven time in the Jordan. Furthermore, there isn't anything in the passage that supports your view.
 

Kade Rystalmane

Active member
You are welcome to your own opinion, but not to your own facts.

2Ki 5:13 Then his servants approached and spoke to him, saying, “My father, had the prophet told you to do some great thing, would you not have done it? How much more then, when he says to you, ‘Wash, and be clean’?”
2Ki 5:14 So he went down and dipped himself in the Jordan seven times, in accordance with the word of the man of God; and his flesh was restored like the flesh of a little child, and he was clean.

Naaman was not baptized, he simple dipped himself seven time in the Jordan. Furthermore, there isn't anything in the passage that supports your view.
As you wish.
 

all4Him

Active member
I believe that:

1) The gospel message absolutely includes baptism. The gospel message at its core is the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ. In Romans 6:3-18 we see that for one to get into Christ where all spiritual blessings are found and to be free from sin, one must conform to the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ in baptism. To reject baptism as anything but a show (an outward sign) is to deny how we partake in the gospel itself.

2) I believe that Jesus, in Matthew 28:19, is telling them to teach people of all nations. It's a broad command with the specifics to follow as to how that is to be done. You teach them the basics about sin and the gospel, you immerse them in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit, then you keep teaching them everything Jesus revealed to mankind. Matthew 28:19 isn't about downplaying the importance of water immersion. It's actually highlighting its importance. In Mark 16:15-16 we see a parallel idea. Go teach all nations. He that believes what is taught and is immersed shall be saved. What does it take to be saved? Believing what was taught and being immersed. If they refuse to believe what is taught, they won't be saved because they will have no reason to be immersed.

In Truth and Love.

You like to put your own spin on scripture. Matthew 28:19 in its context is simple.

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.
Mat 28:19 “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to follow all that I commanded you; and behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

The first command is to make disciples, second is to baptize them, and third is to teach them to follow all that I commanded you. This progression is seen throughout the NT scriptures.

Act 16:30 and after he brought them out, he said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
Act 16:31 They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”
Act 16:32 And they spoke the word of God to him together with all who were in his house.
Act 16:33 And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household.

Why would Paul tell them to believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved, and not believe and be baptize and speak in tongues to be saved?
 

Kade Rystalmane

Active member
You like to put your own spin on scripture. Matthew 28:19 in its context is simple.

Mat 28:18 And Jesus came up and spoke to them, saying, “All authority in heaven and on earth has been given to Me.
Mat 28:19 “Go, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and the Son and the Holy Spirit,
Mat 28:20 teaching them to follow all that I commanded you; and behold, I am with you always, to the end of the age.”

The first command is to make disciples, second is to baptize them, and third is to teach them to follow all that I commanded you. This progression is seen throughout the NT scriptures.

Act 16:30 and after he brought them out, he said, “Sirs, what must I do to be saved?”
Act 16:31 They said, “Believe in the Lord Jesus, and you will be saved, you and your household.”
Act 16:32 And they spoke the word of God to him together with all who were in his house.
Act 16:33 And he took them that very hour of the night and washed their wounds, and immediately he was baptized, he and all his household.

Why would Paul tell them to believe in the Lord Jesus and you will be saved, and not believe and be baptize and speak in tongues to be saved?
Because part of the faith (Jude 3) that they are believing includes water immersion. Peter used the word epirotema in 1 Peter 3:21. It means "the answer to that which is demanded". If the gospel says be immersed in water (Acts 8:36) by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:13) according to the Word (Eph. 5:26) into Christ (Gal. 3;26-27) to have your sins washed away (Acts 22:16) and the jailor and those under his charge believed the gospel message, that belief demands (epirotema) obedience to the gospel (Romans 6:16-18) and so should save them.

That doesn't mean that they can't believe it and then refuse to act (dead faith - James 2), but if their belief is a living faith, it will.

Note especially in Galatians 3:24-27 what Paul says:

24 Wherefore the law was our schoolmaster to bring us unto Christ, that we might be justified by faith.
25 But after that faith is come, we are no longer under a schoolmaster.
26 For ye are all the children of God by faith in Christ Jesus.
27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

The law here is the law of Moses, the Old Testament, was a tutor to help us understand Christ (I mentioned that before in the types and antitypes). Paul writes "but after that faith is come". This is not individual faith, but the faith system that is the gospel, the law of Christ, the New Testament, Matthew - Revelation as it is arranged in most of our Bibles. Once that faith arrived, we were no longer under the tutor. The New Testament went into effect at the death of the testator (Heb. 9:16).

