What is the main purpose or purposes of water baptism, and what all does baptism pertain to? Although it is clear that water baptism was involved in becoming a part of the early Christian Church, was water baptism solely or mainly a ritual to officiate and solemnize being admitted into the Christian Church? In early Christianity converts in becoming a part of the Christian Church not only were baptized with water, but also often received a special infilling of the Holy Ghost through the physical laying of the Apostles hands (Acts 8:7-19, 9:19, 19:6), which experience was not necessarily one with water baptism (Acts 8:5-17). Early Christians might have felt the issue of receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost through the laying on of hands was just as an important issue in becoming a part Christian Church as the issue of water baptism. As this chapter considers various principles and functions of baptism the answer as to whether or not water baptism is solely or mainly to officiate and solemnize entering the Christian Church should become quite clear. Following are two verses which relate water baptism with becoming a part of the Christian Church; bC-5:1

Four verses in the KJV particularly speak of being baptized in the name of Jesus (Acts 2:38, 8:16, 10:48, 19:5), while Matt 28:19 not only speaks of being baptized in the name of the Son but also speaks of being baptized in the name of Father and the Holy Ghost. As the words baptism and wash are so much alike, it is clear that being baptized in the name of Jesus is much like being washed in the name of Jesus, (being washed in and through Jesus). Being baptized in the name of the Father and the Holy Ghost then would pertain to being washed in and through the Father and the Holy Ghost. Numerous Scriptures clearly reveal that Christians need washed (Eph 5:26, Tit 3:5, Heb 10:22, Rev 1:5, &;14). Acts 22:16 vividly relates baptism to a washing away of one's sins reading, "And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord." Considering all Scriptures it becomes clear that water baptism is an outward similitude or demonstration of one's uncleanness and filthiness being washed away and of one becoming clean and starting out anew in Christ. Baptism in the name of Christ particularly dramatizes being washed through the cleansing power made available through Christ's atonement! bC-5:4

V Although baptism very much symbolizes washing away one's sins, it appears that the Scriptures also very much relate the ritual of water baptism with experiencing Christ's death together with Him, and with springing forth into a new life together with Him. Following are some such Scriptures with some comments; Note before reading these verses one should already be totally convinced that early Church baptisms normally or often involved going into water and involved a real washing and wetting (whether by immersion or pouring or both), and should be aware that Paul who wrote the following was accustomed to water baptisms as such; bC-5:5

M (Rom 6:3-4) "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." Some might believe that Paul here was largely or only speaking of Spiritual baptism such as a baptism of suffering. Although Paul here might somewhat be speaking of a baptism of suffering, yet it is quite clear that he here also is speaking of water baptism. Note how Paul in this Scripture says "so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ", which seems to be speaking of a distinct past baptism of water as in the name of Jesus. bC-5:6

V According to the above Scriptures, baptism is not only to symbolize a washing away of man's sin, but also normally was a realistic outward drama of burying the old man of sin in death and resurrecting forth to a new life in Christ. Now in considering modes of baptism, which mode of baptism would best symbolize and be a true drama of firstly washing away one's uncleanness, secondly of burying and leaving behind ones old life, and thirdly of resurrecting and coming forth clean and to a new life in Christ? Would the baptismal mode of slightly pouring or sprinkling water on one's head, or the mode of partial immersion while also being engulfed and covered with poured water, or the mode of a total immersion in the water? It is clear that in some respects submersion would best symbolize these three issues, although a partial submersion while being engulfed and largely buried with poured water would also be a good drama of the Christian's experience. Note several quite appropriate reasons for incorporating pouring in baptism are considered below. Yet merely slightly wetting the head is a quite poor demonstration of burying the old man, washing away one's sinful past, and resurrecting as a new and clean person in Christ. Who can argue with such? bC-5:8

As baptism is not only to be done in the name of the Father and the Son, but also in the name of the Holy Ghost, it is clear that Holy Ghost is very much involved in baptism. Many Scriptures make it clear that the washing and vivid change the convert can experience are very much a result of the gift of the Holy Ghost, and the rivers of living water that accompany the outpouring of the Holy Ghost (John 4:10-11, John 7:38-39, Titus 3:5, 1 Cor 6:11, Rom 5:5, Gal 5:22-23). Considering the inner washing and vivid change the convert experiences is very connected to the outpouring of the Holy Ghost and the rivers of living water which accompany this outpouring, would it not seem very appropriate if Christian baptism which is to represent this special experience, would include water being poured from above (symbolizing the pouring out of the Holy Ghost and the washing of the living waters), rather than solely consisting of a descending underneath water as without any pouring? bC-5:9

Firstly, it is possible that Apostle Paul in speaking of being buried in baptism was speaking of a general burying such as being covered or engulfed, rather than speaking of a technical submersion, which burying in baptism thus could be very much fulfilled by a partial submersion combined with a good pouring. One should consider that if one had a very large amount of water poured over him suddenly, or if one stood under a sufficient water fall, one could quite properly say he was buried in water even if not technically submerged as in a pool. Note if one had a lot of paint or thin mud suddenly poured over him, it could also be quite properly be said he was buried in mud or paint even if not submerged in a pool of mud or paint. bC-5:11

The above issues make it seem quite possible that early Christians did not make a big issue out of whether or not one was totally or technically submerged in their baptisms. In considering baptism, washing, and submersion one should consider that when one fully washes his body as in a normal bath, although one in doing so is significantly buried with water, it is not a big issue whether or not he was totally submerged. It is true that Namaan in following Elisha's instructions to wash himself seven times, dipped himself seven times to fulfill the seven washings (2 Ki 5:10-14). Yet such clearly does not mean that one cannot properly or fully wash without fully submerging, and mean all the washings of the old era demanded a total and technical submersion. Many in our day fully bath themselves by standing under pouring or spraying water without entering any water at all. Although it is very possible to fully wash and be significantly buried in water without a technical submersion, yet it is possible that many early Christians in their zeal for Christ even if poured upon also desired to be totally submerged. Yet Christians should be careful lest they demand a technicality in baptism that the Scriptures and God do not demand. Christians should be careful to not interfere with those issues which they should leave to personal conscience and preference. bC-5:18

