MUTUAL SUBMISSION EXPOSED......

What is mutual submission? It's the belief that the wife submits to the husband and the husband submits to the wife. They submit to each other, mutually. No where in The Bible is this ever taught. Some may try to quote...

Ephesians 5:21 ~ "Submitting yourselves one to another in the fear of God."

Now, I have two points to debunk this Scripture being used for such a doctrine as spouses submitting one to another; husbands submitting to wives.

First, considering the context of Ephesians 5... Paul is addressing the Church of Ephesus to all believers from verses one to twenty without a doubt, to which he could still be addressing all believers to submit themselves one to another in verse twenty-one.

Second, even if it is speaking in the context of twenty-one onward into the addressing of marital conduct, there is still no foundation for mutual submission in this verse because Paul never writes in any of the other epistles for a husband to submit to a wife and within the context of verse twenty-one alone we know that a woman that fears God will submit to her husband in everything as Ephesians 5:24 goes on to command.

If a woman is in the fear of the Lord she will be a helpmeet (Genesis 2:18) that her husband can trust in (Proverbs 31:11), encouraging him and not tearing him down (Proverbs 14:1) , meek, quiet spirit, submitted (1 Peter 3:4) and taking care of her husband and his home (Titus 2:5).

If a man is in the fear of the Lord he will be a great leader, a humble leader of his home, being a righteous provider and protecter (1 Timothy 5:8) physically, spiritually and emotionally and by emotionally I mean washing you in the word (Ephesians 5:26) especially when you are in the wrong and in your emotional flesh, you will have a REAL MAN that is a great headship who warns and corrects with LOVE. (Ephesians 5:25). Christ loved His Church by correcting His Church. 

Even if your husband is not doing his role, that does not nullify you from doing your role as you have the power to win your husband to the faith by living out Biblical submission, by your character. (1 Corinthians 7:16). Many women ignore the heavier issues... Like 1 Peter 3:1-2 as well as 1 Corinthians 14:34-35.

The whole concept of CRUCIFIED SUBMISSION... That really gets to the deeper heart of submission because many churches (the ones that don't cut out wive's submission all together) give the illusion that they do teach/practice wive's submission. Do not be fooled!!!

Feminism has entered the church by teaching women mutual submission. The church is conforming to what is politically correct in the culture instead of conforming to God in what He has ordained as order. This "submission" is only a mere superficial submission where the woman's heart is not yet crucified and the men of the church are wrapped around the women of the churches fingers'.

1 Kings 21:5-15 ~ "5 But Jezebel his wife came to him, and said unto him, Why is thy spirit so sad, that thou eatest no bread? 6 And he said unto her, Because I spake unto Naboth the Jezreelite, and said unto him, Give me thy vineyard for money; or else, if it please thee, I will give thee another vineyard for it: and he answered, I will not give thee my vineyard. 7 And Jezebel his wife said unto him, Dost thou now govern the kingdom of Israel? arise, and eat bread, and let thine heart be merry: I will give thee the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite. 

8 So she wrote letters in Ahab's name, and sealed them with his seal, and sent the letters unto the elders and to the nobles that were in his city, dwelling with Naboth. 9 And she wrote in the letters, saying, Proclaim a fast, and set Naboth on high among the people: 10 And set two men, sons of Belial, before him, to bear witness against him, saying, Thou didst blaspheme God and the king. And then carry him out, and stone him, that he may die. 11 And the men of his city, even the elders and the nobles who were the inhabitants in his city, did as Jezebel had sent unto them, and as it was written in the letters which she had sent unto them. 

12 They proclaimed a fast, and set Naboth on high among the people. 13 And there came in two men, children of Belial, and sat before him: and the men of Belial witnessed against him, even against Naboth, in the presence of the people, saying, Naboth did blaspheme God and the king. Then they carried him forth out of the city, and stoned him with stones, that he died. 14 Then they sent to Jezebel, saying, Naboth is stoned, and is dead. 15 And it came to pass, when Jezebel heard that Naboth was stoned, and was dead, that Jezebel said to Ahab, Arise, take possession of the vineyard of Naboth the Jezreelite, which he refused to give thee for money: for Naboth is not alive, but dead."

The men think they are in charge, just like how Ahab thought he was in charge, but he was puppeteered by Jezebel to submit to her. Just like how Adam submitted to Eve... Mutual submission is accepted and taught in the church that it is "Fair", "Equality", "Couple's compromising". Feminism. Feminism is rebellion, Jezebel was in this same spirit of rebellion we see today with Feminism, especially in our own churches. I will quote from, Created to be his help meet by Debi Pearl pg. 110-111...