Then Paul writes that the Christians at Galatia were children of God by faith in Christ Jesus. Immediately after that he writes FOR (a conclusion drawing on the previous statement) as many of you as have been immersed into Christ have put on Christ. He explicitly ties faith and immersion together with regard being in Christ and being children of God. Faith saves us and part of that faith is obedience by being immersed in water. This is the difference between a dead faith - which is faith alone by definition, and a living faith - which is faith and works together in tandem.

Those who argue for salvation by faith before and without works are arguing for salvation by a dead faith - by definition. The only recourse they have is to redefine the terms and deny what James explicitly writes. Deny what Paul has written in multiple places. Deny what Jesus has said on multiple occasions. Nowhere does the Bible say faith alone saves you. There are multiple places where things other than faith are said to save you. Reading the Bible as an aggregate whole demands that it is much more than faith by itself that saves.

Faith does save. It saves when it is realized in actions that God has commanded we complete before He saves us.

"Not everyone that says unto me, Lord, Lord shall enter into the kingdom of Heaven, but he that doeth the will of My Father which is in Heaven."

Faith only vs a faith coupled with works in a single sentence from the mouth of the Savior directly.

In Truth and Love.
 

all4Him

Active member
Because part of the faith (Jude 3) that they are believing includes water immersion. Peter used the word epirotema in 1 Peter 3:21. It means "the answer to that which is demanded". If the gospel says be immersed in water (Acts 8:36) by the Holy Spirit (1 Cor. 12:13) according to the Word (Eph. 5:26) into Christ (Gal. 3;26-27) to have your sins washed away (Acts 22:16) and the jailor and those under his charge believed the gospel message, that belief demands (epirotema) obedience to the gospel (Romans 6:16-18) and so should save them.

Please explain Jude 3?

Act 8:36 As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch *said, "Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?"
Act 8:37 [And Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."]
Act 8:38 And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him.
 

Kade Rystalmane

Active member
Please explain Jude 3?
Jude verse 3 says that "the faith", singular meaning the system of faith, the doctrines that comprise what Jesus taught. As opposed to individual faith.
Act 8:36 As they went along the road they came to some water; and the eunuch *said, "Look! Water! What prevents me from being baptized?"
Act 8:37 [And Philip said, "If you believe with all your heart, you may." And he answered and said, "I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God."]
Act 8:38 And he ordered the chariot to stop; and they both went down into the water, Philip as well as the eunuch, and he baptized him.
Yes. The faith includes water immersion. If you believe (living faith) you will demand to be immersed in order to be saved.
 

all4Him

Active member
Jude verse 3 says that "the faith", singular meaning the system of faith, the doctrines that comprise what Jesus taught. As opposed to individual faith.

Yes. The faith includes water immersion. If you believe (living faith) you will demand to be immersed in order to be saved.

Apparently, Paul did not get the memo on faith includes baptism for salvation. In the below scriptures Paul emphatically states that when a person believes in their heart that God raised Him (Jesus) from the dead, YOU WILL BE SAVED. Paul already stated that Christ did not send him to baptize but to preach the gospel, and that is exactly what we read in Romans 10.

Rom 10:8 But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART"—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching,
Rom 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;
Rom 10:10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.
Rom 10:11 For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."
Rom 10:12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him;
Rom 10:13 for "WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED."

If baptism is required for salvation, the order in which the steps to obtain salvation would not matter.

You missed the purpose of Jude 1:3.
 

Kade Rystalmane

Active member
Apparently, Paul did not get the memo
Are you able to discuss the Bible without snark?
on faith includes baptism for salvation. In the below scriptures Paul emphatically states that when a person believe in your heart God raised Him from the dead, YOU WILL BE SAVED. Paul already stated that Christ did not send him to baptize but to preach the gospel, and that is exactly what we read in Romans 10.

Rom 10:8 But what does it say? "THE WORD IS NEAR YOU, IN YOUR MOUTH AND IN YOUR HEART"—that is, the word of faith which we are preaching,
Rom 10:9 that if you confess with your mouth Jesus as Lord, and believe in your heart that God raised Him from the dead, you will be saved;
Rom 10:10 for with the heart a person believes, resulting in righteousness, and with the mouth he confesses, resulting in salvation.
Rom 10:11 For the Scripture says, "WHOEVER BELIEVES IN HIM WILL NOT BE DISAPPOINTED."
Rom 10:12 For there is no distinction between Jew and Greek; for the same Lord is Lord of all, abounding in riches for all who call on Him;
Rom 10:13 for "WHOEVER WILL CALL ON THE NAME OF THE LORD WILL BE SAVED."