It is possible that baptism by submersion without any pouring is a poorer representation of the Christian's inner washing, burying of the old life, and resurrection to a clean and new life, than baptism by a partial immersion together with a heavy pouring. One should again remember the Christian's inner washing is very related to the pouring out of the Spirit and the living waters accompanying Him, and is a washing from heaven above rather than a washing from below. To the writer it appears a heavy pouring while standing or kneeling in water would nicely demonstrate God's Spiritual washing from above as made possible by pouring out of the Holy Ghost and the living waters accompanying Him, while also incorporating a total submersion and coming up again, would nicely demonstrate the burying of the old life and resurrection into the new life in Christ. Yet it is true a heavy pouring of water while being partially immersed would also substantially bury the convert in water and could signify their burying of the old life and resurrecting to a clean and new life. If one becomes very technical and believes that in baptism the convert's whole body must be surrounded by dense water, the applicants feet should not touch the bottom in the moment of immersion, nor should the applicant be touched by any one in the moment of immersion. Yet likely most agree that a total water contact as such is not necessary in baptism. bC-5:19

Note the writer in advocating that baptism should be a real washing thereby means that baptism should involve much water and be a literal wetting (as were early Christian baptisms). Yet the writer does not mean that baptism must be a complete or full washing such as a extensive scrubbing to make one physically clean. In the old era religious feasts, God was very concerned about the Jews physical cleanliness, and one vital purpose of old era washings was actually to make them physically clean. The truth that the Priests were not to wear anything that caused sweat (Eze 44:18), portrays how God desired physical cleanliness. It is clear that God in the new era is not as concerned about and demanding of physical cleanliness as in the old era. Although new era baptism also is a washing, yet it appears new era baptism (washing) is more of a symbol then washings were in the old era. In the new era it does not appear that one should expect a complete or extensive washing in baptism, as to become physically clean. Apostle Paul speaking of the communion meal said that one should not endeavor to satisfy his hunger thereat but rather said one should eat at home (1 Cor 11:20-23&34). The purpose of communion meal is to symbolize the Lord's death and such does not take much food. The purpose of baptism is to symbolize one being washed, and transformed through Christ and such neither takes a extensive washing and scrubbing. It thus appears as one should not expect to satisfy his hunger at the Lord's supper and rather should eat at home, so also in baptism one should not expect to fully wash himself therein but rather should fully wash himself at home. One should here consider that although early Christian baptisms involved a real washing of water, it does not appear they demanded a real scrubbing and with the purpose to make one physically clean. bC-5:19.5

V How should the one who is baptizing by submersion properly perform his baptisms? Would it be necessary or proper for a man to grasp a women in immersing her in baptism. Or should the one baptizing pour water over women while they themselves are partially or largely immersed? May Christians follow the spirit and intent of the law rather than become bound by technicalities or the letter of the law (2 Cor 3:6). May Christians not demand technical performances in baptism that the Scriptures do not demand but rather give proper liberty for conscience and preference. Psalms 119:96 reads "I have seen an end of all perfection: but thy commandment is exceeding broad." This verse could well mean "I have seen an end (unsolvable problems) with all perfection (man's technicalities, legalism and the letter of the law), but thy commandment (spirit of the law) is exceedingly broad (having abundant applications, fulfillments, and solutions). True Christians advocate the spirit of the law and walk in the liberty of the Spirit (2 Cor 3:6&17). Erring Christians in rejecting truths that they don't like, find all kinds of problems where their really is bountiful answers, and then turn around and find all kinds of so called answers where their really is mostly problems. Erring Christians strain at gnats and swallow camels (Matt 23:24). When it comes to baptism or many doctrinal issues, are we possibly swallowing camels and straining at gnats? bC-5:20

One individual in defending baptism as a light pouring, and rejecting baptism as a washing, told the writer that baptism as a washing simply was not practical. The writer then was moved to think how that throughout the old era washings were continuously done for religious reasons, and moved to think how in our day many fully wash (bath) themselves daily for non religious reasons. Yet here this individual was saying it is not practical for one to wash oneself, even possibly only once in a life time, for religious reasons! When people are accustomed to particular traditions it is very easy to strain at gnats and to swallow camels! bC-5:20.1

It is very possible that some Christians who baptize by a real washing and wetting too much think that the act of baptism in itself is what washes away one's sin, buries the old man, and resurrects them into a new creature in Christ. Although some might foolishly start thinking as such, is that sufficient reason to baptize in a mode other than the mode that the Scriptures contain and which is the most realistic demonstration of what the Christian must experience? One might also teach that Christians should not baptize their converts at all, because those who do baptize are too much tended to trust in their baptism. Thus it is quite obvious the false trust in baptism should be rejected rather than rejecting the original and best demonstrative mode of baptism. Note the next chapter considers how that baptism in itself does not save or forgive one's sins. bC-5:21

Some individuals might say it does not really matter how one is baptized, since baptism is only a symbol of what the Christian experiences. Yet should not Christians endeavor to practice baptism in it's original form and original order as established and performed by Christ and the Apostles? Since baptism is a vital ritual which the Church is to perform upon converts to celebrate and symbolize their Spiritual washing, their burying of their old life, and their resurrection into a clean new life, why should the Church intentionally or willingly lay aside the original and Biblical method of baptism that best symbolizes these things? It appears their is no proper reason to do so. bC-5:22

In considering the reason why many Churches do not perform baptism as a washing but rather as a light pouring or anointing, one must remember that the Roman Catholic Church already by the 12th century had largely laid aside baptism as a real washing and had taken on a light pouring or sprinkling mode of baptism, and must consider that the Roman Catholic Church has had significant influence upon many Churches. Many Anabaptists came from this Church, as also did Menno Simons who appears to at times or often baptized with only a handful of water. It appears that in dealing with the sick, sprinkling the convert would be acceptable, and appears in times of persecution or other particular situations Christians might be forced to baptize utilizing simpler methods and less water, yet to make the exceptional modes of baptism the standard and promoted mode for all seasons and situations seems quite improper. Yet even in times of persecution baptism often could involve more than a slight wetting of the head. One should consider that Christians were very persecuted in the early centuries of Christianity and in which centuries they yet continued to practice baptism as a washing. In considering these things if one learns that their baptism was not performed according to the original and most proper mode, one should still not cast away their baptism as having been of no value at all. God to some extent often blesses that which is done with a sincere heart and with an honest intent even if not done in the best way. bC-5:23