"God had instructed Adam, and Adam had instructed Eve. Adam clearly understood that Satan's promise of spiritual enlightenment was a diabolical lie against God. The natural armor God had given Adam granted him enough understanding to doubt the devil and resist his lies. But Adam's armor had one small weak spot. He was not ruled by HIS FEELINGS except where it concerned his woman. Adam's soul was exposed and vulnerable to the woman he loved.

He wanted her happy even if it meant disobeying God or going against his natural understanding of truth. He was willing to set aside reason for his woman. Eve's influence over Adam changed the course of history. We need to be aware of the power we have to seduce our husbands into following us into disregarding the clear, objective words of God.

Adam, the first man, Samson, the strongest man, Solomon, the wisest man, and even David, the man listed as being after God's own heart, were all brought down by the woman they loved."

Why did the fall happen? Because Adam submitted to his wife. Case closed.

Eve sought to be a god. Independent of her husband and her Creator. This is the foundation for all rebellion, seeking to validate our own self, our own ego. Wive's submission to their husbands is not the curse. The curse is the rebellion within us (feminism/control/matriarchy) that is the curse that needs to be put in subjection!

Everything was good and in order before the fall, no sin, Eve in subjection to her husband Adam, as God designed it to be from the beginning, but she was tempted by the devil as she being the weaker vessel (1 Peter 3:7) and she gave the forbidden fruit to Adam and he submitted to his wife.

The Lord commanding you to submit to your husband is part of God's perfect plan and order from the beginning. If you see submission as the curse, than your heart has not yet been crucified to how beautiful submission is. Mutual submission is based fully in emotionalism and not in The Holy Scriptures.

1 Timothy 2:14 ~ "And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."

Be blessed and stay sanctified,

FEMALE PASTORS......

So many churches are now allowing women to stand in their pulpit, even homosexual pastors are being allowed, which really shows that we are in the time of apostasy. 

2 Timothy 3:1-7 ~ "1 This know also, that in the last days perilous times shall come. 2 For men shall be lovers of their own selves, covetous, boasters, proud, blasphemers, disobedient to parents, unthankful, unholy, 3 Without natural affection, trucebreakers, false accusers, incontinent, fierce, despisers of those that are good, 4 Traitors, heady, highminded, lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God; 5 Having a form of godliness, but denying the power thereof: from such turn away. 6 For of this sort are they which creep into houses, and lead captive silly women laden with sins, led away with divers lusts, 7 Ever learning, and never able to come to the knowledge of the truth."


Lovers of pleasures more than lovers of God. Satisfying their flesh by allowing humanism and feminism to be allowed into the church. These women have a form of godliness, but deny the power thereof. They say that the Holy Ghost has anointed them to be pastors, but we see that is contrary to The Bible. 


1 Timothy 2:12-14 ~ "12 But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor to usurp authority over the man, but to be in silence. 13 For Adam was first formed, then Eve. 14 And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression."


So it gives us a clear command that God does not allow a woman to teach or usurp authority over the man. For the reason that, Adam was first formed to have authority over Eve and Eve not staying under the protection of her husband went and listened to the serpent. She was deceived by her emotions as the weaker vessel.


1 Peter 3:7 ~ "Likewise, ye husbands, dwell with them according to knowledge, giving honour unto the wife, as unto the weaker vessel, and as being heirs together of the grace of life; that your prayers be not hindered."


Eve knew that she wasn't to eat from the tree in the midst of the garden as she told the serpent. The serpent was subtil though and convinced Eve otherwise that the tree was good for food and able to make her wise. She desired wisdom more than obeying God. 

Genesis 3:1-6 ~ "1 Now the serpent was more subtil than any beast of the field which the Lord God had made. And he said unto the woman, Yea, hath God said, Ye shall not eat of every tree of the garden? 2 And the woman said unto the serpent, We may eat of the fruit of the trees of the garden: 3 But of the fruit of the tree which is in the midst of the garden, God hath said, Ye shall not eat of it, neither shall ye touch it, lest ye die. 4 And the serpent said unto the woman, Ye shall not surely die: 5 For God doth know that in the day ye eat thereof, then your eyes shall be opened, and ye shall be as gods, knowing good and evil. 6 And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he did eat."