If baptism is required for salvation, the order in which the steps to obtain salvation would not matter.
Paul had just finished writing chapter 6 before this point.

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 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.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.

16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.
Paul does not contradict Paul. Paul is in harmony with Paul as with all other scripture. Water immersion is part of that living, saving faith. Without it, the faith is dead and does nothing, being alone.

In Truth and Love.
 

all4Him

Active member
Are you able to discuss the Bible without snark?

Paul had just finished writing chapter 6 before this point.

3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?
4 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.
5 For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:
6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.
7 For he that is dead is freed from sin.
16 Know ye not, that to whom ye yield yourselves servants to obey, his servants ye are to whom ye obey; whether of sin unto death, or of obedience unto righteousness?
17 But God be thanked, that ye were the servants of sin, but ye have obeyed from the heart that form of doctrine which was delivered you.
18 Being then made free from sin, ye became the servants of righteousness.
Paul does not contradict Paul. Paul is in harmony with Paul as with all other scripture. Water immersion is part of that living, saving faith. Without it, the faith is dead and does nothing, being alone.

In Truth and Love.

Paul explained in more detail the spiritual basis for his abrupt declaration, “We died to sin” (Rom_6:2). Whether the Roman Christians knew it or not, the fact is that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death. The question here is whether Paul had in mind Spirit baptism (1Co_12:13) or water baptism. Some object to taking Rom_6:3 as Spirit baptism because that verse speaks of being “baptized into Christ” whereas 1Co_12:13 speaks of Spirit baptism placing the believer into Christ’s body. Of course, both are true: the believer is “baptized” (placed into) Christ and also into the body of Christ, and both are done by the Holy Spirit.

A.T. Robertson: Were baptized into Christ (ebaptisthēmen eis Christon). First aorist passive indicative of baptizō. Better, “were baptized unto Christ or in Christ.” The translation “into” makes Paul say that the union with Christ was brought to pass by means of baptism, which is not his idea, for Paul was not a sacramentarian. Eis is at bottom the same word as en. Baptism is the public proclamation of one’s inward spiritual relation to Christ attained before the baptism. See note on Gal_3:27 where it is like putting on an outward garment or uniform.
 
Last edited:

Kade Rystalmane

Active member
Paul explained in more detail the spiritual basis for his abrupt declaration, “We died to sin” (Rom_6:2). Whether the Roman Christians knew it or not, the fact is that all of us who were baptized into Christ Jesus were baptized into His death. The question here is whether Paul had in mind Spirit baptism (1Co_12:13) or water baptism. Some object to taking Rom_6:3 as Spirit baptism because that verse speaks of being “baptized into Christ” whereas 1Co_12:13 speaks of Spirit baptism placing the believer into Christ’s body. Of course, both are true: the believer is “baptized” (placed into) Christ and also into the body of Christ, and both are done by the Holy Spirit.
The immersion of Romans 6 is something that can be obeyed. Water immersion is a type of immersion that can be obeyed. Please explain how one "obeys from the heart" immersion in the Holy Spirit?
A.T. Robertson: Were baptized into Christ (ebaptisthēmen eis Christon). First aorist passive indicative of baptizō. Better, “were baptized unto Christ or in Christ.” The translation “into” makes Paul say that the union with Christ was brought to pass by means of baptism, which is not his idea, for Paul was not a sacramentarian. Eis is at bottom the same word as en. Baptism is the public proclamation of one’s inward spiritual relation to Christ attained before the baptism. See note on Gal_3:27 where it is like putting on an outward garment or uniform.
That is pure eisegesis. I do not accept the authority of A.T. Robertson.
 
Last edited:

all4Him

Active member
The immersion of Romans 6 is something that can be obeyed. Water immersion is a type of immersion that can be obeyed. Please explain how one "obeys from the heart" immersion in the Holy Spirit?

That is pure eisegesis. I do not accept the authority of A.T. Robertson.
You would if he agreed with your view. Besides the entire Oneness doctrine is pure eisegesis.