In considering how baptism particularly signifies the Christian's inner washing, and their transformation through Christ, it appears that many Christians too much think of baptism as just being an official door into the Christian Church. In our time it is very common to hear Christians speaking of converts being "baptized into the Church". Although being baptized is involved in becoming a part of the Christian Church, yet one should consider that no Scripture uses the term "baptized into the Church" nor a term quite similar to such, but the Scriptures do speak of being baptized into Jesus and into Christ (Rom 6:3, Gal 3:27). The real and true emphasis of water baptism rather than being to celebrate or officiate entering the visible Christian Church, is to celebrate Jesus and celebrate the experience of participating in His powers of cleansing, transformation, and resurrection. Baptism celebrates the converts washing and transformation (as made possible through Christ) from their old life of variance with God to a new life as an adopted child of God. Christians are baptized into Jesus! May Christians see Jesus in baptism as they really should. Those who believe that circumcision acted as an entrance into the Jewish nation and believe that baptism like circumcision should be applied to infants to bring them into the Church, should consider how the main purpose of baptism is not even to officiate or solemnize entering the Christian Church but rather is to celebrate being washed and transformed through Jesus. bC-5:24

The many old era religious washings which the Jews were very accustomed to, to a significant extent were to reveal to them their total uncleanness before God and their need of a special washing as was made possible through Christ's atonement (Gal 3:24). Early Christian converts in being baptized in the name of Christ, were giving respect to Christ's atonement as the true and real washing and which only avails before God. The washing of the Jewish convert as done in Christian baptism was a far superior and a more permanent washing than their past traditional washings because it distinctly celebrated God's real and final washing as provided in Christ's atonement, which atonement had satisfied the law and annulled the need of their past repetitious washings. Being baptized and washed in the name of Christ likely was very special to the Jews. Yet possibly the Jewish Christians did not fully understand these new era changes, as they in the new era for many years because of conscience, tradition, and to avoid offenses continued to perform some washings or purifications. Chapter eight pertains to the permanency of Christian baptism and pertains to rebaptisms. bC-5:25

(1 Pet 3:21) "The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ:" This verse is more difficult to understand. Although this verse appears to advocate that water baptism has an important place in being saved, it appears this verse also is saying that it is not the literal washing of the dirt from the body as in baptism that saves, but rather the aspects of having a good conscience toward God and participating in the powers of the resurrection of Christ. One by being baptized is vividly giving himself over to God and to a new life, and has a good conscience toward God. The NIV translation of this verse is very nice and reads; "and this water symbolizes baptism that now saves you also--not the removal of dirt from the body but the pledge of a good conscience toward God. It saves you by the resurrection of Jesus Christ," (1 Pet 3:21 NIV). Note how this verse nicely fits into the belief that water baptism involves a particular washing of the body. bC-6:6

Although baptism is a vital issue, it yet is clear that baptism itself if not done in accordance with God's plan and blessing, is of no avail and provides no blessing or benefit at all. As said before Hebrews 6:1-6 appears to speak of some Christians who were baptizing fallen and obstinate Christians in an endeavor to restore them to Christ, which baptisms Paul taught were of no avail since the individuals themselves had turned away from Christ and were yet unrepentant. Acts 8:9-24 speaks of Simon a sorcerer who believed in Jesus and who was baptized, yet his baptism had no real blessing or benefits as Simon did not have a proper heart in his baptism. Apostle Peter speaking to Simon who already was baptized said, "But Peter said unto him, Thy money perish with thee, because thou hast thought that the gift of God may be purchased with money. {21} Thou hast neither part nor lot in this matter: for thy heart is not right in the sight of God." (Acts 8:20-21). Others similar to Simon were received into the early Church unawares and although they would have been baptized, their baptism obviously did not wash them or resurrect them into a new creature in Christ, while they rather were false Christians within the Church (Gal 2:4, Jude 1:4). If baptism in itself would restore and save and make new creatures in Christ, it would appear that Christ would have ordained that the Christian Church should force people to be baptized even if against their wishes. bC-6:12

Just like the application of baptism in itself and without God's blessing is of no avail and does not save, so also the withholding or lack of baptism in itself cannot condemn the sincere convert or remove God's blessings from him. The thief on the cross clearly was a saved convert without baptism (Luke 23:40-43). As said before it is quite obvious that Jesus in speaking of little children did not say "of such is the Kingdom of heaven" subject to them having been baptized. God clearly does not condemn one or save one for things that are outside of their control. It should be noted that Jesus forgave many individuals their sins without them first doing any traditional washings and should be noted that Jesus told the woman that washed His feet with tears and wiped them with her hair that "thy faith hath saved thee go in peace" without any regard to outward washings first being done. The Church rather than actually saving and issuing forgiveness to converts by baptizing them is to only baptize those who already believed and repented and who already would have been accepted of God and forgiven. bC-6:13

M Although baptism is to outwardly celebrate the Christian's experience in turning to Christ, rather than to actually save the convert, yet it still appears that baptism often had some connection or involvement with early Christian converts receiving an additional infilling of the Holy Ghost. During baptism or soon after baptism, converts often received an additional measure of the Spirit. Yet numerous times not only baptism, but also prayer and the laying on of hands was involved in bringing down a special outpouring of the Holy Ghost upon the convert. Following are three early Church situations wherein baptism and the laying on of hands were quite related and involved in converts receiving a special infilling of the Holy Ghost; bC-6:14

(Acts 8:14-17) "Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John: {15} Who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might receive the Holy Ghost: {16} (For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.) {17} Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy Ghost." Note how these did not receive this special infilling of the Holy Ghost till a significant time after baptism. Here the doctrine of baptism was first satisfied and then by the laying on of hands and prayer, a special infilling of the Holy Ghost was brought upon the converts. bC-6:15

(Acts 9:17-18) "And Ananias went his way, and entered into the house; and putting his hands on him said, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, that appeared unto thee in the way as thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mightest receive thy sight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost. {18} And immediately there fell from his eyes as it had been scales: and he received sight forthwith, and arose, and was baptized." Note although it is not clear whether Paul here received the gift of the Holy Ghost before or after or during his baptism, yet it is clear that here again baptism and the laying on of hands, were quite involved in the convert receiving the special infilling of the Holy Ghost. bC-6:17