Isn't that just like women today? They desire wisdom more; going to seminary and getting ordained rather than obeying God in the role that HE has commanded women to walk in. God's ways are higher than our ways even if we do not understand completely we are to seek His will for our lives. Isaiah 55;8-9.Through 1 Timothy 2 and 3, God not only tells women that they cannot be pastors, but gives men clear qualifications that they must meet to lead over a church. It is far from a sexist command or given just to the early church. These commands are instructions for all of God's Churches through every generation God's ways do not change. Malachi 3:6.1 

Timothy 3:1-11 ~ "1 This is a true saying, if a man desire the office of a bishop, he desireth a good work. 2 A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; 3 Not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; 4 One that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; 5 (For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) 6 Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. 7 Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil. 8 Likewise must the deacons be grave, not doubletongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of filthy lucre; 9 Holding the mystery of the faith in a pure conscience. 10 And let these also first be proved; then let them use the office of a deacon, being found blameless. 11 Even so must their wives be grave, not slanderers, sober, faithful in all things."


Are we to throw out this section of Scripture that men not follow God's commands? Should we allow leaders of a congregation to take more than one wife? I'm sure any wives reading this do not want their husbands to have another wife. We must obey all of God's Word. 


It is not hindering God's Spirit in a woman's life to not be a pastor. A woman can give a word in all order and meekness as long as she respects the pastor and men of the church including her own husband. She is not to usurp authority, but know how she best contributes to the body of Christ which is doing God's ordained role for her life. 

Again, since women are the weaker vessel, they are emotional; they are not made to teach doctrine over a congregation. They are made to be caretakers, mothers, helpers to their husbands and the church in all of their natural strengths such as cooking, cleaning, teaching other women and children in the roles they are to walk in so there can be order in the Church. Respect for God-given authority. Can I teach doctrine? Of course I can as I have walked in submission to the authority in my life: My husband and pastor. Hebrews 13:17.

I have studied to show myself approved. 2 Timothy 2:15. A truly spiritual woman will desire to teach women in sound doctrine and this is why I stay in my role in my church. I do not seek the office of a pastor as that role has not been given to me as a woman. 

Would I ever try to usurp authority over my husband or pastor? Of course not! I highly respect both of them and God has placed them in their roles to which they both are walking in the Fear of the Lord. A truly spiritual woman will fear God in what He has commanded for her, if she does such, then God will give you a voice to share The Gospel under your husband's and pastor's headship. 

A woman that teaches on her own authority is in rebellion because she is the weaker vessel and can be easily deceived by her own imaginations, but a woman that shares the teachings of her spiritual headship is covered and washed in the Word so she can share in meekness. God is not your headship, your husband is your headship.1 Corinthians 11:3 ~ "But I would have you know, that the head of every man is Christ; and the head of the woman is the man; and the head of Christ is God."

You will come along a website known as The Junia Project that is exceptionally wicked and rebellious in their doctrinal positions; feministic. I will link one such article below so that you can be prepared in refuting all falsehoods of this article when you get in such a debate about female pastors. 1 Timothy 2:12 should be enough, 1 Timothy 3:1-12 should be enough to lead us in what God has intended and set in place for His Church, but sadly there is rebellion that needs to further be exposed in all of the excuses that the imagination makes up in order to justify the flesh.


Before I link the article trying to justify rebellion I want to first address the name of this website: The Junia Project. In reference to Junia in Romans 16:7. It says so right on their website here, "A woman apostle in the early church (see Romans 16:7)" Let us see this Scripture... 


Romans 16:7 ~ "Salute Andronicus and Junia, my kinsmen, and my fellow-prisoners, who are of note among the apostles, who also were in Christ before me."

It doesn't say that she is an apostle herself, it also not only mentions her, not only she is NOTE among the apostles, but ALSO Andronicus. Junia is known among the apostles, that is not saying that she is an apostle. That is blatantly adding to the Scripture. Let's go back and look at some other Scriptures in this chapter...

Romans 16:3 ~ "Greet Priscilla and Aquila my helpers in Christ Jesus:"
So what we can gather from seeing Priscilla and Aquila mentioned together in the same chapter as husband and wife. Acts 18:2-3. I believe it is safe to say that Andronicus and Junia are also husband and wife. If a woman was married, it is only right to mention her husband as her headship with her. A wife is her husband's help meet.

Romans 16-1-2 ~ "I commend unto you Phebe our sister, which is a servant of the church which is at Cenchrea: 2 That ye receive her in the Lord, as becometh saints, and that ye assist her in whatsoever business she hath need of you: for she hath been a succourer of many, and of myself also."

Now, no husband is mentioned with Phebe, but nonetheless she was praised because she was a godly woman that served the church at Cenchrea. She didn't serve as a pastor as she is not commended as a pastor but as a sister.