Tell me Kade, do you find anyone arguing for or against modalism before the late second century or early third century? I don’t see anything, so are we accept that the modalist doctrine was lost within one or two generations after the apostles without anyone noticing it or raising one objecting voice against it? We just don’t see Oneness doctrine of any kind being taught by any church leader who followed the apostles. Where did the Oneness doctrine go after the apostles died?
 

Kade Rystalmane

Active member
You would if he agreed with your view. Besides the entire Oneness doctrine is pure eisegesis.

Tell me Kade, do you find anyone arguing for or against modalism before the late second century or early third century? I don’t see anything, so are we accept that the modalist doctrine was lost within one or two generations after the apostles without anyone noticing it or raising one objecting voice against it? We just don’t see Oneness doctrine of any kind being taught by any church leader who followed the apostles. Where did the Oneness doctrine go after the apostles died?
I have no intetest in an extra-Biblical conversation. It is abount uninspired things and irrelevant.
 

all4Him

Active member
Is it because it will expose that your doctrine is extra-biblical? And it is extremely relevant since it will show that the disciples and those immediately following them were not modalist. Your eternal salvation rest on you serving the real Jesus.
 

all4Him

Active member
If you say so.

Kade, this is serious. Your eternal salvation rest on the truth. All I want to do in here is point out facts. Fact - the teaching of the Christian leaders who immediately following the apostles are very relevant to any biblical doctrine. If we examine the teaching of the earliest post-apostolic fathers, it will provide very relevant information as to the original apostolic teaching, whether or not if Jesus is indeed Himself the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Oneness do claim they alone possess the original teaching of the apostles. If this is true, those who followed would have continued this teaching. It might be irrelevant to you, but it is very relevant to your eternal salvation. A study of the earliest post-apostolic writing will settle this for you. Here are just a few.

The Shepherd of Hermas (Sim. 89:2)

"The Son of God is far older that all His creation, with the result that he was the Father's counselor in his creation."

Barnabas 5:5

There is yet this also, my brethren; if the Lord endured to suffer
for our souls, though He was Lord of the whole world, unto whom God
said from the foundation of the world, Let us make man after our
image and likeness
, how then did He endure to suffer at the hand
of men?

Irenaeus Against Heresies IV. preface

Now man is a mixed organization of soul and flesh, who was formed after the likeness of God, and moulded by His hands, that is, by the Son and Holy Spirit, to whom also He said, "Let Us make man."

The post-apostolic father were not modelist.
 

Kade Rystalmane

Active member
Kade, this is serious. Your eternal salvation rest on the truth. All I want to do in here is point out facts. Fact - the teaching of the Christian leaders who immediately following the apostles are very relevant to any biblical doctrine.
No. They aren't. They are uninspired and hold no authority in spiritual matters. Only the word of God itself is authoritative.
If we examine the teaching of the earliest post-apostolic fathers, it will provide very relevant information as to the original apostolic teaching, whether or not if Jesus is indeed Himself the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit. Oneness do claim they alone possess the original teaching of the apostles. If this is true, those who followed would have continued this teaching. It might be irrelevant to you, but it is very relevant to your eternal salvation. A study of the earliest post-apostolic writing will settle this for you. Here are just a few.

The Shepherd of Hermas (Sim. 89:2)

"The Son of God is far older that all His creation, with the result that he was the Father's counselor in his creation."

Barnabas 5:5

There is yet this also, my brethren; if the Lord endured to suffer
for our souls, though He was Lord of the whole world, unto whom God
said from the foundation of the world, Let us make man after our
image and likeness
, how then did He endure to suffer at the hand
of men?

Irenaeus Against Heresies IV. preface

Now man is a mixed organization of soul and flesh, who was formed after the likeness of God, and moulded by His hands, that is, by the Son and Holy Spirit, to whom also He said, "Let Us make man."

The post-apostolic father were not modelist.
I don't even know what this has to do with me as I'm not a Oneness believer. I believe in the Trinity. One God, three distinct persons.

The Father is God but not the Son or Holy Ghost.
The Son is God but not the Father or Holy Ghost.
The Holy Ghost is God but not the Father or Son.

My original post in this thread was talking about 1 Corinthians 1 and the difference between the importance of being immersed and the relative unimportance of what human does the immersing.

I do appreciate your concern for my soul, but on this issue of the persons of the Godhead, I think we are in agreement.

In Truth and Love.
 
Top