M One should not think that because a convert after baptism received a special infilling of the Spirit, that before this infilling he had none of the Spirit and was not saved. One should consider that those followers of Christ at Pentecost upon whom the Holy Ghost suddenly fell, obviously were saved and accepted of God before this special infilling (Acts 2:1-4). Those fervent Christians of Acts 4:24-31 who were gathered together in prayer, when the place wherein they were gathered was shaken and a new infilling of the Holy Ghost experienced, also were saved before this additional infilling. Although during or soon after baptism many early Christian converts received a special infilling of the Holy Ghost, yet such coverts before this special infilling were accepted of God and saved and appears that they already had a particular although lessor measure of the Spirit. In considering the aspect of converts already having a measure of the Spirit before baptism and receiving a greater measure thereof after baptism, Christ's own water baptism should be considered. It is clear that Jesus before His baptism was possessive of the Spirit of God. Yet the Scriptures strongly indicate that Jesus during or soon after His baptism received an additional infilling of the Spirit. Luke 3:21-22 & 4:1&14&18 speaking of these things read; "Now when all the people were baptized, it came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying, the heaven was opened, {22} And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased. {4:1} And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan, and was led by the Spirit into the wilderness, {14} And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee: and there went out a fame of him through all the region round about. {18} The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor; he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised,". Matt 3:16-17 and Mark 1:9-11 also speak of the Spirit coming upon Jesus like a dove in His baptism. Acts 10:38 quite obviously speaking of Christ's particular infilling of the Spirit as experienced in or after His baptism reads "How God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with power: who went about doing good, and healing all that were oppressed of the devil; for God was with him." Matthew 12:18 also speaking of these things reads, "Behold my servant, whom I have chosen; my beloved, in whom my soul is well pleased: I will put my spirit upon him, and he shall show judgment to the Gentiles." As Jesus who already had a measure of the Spirit, appears to have received a greater infilling after His baptism, so it appears that converts of the early Church also before baptism had a portion of the Spirit but after baptism often received an additional measure of the Spirit. bC-6:19

M Although numerous times it was during or after baptism and through the laying on of hands that converts received a special infilling of the Holy Ghost, yet because of particular needs and in particular situations God seen fit to pour out of the Holy Ghost before baptism and without the laying on of hands. God on the day of Pentecost in revealing Himself in a very new and clear way poured out His Spirit without regarding baptism and the laying on of hands (Acts 2:1-4). God also in revealing His new acceptance of the Gentiles, which acceptance the Jews otherwise might not have been understood, also poured out His Spirit upon the Gentiles without regards to baptisms and the laying on of hands (Acts 10). bC-6:20

Yet it appears that God most often before showering out His Spirit allowed the labors of the Church or Apostles to be accomplished first (such as baptism and the laying on of hands), which labors God then confirmed and blest by particularly showering out His Spirit upon the involved converts. It appears that God in especially showering His Spirit upon the converts whom the Apostles baptized and laid hands upon, was confirming Christ's words, "And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Mat 16:19 & 18:18). God often blessed the laying on of the hands of the Apostles and thereby granted particular infillings of the Spirit as well as physical healings. bC-6:21

M The writer has heard of some who strongly advocate two particular works of grace, and knows that others very much oppose their belief. The writer does not know the details of these beliefs, or the details of their disagreements. Yet Christians should agree that in the early Church it was a special work of God's grace when those who formerly had rejected Christ upon hearing the Apostles preaching repented and believed in Him and received forgiveness of sins, and that later it was a second or another special work of God's grace when He especially poured out His Spirit upon these converts by the laying on of hands. Although God in some situations might do both of these works largely in the same experience as one singular work, yet in the early Church it often times was not so. bC-6:22

M Could it be in our time that many Christians have repented, received forgiveness of sins, have been baptized and although having a certain portion of the Spirit, yet lack that special infilling of the Holy Ghost that was given at Pentecost and was afterwards often given by the laying on of the Apostles hands? Although receiving forgiveness of sins through repentance and faith in Christ, and receiving the infilling of the Holy Ghost are two very vital and special aspects of God's grace Christians yet should be careful not to confine God's workings to two works of grace, as an individual can experience more than one other particular work of grace after believing and finding forgiveness. The early Christians did not limit the laying on of hands to new converts, but also laid hands upon faithful established Christians to bestow a further and special blessing upon them as they ordained men as elders or sent them forth as missionaries (Acts 6:6, Acts 13:3). If a Christian falls into error and then again repents and finds forgiveness such also is another special work of God's grace, which could be considered beyond a second work of grace. Man should also be careful to not divide repentance, faith in Christ and forgiveness of sins too vividly from being filled with the Holy Ghost since man should not limit God to how and when He might pour out His Spirit upon the forgiven believer. bC-6:23

Concerning how urgent or soon one should be baptized after repenting, believing, and finding forgiveness, it is clear that baptism should not be carelessly and unnecessarily delayed. Yet as the converts sins are not actually forgiven and salvation is not actually found in baptism, baptism is not as urgent as would be otherwise. Yet if the infilling of the Holy Ghost is significantly dependent on baptism it would make baptism seem more urgent. Yet one should consider that God has His time for everything, for Jesus Himself was not baptized until the right time. Although baptism often did have a particular involvement with receiving a special infilling of the Holy Ghost, one should remember that the laying on of hands also was very involved in receiving this special infilling (possibly having more to do with such infilling than baptism), and should consider that God in some situations did provide this infilling before baptism. bC-6:24

According to numerous Scriptures, many early converts that repented and believed were baptized basically immediately (Acts 2:41, 8:12, 8:36-38, 9:17-18, 10:46-48, 16:14-15, 16:33, 18:8, 19:3-5). Now if it would have been winter time, would these converts have simply been baptized in cold outside water, or would they have waited for warmer weather for baptism or have been baptized using heated and possibly lessor water? Although it largely would be impractical for converts to be baptized outside in real cold water and weather, converts yet could be baptized in slightly cold water as it would only be a short time washing, while the one baptizing, if only standing in a knee or waist deep water could bear being in cooler water for significant time. The nation of Israel has a very mild climate as it is so near to the Mediterranean Sea. Encarta Encyclopedia concerning Israel's climate reads, "The climate of Israel is generally subtropical, ...The average temperature in Jerusalem during the month of January ranges from ... (41° to 55° F); in Haifa it ranges from ... (49° to 65° F)" Note these are very mild climates. According to this encyclopedia and to those who are knowledgeable of Israel's climate, outdoor baptisms can be accomplished all months of the years accept for several of the coldest months. In considering seasonal baptisms it might be worthy to consider that the Jews especially performed their religious washings in preparation for their religious feasts which feasts all were in warmer weather. Yet it appears the Jews technically were to wash themselves quite soon after any encounter with unclean things (Lev 11:24-40, 15:1-27). In considering seasonal baptizing, one should consider that John and Jesus who both baptized many converts using much water and in the Jordan, likely would not have been baptizing in real cold parts of the year. In considering these issues one should again remember that God is not a God who demands that things must always be done the same way, but rather allowed differences as to fit the different needs and situations. Although some early Christian baptisms might have been postponed either for warmer weather, or to give time for the converts to prove their sincerity, yet no Scriptures record situations where baptism was postponed for any length of time. bC-6:25