Feminists gravitate to Deborah and many of the women mentioned in Romans 16 that we've gone over because they perceive (in truth deceived) that these women had leadership and authority over men. Allow me to address Deborah...

Judges 4:4-5 ~ "4 And Deborah, a prophetess, the wife of Lapidoth, she judged Israel at that time. 5 And she dwelt under the palm tree of Deborah between Ramah and Bethel in mount Ephraim: and the children of Israel came up to her for judgment."

Now, this stands out because a woman judging in the land was a shame to Israel. Deborah was still married to Lapidoth, she was not without headship.

Judges 4:8-9 ~ "8 And Barak said unto her, If thou wilt go with me, then I will go: but if thou wilt not go with me, then I will not go. 9 And she said, I will surely go with thee: notwithstanding the journey that thou takest shall not be for thine honour; for the Lord shall sell Sisera into the hand of a woman. And Deborah arose, and went with Barak to Kedesh."

See how she is still respectful to Barak, how she even submits to his requests as any godly woman's heart is that the men of Israel would rise up to be the patriarchs they are meant to be. We this in her character as we read that her heart was towards them, she desired Barak and the men of Israel to rise up and lead.

Judges 5:7-12 ~ "7 The inhabitants of the villages ceased, they ceased in Israel, until that I Deborah arose, that I arose a mother in Israel. 8 They chose new gods; then was war in the gates: was there a shield or spear seen among forty thousand in Israel? 9 My heart is toward the governors of Israel, that offered themselves willingly among the people. Bless ye the Lord. 10 Speak, ye that ride on white asses, ye that sit in judgment, and walk by the way. 11 They that are delivered from the noise of archers in the places of drawing water, there shall they rehearse the righteous acts of the Lord, even the righteous acts toward the inhabitants of his villages in Israel: then shall the people of the Lord go down to the gates. 12 Awake, awake, Deborah: awake, awake, utter a song: arise, Barak, and lead thy captivity captive, thou son of Abinoam."

Now unto the article...

http://juniaproject.com/defusing-1-timothy-212-bomb/

Notice the negative language used, "Did Paul really intend to drop a bomb that would forever exclude women from all levels of church leadership? I don’t believe he did..."

It turns into being about feelings! Poor baby is being excluded from doing whatever she wants to do! When God crucified me to Feminism, He clearly told me, "Even though you are the weaker part of the body you are still necessary as I have ordained this role for you and you have to do your part if you want any part of Me."


1 Corinthians 12:22 ~  "Nay, much more those members of the body, which seem to be more feeble, are necessary:"



This was God's grace on my life and I praise Him everyday for leading me in the way I should go. You have to trust God that His ways are higher than our ways, the ways of the world and that He used Paul to write by the Holy Ghost all that is ordained for women and men to walk in. 2 Timothy 3:16. It says what it says and we should not try to apologetically explain what God says in His Holy Word.Now, going back to the article. I am all for looking at the Hebrew and Greek for a clearer understanding of The Scriptures, but most often people in their rebellion will try to use it to sound smart and lead other's astray in how they have come to comfort their flesh with such excuses.


For example, "This unusual Greek verb is found only once in scripture and rarely in extrabiblical texts, where it is usually associated with aggression.  Authentein is translated as “domineer” in the Latin Vulgate and New English Bible and as “usurp authority” in the Geneva and King James Bibles.

A study of Paul’s letters shows that he regularly used a form of the Greek “exousia” when referring to the use of authority in the church (see 1 Cor 6:12, 7:4, 1 Cor 6:12, 7:4, 9:4-6, 9:12, 11:10, 2 Cor 2:8, 10:8, 13:10, Col. 1:13, 2 Thess 3:12, Rom 6:15, 9:21). So it is strange that some modern versions translate this simply as “authority”.


This sounds very convincing, especially to a woman that is newly converted. Now allow me to sift through all of this. We are not just looking at the word, "Authority" we are looking at the words, "To usurp authority" which is summed up in one Greek word, "Authenteō" - Strong's G831 which means, "One who with his own hands kills another or himself. One who acts on his own authority, autocratic. An absolute master. To govern, exercise dominion over one." 