The Passover affords a more than usually solemn day for baptism; when, withal, the Lord's passion, in which we are baptized, was completed. Nor will it be incongruous to interpret figuratively the fact that, when the Lord was about to celebrate the last Passover, He said to the disciples who were sent to make preparation, “Ye will meet a man bearing water.” He points out the place for celebrating the Passover by the sign of water. After that, Pentecost is a most joyous space for conferring baptisms; wherein, too, the resurrection of the Lord was repeatedly proved among the disciples, and the hope of the advent of the Lord indirectly pointed to, in that, at that time, when He had been received back into the heavens, the angels told the apostles that “He would so come, as He had withal ascended into the heavens;” at Pentecost, of course. But, moreover, when Jeremiah says, “And I will gather them together from the extremities of the land in the feast-day,” he signifies the day of the Passover and of Pentecost, which is properly a “feast-day.” However, every day is the Lord's; every hour, every time, is apt for baptism: if there is a difference in the solemnity, distinction there is none in the grace. Early Church Fathers, Vol 3, Page 1229. Note the Passover season is one season with Easter as Christ was crucified in the beginning days of the Passover celebration and also resurrected during this seven day Passover celebration. Note Pentecost also is the same season as Whitsuntide. bC-6:27

Although Leo the Great a predominate leader of the erring Roman Church of the fifth century, largely demanded baptisms to be done within these two seasons, yet Tertullian's writing reveals that baptizing on these seasons was encouraged long before Leo's time. Leo writes, "Wherefore, as it is quite clear that these two seasons of which we have been speaking are the rightful ones for baptizing the chosen in Church, we admonish you, beloved, not to add other days to this observance. ...two seasons only are to be observed, viz. Easter and Whitsuntide: we charge you, brother, to make no further departure from the Apostolic institutions. Because hereafter no one who thinks the Apostolic rules can be set at defiance will go unpunished." Early Church Fathers, Vol 36, Pages 77-78. Note Leo within the above pages yet gave permission to baptize the sick or those whose life was in danger at any time rather than needing to wait for one of these seasons. bC-6:28

In considering the subject of baptizing mainly on Easter or Pentecost (Whitsuntide), one should also remember that numerous writing in the Martyrs Mirror speak of baptizing mainly at these seasons. Considering all the above it is quite clear that already in Tertullian's time (being about year 200 A.D.) or sooner, these two seasons were favored as special times to baptize converts. Yet one should remember that the Bible almost always, if not always records baptisms being done basically immediately after one repents and believes, and remember that Tertullian although speaking of two seasons of ideal baptismal times also said that any day is appropriate for baptism. One should remember that God is not a God that demands that things be always done in the same way, but allows adjustments according to the needs. Their likely will be situations when it would be best for converts to prove their sincerity for a time before baptism, and situations when converts (especially those who are very ignorant) should spend some time learning the ways of the Gospel before baptism. bC-6:29

In the Old Testament era many times when individuals were ceremonially unclean they again were made clean simply by fully washing themselves and their clothes with water and allowing the proper amount of time to elapse (Lev 15). Yet for numerous situations of ceremonial uncleanness, cleansing required a qualified person performing particular cleansing rites upon the unclean persons as well as the unclean persons also washing themselves. If one had touched a dead person or a human bone or a grave they were made ceremonially unclean insomuch that to be cleansed it required that a clean person (likely a Priest) sprinkle a particular water called the water of separation upon the unclean person, after which the unclean person also needed to fully wash himself and his clothes (Num 19:11-19). In cleansing lepers and cleansing the Levites, special sprinklings also were done as well as washings of clothes and the body (Lev 14:2-8, Num 8:6-7&21). In some of the above cleansings and other cleansings, particular sacrifices or offerings also needed to be made by the Priests (Lev 12:1-8, 14:1-32, Nu 8:5-15). Thus although some old era cleansings were completed simply by individuals dealing with and washing themselves, yet it is clear some cleansings required a qualified individual performing cleansing rituals on another. John the Baptist in baptizing, was of Priestly descent and clearly was performing a washing and ritual more special and significant than the Jews normally could perform upon themselves. Although the baptisms of John the Baptist clearly had some relation and connection to old era cleansings, yet to know exactly how the baptisms of John related and compared to past various old era washings and cleansing rituals is quite difficult. bC-7:1

John's mission and baptism pertained to inwardly and outwardly cleansing the Jews in preparation for the coming of their Messiah. John the Baptist's mission was "...to make ready a people prepared for the Lord" (Luke 1:17). Mark 1:2-3 further speaking of this reads, "...Behold, I send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy way before thee. {3} The voice of one crying in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the Lord, make his paths straight." John inwardly prepared the Jews for the Messiah by preaching repentance, and outwardly prepared the Jews for the Messiah by washing them in baptism. bC-7:2

Although John's baptism was outstanding in how it was focused on repentance and confession of sin, yet possibly even before John's time confession of sins was done in some Jewish cleansings. Leviticus 5:3&5-6 reads, "Or if he touch the uncleanness of man, whatsoever uncleanness it be that a man shall be defiled withal, and it be hid from him; when he knoweth of it, then he shall be guilty. {5} And it shall be, when he shall be guilty in one of these things, that he shall confess that he hath sinned in that thing: {6} And he shall bring his trespass offering unto the LORD for his sin which he hath sinned...". Old era Scriptures commanded that the Jews should confess their sins before atonement was made for them (Lev 5:5-6, 16:21, Nu 5:7-8). bC-7:3

In Jewish history (long before John the Baptist's time), the inward cleansing of the heart was of great importance and even of greater importance than their outward cleansings. 2 Chr 30:18-20 reveals such reading "For a multitude of the people, even many of Ephraim, and Manasseh, Issachar, and Zebulun, had not cleansed themselves, yet did they eat the Passover otherwise than it was written. But Hezekiah prayed for them, saying, The good LORD pardon every one {19} That prepareth his heart to seek God, the LORD God of his fathers, though he be not cleansed according to the purification of the sanctuary. {20} And the LORD hearkened to Hezekiah, and healed the people." Prophet Joel long before John the Baptist's time preached repentance and an inward cleansing saying, "Therefore also now, saith the LORD, turn ye even to me with all your heart, and with fasting, and with weeping, and with mourning: {13} And rend your heart, and not your garments, and turn unto the LORD your God..." (Joel 2:12-13). bC-7:4

Although washings of the body and clothes most often were used in cleansing those who were ceremonially unclean, yet it appears that in initiating individuals into particular offices such as the office of a Priest or Levite, washings were also performed even if the individual was not particularly or ceremonially unclean (Ex 29:4, 40:12-13, Lev 8:6-7, Nu 8:6-7&21-22). As some old era washings pertained to initiating individuals into the Priesthood, so also one issue of Christian baptism could pertain to instating converts into the office of a Spiritual Priest. God's people in one respect are a Kingdom of Priests (Lev 19:6, 1 Pet 2:9, Rev 1:6, Rev 5:10). Yet it is clear that Christian baptism most vitally pertains to celebrating the converts experience of finding a new life in Christ, and represents the convert being washed buried, and resurrected (transformed) with and through Christ.

In considering old era cleansing rituals it is clear there were many types of religious cleansings. Many were focused on dealing with ceremonial uncleanness, others rather on preparing one for a particular office, some cleansings involved washings which one could do for himself, others required performances of the Priests such as sprinklings of special water or sacrifices, while some might have included confessions of sins (Lev 5:3-6). John the Baptist's baptisms or cleansings although not being identical to any one of the old era cleansings clearly did have similarities with the various aspects of these various cleansings. John who was of Priestly descent, performed a particular washing to particularly cleanse the Jews in preparation for their long waited for Messiah. John's baptisms or cleansings were most peculiar in how they in a greater way pertained to repentance and confession of sin. bC-7:5

In considering what John the Baptist or the early Christians who baptized technically did in baptizing, one should consider what particular performance the Jewish Priests might have done in performing cleansings. It appears that Moses in cleansing and instating Aaron and his sons into the Priesthood washed them rather than they washing themselves (Ex 29:4, 40:12, Lev 8:6). Yet it appears that in most religious cleansings when one was sprinkled upon by a Priest, they in washing would wash themselves likely sometimes in the presence of the Priest and likely sometimes privately. (Nu 8:7&21, Nu 19:19). In John's baptisms and early Christian baptisms the one baptizing, possibly poured water upon the applicant, while the applicant then largely immersed or washed himself. Since sprinkling usually involved a special water, it is quite possible that John in his baptizing did something other than sprinkling (such as applying a heavy pouring), in officiating the cleansing or baptism. Yet whether John sprinkled or poured or held the hand of the one he baptized, or simply pronounced a special blessing upon the applicant, it is clear that in John's baptisms the applicant experienced a real wetting and washing (although possibly through largely washing himself). The fact that most all if not all old era cleansings included a washing of the body and clothes, even if sprinkling also was done, strongly indicates that John's baptisms and early Christian baptisms involved a real washing and did not consist of only a light pouring or sprinkling. Yet numerous Scriptures and other issues as given before in this writing, reveal such much more clearly. bC-7:6

It is obvious that Christian baptism was not established to be a ritual that would need to be often repeated as were old era washings. Obviously one was not required to be washed or baptized in the name of Christ after every encounter with an unclean animal or dead body, even though the Jews by the Mosaic Law were to wash themselves after all such encounters to be ceremonially clean. Although the early Jewish Christians were significantly aware that Christian baptism was a more permanent washing then their past religious washings, it yet is very possible that they yet did not think of Christian baptism as washing that should only to be applied once to each Christian as did the later Church of Rome. Numerous early writings that very strictly and rigidly advocate only one baptism are given later in this chapter. bC-8:10

M The early Jews who were baptized in the name of Christ, were accustomed to many traditional washings and likely many of them also witnessed the three particular baptisms of the Apostles time, such as firstly John's baptisms, secondly Christ's baptisms, and thirdly the baptisms of the Apostles after Christ's ascension. The early Christians could easily have understood Paul's teaching on one baptism to firstly mean there only was one baptism that was valid and proper and accepted by God (baptisms in the name of Christ), and secondly to mean Christian baptism was more permanent than old era washings. Yet the early Christians could still have felt this particular and only true baptism could be applied more than once, if an individual fell away and again experienced being washed and transformed through Christ. bC-8:11

Hebrews 6:2-6 likely instructing some early Jewish Christians who were erroneously endeavoring to restore and resurrect fallen and unrepentant Christians by baptism and laying on of hands reads "Of the doctrine of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of resurrection of the dead, and of eternal judgment. {3} And this will we do, if God permit. {4} For it is impossible for those who were once enlightened, and have tasted of the heavenly gift, and were made partakers of the Holy Ghost, {5} And have tasted the good word of God, and the powers of the world to come, {6} If they shall fall away, to renew them again unto repentance; seeing they crucify to themselves the Son of God afresh, and put him to an open shame." bC-8:12

M If the Jews truly did baptize and lay hands upon some fallen and obstinate Christians in an endeavor to restore them to Christ as Hebrews 6 strongly indicates, they quite obviously would not have thought it wrong to rebaptize Christians who had fallen away, upon their second experience of being cleansed and transformed through Christ (even if they were rightly baptized before). If rebaptizing one who was rightly baptized absolutely should never be done in any situation and would be a great error, it is quite clear that Paul in Hebrews 6 would not merely have said "this will we do if God permit" and merely informed them that fallen and unrepentant ones cannot be restored by doing such, but rather would have distinctly taught them that after one has been rightly baptized they should never be baptized again. It is clear that the early Jewish Christians had seen individuals receiving special blessings through outward rituals, such as baptism and especially the laying on of hands, which sightings obviously could have motivated them to baptize and lay hands on fallen ones to restore them. In the following paragraph is given a writing of Tertullian's concerning one baptism; bC-8:13