It references murder because you are usurping over someone's own authority of their life by taking their life from them so it can be applied in that context. We are speaking in the context of church leadership such as, "One who acts on his own authority, autocratic." Many women are operating in their own authority to go and get ordained as pastors when God does not ordain that work for them. A woman is not to exercise dominion over a man. Period. Not, “Don’t teach in a domineering way”

As we see that the word, "Didaskō" - Strong's G1321 simply means what it means, "To teach." For a broader spectrum of the definition given, "To hold discourse with others in order to instruct them, deliver didactic discourses. To be a teacher. To discharge the office of a teacher, conduct one's self as a teacher. To teach one.  To impart instruction. Instill doctrine into one. The thing taught or enjoined. To explain or expound a thing. To teach one something." 

Back to the article, "Additionally, the grammar in this passage changes abruptly from the plural “women” in verses 9 & 10 to “a woman” in verses 11-15. Then it changes back to “women” in the next chapter, suggesting that Paul had a specific woman in mind, perhaps one that Timothy had written to him about. Furthermore, some scholars believe “I don’t permit” could also be accurately translated as “I am not currently permitting”I'm honestly stunned by these excuses. The reason it changes from "women" to "woman" is to reference to a woman's character and that a woman is not to be a pastor. If it said, "Women are not to usurp authority" than it wouldn't make sense as there is only one head pastor of a church which is what the Scripture is talking about.


And as always the excuse of, "I am not currently permitting" is a common justification that this commandment was only given to the Early Church and not to all women of all time which is crazy since we live in a more rebellious society than that of the Early Church. We live in a Feminist Society! We need these commandments more than ever! The article goes on to blatantly say this, "There is no evidence in the text that Paul was writing to establish a permanent restriction on all women for all time."


"Doctrine should not be built on a hapax legomenon". So we cannot trust what the Bible clearly states in English and in Greek? I've already addressed this. There are so many more complex Scriptures than this one. This Scripture is plain and clear in English and in Greek.



"Interpretation should be consistent with the rest of the passage under study." I absolutely agree with this! As I've already addressed, 1 Timothy 2:12 is in context with women's character in church and as well as in context with 1 Timothy 3 for the qualifications a man must meet to be a bishop. Not all men meet these qualifications and a woman certainly does not meet the qualifications in God's eyes to be a pastor.



"Interpretation should not contradict the rest of the author’s teaching." Again, I absolutely agree. A woman has been given her own role that is in context with Proverbs 31:10-31, 1 Corinthians 11, 12 and 14:34-35, Ephesians 5:21-24, Titus 2:3-5 and 1 Peter 3:1-7. 

"Interpretation should not contradict the overall teaching in the New Testament, especially the example and teaching of Jesus." As if this is implying that the teachings of Paul contradicted Jesus' teachings? Again, the entire Bible is inspired by the Holy Spirit. 2 Timothy 3:16.Jesus is God! Jesus is the One who created Adam first and placed him as headship over Eve from the beginning! There are no contradictions from Genesis to Revelation. For example, "A man shall leave his father and his mother, and be joined to his wife; and they shall become one flesh." Genesis 2:24, Matthew 19:5 and Ephesians 5:31. 



"Once these issues of translation, context, and interpretation have been considered, it seems that 1 Timothy 2:12 only prohibits women who do not have rightful authority to do so from teaching and assuming authority over men."But again, 1 Timothy 2:12 doesn't say that only contentious women cannot be pastors or only certain women with certain qualifications. It says, "A woman". Period! If you are a woman than you do not meet the qualifications to be a pastor. Some men do not even meet the qualifications to be a pastor as per 1 Timothy 3. 


"The bottom line is that in light of current biblical scholarship it’s time to acknowledge that there are too many problems with this passage to continue using it as a weapon against women called to church ministry." 

Notice how there is a dependency on commentary instead of just reading The Bible for what it says. Again, a very clear and plain Scripture that doesn't need apologetic explanation to the Feminist society we live in today. God does not call a woman to a role that is contradictory to His Word. God does not change.

Nothing sexist about it. It is order and it is what God has ordained for women to be in a specific role. Everyone cannot have the same role so we all have been given specific callings by God, not callings of our own selves and not callings that are contradictory with The Scriptures.

So I suggest that we seek His Spirit for answers when we do not understand instead of coming up with our own explanations that is of our fleshly imagination. Matthew 7:7. It's time to grow up and accept the part of the team that we are to play instead of coveting the role of a pastor. This is what The Lord has taught be by His Spirit and by His Word.

1 Corinthians 12:14-18 ~ "14 For the body is not one member, but many. 15 If the foot shall say, Because I am not the hand, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? 16 And if the ear shall say, Because I am not the eye, I am not of the body; is it therefore not of the body? 17 If the whole body were an eye, where were the hearing? If the whole were hearing, where were the smelling? 18 But now hath God set the members every one of them in the body, as it hath pleased him."