"But this point has already received a fuller discussion from us in Greek. We enter, then, the font once: once are sins washed away, because they ought never to be repeated. But the Jewish Israel bathes daily, because he is daily being defiled: and, for fear that defilement should be practiced among us also, therefore was the definition touching the one bathing made. Happy water, which once washes away; which does not mock sinners (with vain hopes); which does not, by being infected with the repetition of impurities, again defile them whom it has washed!" Note how Tertullian here speaks of the Jews daily religious washings, and then speaking of the Christian baptism advocates only one baptism because one ought never repeat their past sins after baptism. Tertullian here speaking of happy water might be speaking of the fact that Christians do not need to be rebaptized because of their daily imperfections and sins that are not unto death as they do not invalidate their washing or baptism. Yet would Tertullian have felt it would not be proper to rebaptize one even if he turned away from Christ and the Church and become defiled by grave sins and then later would repent and again turn to Christ and His Church? bC-8:14

One could think of one's first transformation in Christ as being a birth into Christ, and could think of the experience of fallen Christians again being transformed into Christ as a resurrection into Christ since they once had been alive in Christ but had died. Although ones first transformation in Christ could be considered a birth and one's second transformation (such as being restored in Christ) could be considered a resurrection, both experiences involve one's sins being washed away, burying the old man, and resurrecting to a clean and new person in Christ. As the main purpose of water baptism is to celebrate one's sins being washed way and one's transformation in and through Christ, why should only one's first washing and transformation through Christ be celebrated by baptism, but baptism be disregarded in regards to one's second experience of being washed and transformed through Christ? One might say that since the Scriptures do not distinctly command rebaptisms to be done in dealing with restored Christians, such should not be done, yet one should consider that the Scriptures neither by any means teach against rebaptizing when dealing with such one's. bC-8:15

"But if, in the flesh of a circumcised man, I could not find place for the repetition of the circumcision, because there is but one member which is circumcised, much less is place found in the one heart of man for the repetition of the baptism of Christ. Ye, therefore, who wish to baptize twice, must seek as subjects of such double baptism men who have double hearts." Note Augustine lived around 400 A.D. One should firstly consider that baptism does not much relate to circumcision, and is not a replacement for circumcision. Augustine in likening baptism to circumcision and to baptizing the heart should have considered that God obviously can wash or circumcise the heart of man more than once (Deu 10:16, 30:6, Jer 4:4, Rom 2:29, Psa 73:13, Jer 4:14, James 4:8). bC-8:17

"But just as for the birth of the flesh, the bowels of woman avail to bring forth the child only once, so for the spiritual birth the bowels of the Church avail that a man be baptized only once." One should consider that baptism is not an actual birth but rather is a washing ritual to celebrate the converts washing and transformation through Christ. Although Augustine often had a powerful and impressive way of teaching, in considering more of Augustine's writings it appears Augustine lost sight of the simplicity of the Gospel and became involved with supposedly advanced and educated philosophies and theologies but which lacked being based upon simple and distinct Scriptural truths and were erroneous. Augustine did very much writing and his writings as a whole are believed to have initiated and formulated much of the doctrine as held by the Roman Catholic Church. Augustine believed the Christian Church could function as a nation of this world as did the nation of Israel, and believed that the Church should physically punish and put to death those who were teaching falsehood as God fearing old era King's punished those who promoted idol worship. Augustine placed very much emphasis on baptism, largely if not totally teaching that one is saved and regenerated by the very act of being baptized. Augustine also very strongly advocated infant baptism, even teaching that infants were condemned and damned if not baptized. It appears in Augustine's situation he often was forced to defend one error by adding another error. bC-8:18

"Be ye likewise contented with one baptism alone, that which is into the death of the Lord; not that which is conferred by wicked heretics, but that which is conferred by unblameable priests,, ...nor let that which is done by the godly be disannulled by a second. For as there is one God, one Christ, and one Comforter, and one death of the Lord in the body, so let that baptism which is unto Him be but one. ...And, besides, they that attempt to baptize those already initiated crucify the Lord afresh, slay Him a second time, laugh at divine and ridicule holy things, affront the Spirit, dishonor the sacred blood of Christ as common blood...". bC-8:20

"...who departed from the Church, having first been baptized therein; and these, therefore, when they returned to the Church and repented, it was not necessary to baptize. Which also we observe in the present day, that it is sufficient to lay hands for repentance upon those who are known to have been baptized in the Church, and have gone over from us to the heretics, if, subsequently acknowledging their sin and putting away their error, they return to the truth and to their parent; so that, because it had been a sheep, the Shepherd may receive into His fold the estranged and vagrant sheep. But if he who comes from the heretics has not previously been baptized in the Church, but comes as a stranger and entirely profane, he must be baptized, that he may become a sheep, because in the holy Church is the one water which makes sheep. bC-8:22

"Cassius of Macomades said: 'Since there cannot be two baptisms, he who grants baptism unto heretics takes it away from himself. I therefore declare my judgment that heretics, those objects for our tears, those masses of corruption, should be baptized when they begin to come to the Church, and that so being washed by the sacred and divine laver, and enlightened with the light of life, they may be received into the Church, - as being now made not enemies, but peaceful; not strangers, but of the household of the faith of the Lord; not bastards, but sons of God; partaking not of error, but of salvation, - with the exception of those who, being believers transplanted from the Church, had gone over to heresy, and that these should be restored by the laying on of hands." bC-8:23

The way the early Roman Church advocated baptism, gave their Church a significant authority and power over their people. The early Roman Church together with advocating baptism to be a most vital and permanent experience also advocated they only could perform valid baptisms. It is quite possible the early Roman Church was so strongly opposed to rebaptisms, because allowing rebaptisms would have tended to undermine their authority. One should consider that the Catholics strong belief concerning one baptism and belief concerning not rebaptizing fallen Christians but only laying on of hands in restoring them, both might have somewhat carried over from them to the Anabaptists since Menno Simons before converting to Anabaptism was a Catholic Priest and many other early Anabaptists also were converts from the Catholic Church. bC-8:24