Be blessed & Stay Sanctified, 

SEVENTH-DAY ADVENTIST EXPOSED......

I wasn't going to write an exposé about the SDA Church only because I have covered their false doctrine in exposing the doctrine of Annihilationism here and exposing the keeping of The Sabbath here in the expose of Messianics.

So if you want the full doctrinal dispute on those specific issues, please go read those articles. For this article... I am going to dive into exposing the history of the SDA Church, William Miller, Ellen G. White specifically and like my previous article, exposing the false date setting prophesies of this movement. Let us begin...

William Miller is the founder of the religious movement known as the Millerites in the 1930s. The Millerites were formed because of Miller's study through 1818 to 1823 that concluded that the Second-Coming of Christ would between 1843-1844.

He did not publicly declare this conclusion until August, 1831 which we see is the same year that he resigned from being an active Freemason. With regard to his resignation, he stated...

"To avoid fellowship with any practice that may be incompatible with the Word of God among masons."

In 1833 he wrote a letter to friends stating, "Treat Freemasonry as you would any other evil."

Very interesting as it is known that Charles Taze Russell (Founder of Jehovah's Witness) was also a Freemason, which was quite common in those times, but we see how William Miller acknowledged Freemasonry as evil, while Charles Taze Russell never did seeing as his headstone at his grave is that of a Freemason with it's pyramid shape giving glory to the all-seeing eye symbolism that represents Satan. You can read my exposé on Jehovah's Witness, here. 

The major differences between the Seventh-Day Adventists and Jehovah's Witnesses is that the Seventh-Day Adventists obviously believe in keeping The Sabbath, hence their name and Jehovah's Witnesses obviously believe in referring to God using His proper name, Jehovah, hence their name.

With that said, Charles Taze Russel was greatly influenced by William Miller and the Millerites, specifically George Storrs an Adventist writer. Many factions came of the Millerite Adventists such as the Adventist Christian Church and Life and Advent Union to which Russel based many of his doctrinal views off of.

Many Millerites urged William Miller to give a specific date to when The Lord's Second-Coming would be to which after much urging he gave the time-frame between March 21, 1843 to March 21, 1844. This wasn't the Great Disappointment though, as when these dates passed by with no second-coming to be had, William Miller then concluded that April 18, 1844 would be the second-coming as he used the Karaite Jewish Calendar instead of the Rabbinic Calendar that he used in his first time-frame prophesy.

Once again, April 18, 1844 passed by proving the difference of calendar use to be in vain. William Miller wrote to the Second Advent Believers stating, "I confess my error, and acknowledge my disappointment; yet I still believe that the day of the Lord is near, even at the door."

A Millerite known as Samuel S. Snow took on study of his own to prove that Jesus' return would be in 1844 and his conclusion gave the date of October 22, 1844. This date is known as the Great Disappointment.

With much disappointment, to the extent where people were bed-ridden with depression as many had been kicked out of their former churches for accepting Advent doctrine, and many had sold all of their possessions in faith of Christ's coming. With great disappointment came great rioting towards Millerites and their churches.

It is to be believed that William Miller in the Spring of 1845 declared himself in opposition to any arising new prophecies, but it is also to be believed he never gave up his faith in the Second Coming. William Miller drifted to the background in his last years of life with him dying on December 20, 1849.

The Albany Conference of Millerites in 1845 was called together to discuss the future of the Millerite movement as many had lost their faith in the movement or a mass division between the Millerites had ensured. This meeting resulted in the title, "Millerites" being replaced with the name, "Adventists". With the doctrinal disagreements that couldn't be resolved, the meeting resulted in four main factions of Adventists.

These being, The Evangelical Adventists led by Joshua Himes, Advent Christian Church led by Jonathan Cummings, The Life and Advent Union led by John T. Walsh and Sabbatarian Adventists led by Joseph Bates. 

Joshua Himes, a prominent leader in the Advent faith tried to reorganize the multiple dividing factions of continually theorizing Millerites, and opposed factions that believed in Sabbatarian Adventism and Conditional Immortality (which is a conclusion for Annihilationism). 

Miller along with Himes affiliated themselves with the first faction known as Evangelical Adventists who believed in imminent return of The Lord, the immortality of the soul, and Sunday worship, but Miller never stopped working for there to be unity among Adventists until his death in 1849. In 1863, Joshua Himes accepted Conditional Immortality and joined the Advent Christian Church.

Jonathan Cummings, was a disciple of William Miller, but through his own study determined Christ's Coming would be in 1854 and held the belief of Conditional Immortality which led to the faction of the Advent Christian Church being established.

John T. Walsh, was a Millerite who led a group of Millerites that believed that the Lord Jesus did in fact return on October 22, 1844, but His return was invisible. This group formed as Life and Advent Union in 1848. In 1863, the group formerly organized as The Life and Advent Union in 1863 and later merged with the Advent Christian Church.

Joseph Bates, was the one who co-founded Sabbatarian Adventism when he accepted the belief of keeping the Sabbath in Spring of 1845 after the Great Disappointment. He wrote several books on the topic and was known as, "The apostle of the Sabbath." Joseph Bates is accredited with converting James White and Ellen G. White to Sabbatarian Adventism. Joseph Bates died on March 19, 1872.

Now we may dive into the founding of Seventh-Day Adventists...

James White started the first Sabbatarian Adventist news-magazine in 1849 titled, "The Present Truth" known as the, "Adventist Review" today. While Joseph Bates greatly supported James White for his work, Bates particularly took interest in the prophetic gift of James White's wife, Ellen G. White. Her many visions and spiritual leadership was a great impact on the founding of the Seventh-Day Adventist Church. It is believed she had approximately 2,000 visions and dreams from 17-years-old until 87-years-old when she died.

Through the 1850s, Joseph Bates and James White worked towards establishing the Seventh-Day Adventist faith that manifested officially on May 21, 1863. John Byington built the first SDA church on his land in Buck's Bridge, N.Y. Byington then became the first President of the General Conference of Seventh-Day Adventist in 1863. James White rejected the position when he was elected.

In 1865, James white became President of the General Conference of Seventh-Day Adventists and in the same year suffered from a stroke. His fragile health made him have to take breaks from ministry and eventually his retirement in 1880 to whom,  G.I. Butler replaced him as President of the General Conference. James White died on August 6, 1881.

Of all the Adventist factions that died off, Seventh-Day Adventism is the faction that has survived despite William Miller's embarrassing false prophecies. Seventh-Day Adventism surviving I would accredit to Joseph Turner with his imaginative doctrine known as, "Shut-Door" doctrine. Ellen G. White pioneered this doctrine known as, "Investigative Judgment" officially into the Seventh-Day Adventist fundamental beliefs.

Investigative Judgment...

Ellen G. White writes in her book The Great Controversy Chapter 28, pg. 479-480...

"'And, behold, one like the Son of man came with the clouds of heaven, and came to the Ancient of days, and they brought him near before him. And there was given him dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, that all people, nations, and languages, should serve him; his dominion is an everlasting dominion, which shall not pass away.' [Daniel 7:13,14.] The coming of Christ here described is not his second coming to the earth. He comes to the Ancient of days in Heaven to receive dominion, and glory, and a kingdom, which will be given him at the close of his work as a mediator. It is this coming, and not his second advent to the earth, that was foretold in prophecy to take place at the termination of the 2300 days, in 1844. Attended by heavenly angels, our great High Priest enters the holy of holies, and there appears in the presence of God, to engage in the last acts of his ministration in behalf of man,-- to perform the work of investigative Judgment, and to make an atonement for all who are shown to be entitled to its benefits."

It is clear to me this doctrinal was merely created to cover William Miller's butt if I may ever be so blunt. This doctrine is to cover-up the shame of the 1844 failed prophecies. With that said, let's also carefully clarify in the above verse of Daniel 7:13 we see, "Son of man came with the clouds of Heaven."

Mark 13:26 ~ "And then shall they see the Son of man coming in the clouds with great power and glory."

Revelation 1:7 ~ "Behold, he cometh with clouds; and every eye shall see him, and they also which pierced him: and all kindreds of the earth shall wail because of him. Even so, Amen."

Coming in the clouds is a specific key in the Second Coming of Christ and it honestly is a mockery of what knowledge William Miller did have of Eschatology that he knew well enough that Daniel 7:13-14 is in fact, talking about the Second Coming.

As for the Ancient of Days theory, we see in Revelation 1:7 is clear that all eyes, not just the eyes of the living, but the eyes of those who pierced Him will see Him. If they see Him, which are ancient themselves being in the grave thousands of years already as I type... Then what more of the Prophets Time who were persecuted like Christ or those of Moses' time? Every living, dead, righteous or evil eye... Will see the Lord. Christ's Kingdom, Heaven, His Temple, will be upon the earth (Revelation 21) after He cleanses the earth with His wrath.