V It is quite obvious that the early Jewish Christians who were accustomed to their many religious washings and who had witnessed the baptisms of John's ministry, of Christ's ministry, and the Apostles after Christ's ascension did not rigidly confine being baptized or washed in the name of Christ to a one time experience as did the early Roman Church. Rather it appears they in their zeal to restore and save even tried to restore some unrepentant Christians by rebaptizing them and laying hands upon them (Heb 6:2-6). As the main purpose of water baptism is to celebrate one's sins being washed way and one's transformation through Christ, why should only one's first washing and transformation through Christ be celebrated by baptism, but water baptism be disregarded in regards to one's second experience of being washed and transformed through Christ, and a second baptism even be counted a great error? In considering how God's laws are not legalistic but in one respect are exceedingly broad (Psa 119:96), Christians should be careful lest they disallow that which God has not disallowed and which rather might be very appropriate and good. Although Christian baptism clearly is a more permanent washing than old era washings, it yet does not appear it would be erroneous or sinful to rebaptize in celebrating the restoration of fallen Christians. In situations where a whole congregation of Christians largely was in error and has as a whole found a new reviving and washing in Christ such as they never experienced before, why would it be in error to celebrate this experience by all being baptized again? bC-8:24.5

Although the writer does not much connect baptism with anointing, those who do connect baptism with anointing and who strongly advocate only one baptism, should be aware that King Solomon was made King twice and likely was anointed twice. First Chronicles chapter 23 verse 1 speaks of Solomon being made King, which experience likely included Solomon being anointed, while chapter 29 verse 22 then says that Solomon was made King a second time with an anointing reading, "And did eat and drink before the LORD on that day with great gladness. And they made Solomon the son of David king the second time, and anointed him unto the LORD to be the chief governor...". In concerning baptizing and rebaptizing may Christians remember God's laws are not legalistic, and give one and other proper liberty to satisfy their conscience and preference. bC-8:25

When a Christian's past baptism is found disqualified and invalid, such an one obviously should be rebaptized as though he never were baptized, because in reality he had never been baptized. Yet many issues could be involved in determining if one's baptism is disqualified and invalid. Likely many baptisms had some good in them but also in some respects are wanting or lacking. A fully proper baptism (orthodox baptism) involves firstly one who believes in Christ and who has been born again as the applicant, secondly involves one whom God has qualified to baptize doing the baptizing, and thirdly involves performing the baptism in the Biblical mode or way. In considering proper baptisms although the way of performing baptisms likely is not as important as the issues of a qualified baptizer baptizing a qualified applicant, yet the form of baptizing also is of some importance and must be considered. May God in all situations give His children wisdom to know who and how to baptize, and to know when rebaptism is necessary or appropriate. bC-8:26

The early Roman Church together with advocating that their Church only could provide valid baptisms, also advocated that to be a true Church, a particular succession to the Apostles was an absolute necessity, which Apostolic Succession they advocated was in their possession and endeavored to prove they had. Although it appears the one who applies valid baptisms normally should have succeeded from a faithful Church, such as being an individual who has been approved and baptized by faithful Christians, yet it appears God has exceptions to His normal plan, when His people fall into error. God allowed an exception to His normal plan of lineage in the Priesthood, when He because of the Priesthood's wickedness allowed Samuel to take over the Priesthood even though Samuel was not of Priestly lineage as normally was required. 1 Sam 2:29-30 speaking of this reads "Wherefore kick ye at my sacrifice and at mine offering, which I have commanded in my habitation; and honourest thy sons above me, to make yourselves fat with the chiefest of all the offerings of Israel my people? {30} Wherefore the LORD God of Israel saith, I said indeed that thy house, and the house of thy father, should walk before me for ever: but now the LORD saith, Be it far from me; for them that honour me I will honour, and they that despise me shall be lightly esteemed." John the Baptist quite strongly reproved wrongly emphasizing lineage or succession saying "And think not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, that God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham." (Mat 3:9). If God can raise up a people unto Himself from these stones as John the Baptist said, why would God then establish an order that no true Christian congregation could ever arise in any situation or in any place in the world without it having particular tangible, material, or visible roots that connect back to the Apostolic Church? Another article coded bB very extensively considers the subject of Apostolic Succession (lineage) and considers succession of baptism as well as succession of Elders. bC-8:27

This writing was written in a endeavor to research the basics of Christian baptism. The writer obviously learned very much in writing it. In beginning this writing the writer thought he would conclude this writing advocating that a slight pouring of water on the head and submersion in water both would be very proper modes of baptism. Yet now in concluding this writing and after extensively studying baptism, it has become clear that baptism as a real washing and engulfing in water is much more Biblical and orthodox than just a slight pouring, anointing, or sprinkling of water. Yet as said above it appears incorporating a abundant pouring with this washing is very appropriate. bC-8:28

V It is true that change often seems difficult, yet may Christians with regards to all doctrines be willing to change rather than be willing to remain in error. Truly as Jesus said, the light of the body is the eye but if thine eye (judgment and perception facilities) be evil (prejudiced or dishonest) how great is that darkness (Mat 6:22-23). Concerning any doctrinal issue if one in reading or hearing is willing to exaggerate those evidences that promote what he wants to believe, and is willing to minimize those evidences that promote other than what he wants to believe, such an one's eye is evil and his whole body shall be full of darkness. God through His Spirit will help reveal the truth to the sincere seeker. Yet it is very sad that many individuals don't carefully reason with their God given minds, but rather while claiming they are taught the truth by the Holy Spirit, erroneously hold to doctrines that they are accustomed to and which feel good to them, but which doctrines yet do not align with the teachings of the Bible and are false. One should consider that the Holy Spirit is the Spirit of truth and will never motivate one to believe doctrines that are not Scriptural. May we beware lest that belief which feels comfortable and good to us, and which we thus might claim to be approved by the Spirit of God, really is only a false belief which feels good to our deceitful heart and feels warm to our proud, and unteachable flesh. How can one say he loves the Spirit of Truth (Holy Spirit) if he really does not love the truth but rather is resisting it? Note another article coded aZ extensively pertains to how one in learning the truth, absolutely must love the truth and search the Scriptures with and open heart and mind. Although God might for a time overlook or wink at man's ignorances yet as truths are clearly revealed God quits winking and demands repentance. Acts 17:30 speaking of this reads "And the times of this ignorance God winked at; but now commandeth all men every where to repent:" The two following Scriptures give a very sobering warning reading; bC-8:29