I could explain and debunk this from every angle, but this article is already quite lengthy, so I pray with this article, I'd encourage to read other's such as this especially of those from former-SDAs. For now, let us continue onto another false doctrine...

Satan is our scapegoat...

On October 23rd, 1850 Ellen G. White reported a vision...

"He will come to the door of the tabernacle, or door of the first apartment, and confess the sins of Israel upon the head of the scape goat. Then  He will put on the garments of vengeance. Then the plagues come upon the wicked, and they do not come until Jesus puts on the garments of vengeance and takes His seat upon the great white cloud. Then while the plagues are falling the scape goat is being led away. He makes a mighty struggle to escape, but he is held fast by the hand that bears him away. If he should effect his escape Israel would be destroyed (or slain). I saw that it would take time to bear him away into the land of forgetfulness after the sins were put upon his head... As Jesus passed through the holy place or first apartment, to the door to confess the sins of Israel on the scape goat, an angel said, This apartment is called the sanctuary."

First of all, this completely doesn't align with Apostle John's Revelation

Second, there is no land of "forgetfulness" and certainly Satan isn't going there. He will burn forever.

Matthew 25:41 ~ "Then shall he say also unto them on the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire, prepared for the devil and his angels."

Ellen G. White writes in The Great Controversy Chapter 41, pg. 658...

"Now the event takes place foreshadowed in the last solemn service of the Day of Atonement. When the ministration in the holy of holies had been completed, and the sins of Israel had been removed from the sanctuary by virtue of the blood of the sin offering, then the scapegoat was presented alive before the Lord; and in the presence of the congregation the high priest confessed over him 'all the iniquities of the children of Israel, and all their transgressions in all their sins, putting them upon the head of the goat.' Leviticus 16:21. In like manner, when the work of atonement in the heavenly sanctuary has been completed, then in the presence of God and heavenly angels and the hosts of the redeemed the sins of God's people will be placed upon Satan; he will be declared guilty of all the evil which he has caused them to commit. And as the scapegoat was sent away into a land not inhabited, so Satan will be banished to the desolate earth, an uninhabited and dreary wilderness."

It sounds somewhat convincing, and yet such a critical and important event that shouldn't the Bible record such? This is never mentioned in the Bible! Yes, Jesus is our High Priest, (Hebrews 7) so don't you think that anywhere in Revelation this event would be played out before the Apostle John when he foresees Satan being cast into the Lake of Fire? This is no small theory so therefore I dub it extra-Biblical heresy. Jesus died once for sins and He is forever the sacrificial Lamb of God.

Revelation 22:18 ~ "For I testify unto every man that heareth the words of the prophecy of this book, if any man shall add unto these things, God shall add unto him the plagues that are written in this book:"

1 Peter 3:18 ~ "For Christ also hath once suffered for sins, the just for the unjust, that he might bring us to God, being put to death in the flesh, but quickened by the Spirit:"

Revelation 5:6 ~ "And I beheld, and, lo, in the midst of the throne and of the four beasts, and in the midst of the elders, stood a Lamb as it had been slain, having seven horns and seven eyes, which are the seven Spirits of God sent forth into all the earth."

John 1:29 ~ "The next day John seeth Jesus coming unto him, and saith, Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world."

Case closed for me. And of course, other false doctrines that I have already covered in other articles you can click the links to such as...

-Jesus is Archangel Michael

-Sinless Perfectionism

-Vegetarianism

-Keeping the Sabbath

-Annihilationism/Conditional Immortality

Ellen G. White's Leadership...

It is safe to believe that Ellen G. White was a false prophetess like many Adventists. Not to insult her testimony of being filled with the fear of the Lord after suffering from a head injury after being hit in the face by a rock that could have resulted in her death. I love God bringing people to His salvation by putting fear into them, but perhaps this head injury caused her visions or rather, hallucinations. Nonetheless and either way, she was a false prophetess.

And I must make mention of how much influence and authority she had over the Seventh-Day Adventist Church and their doctrine. Her "prophetic" ability really seems to be the key how members feared/reverenced her, giving no concern that she is in fact leading over them through her visions and dreams. Strange thing for that era.

On April 1, 1880 from Oakland, California Ellen G. White wrote a letter to her husband James White stating...

"I had in the evening, it was stated, the largest congregation that had ever assembled at Arbuckle. The house was full. Many came from five to ten and twelve miles. The Lord gave me special power in speaking. The congregation listened as if spellbound. Not one left the house although I talked above one hour. Before I commenced talking, Elder Haskell had a bit of paper that was handed in, quoting certain texts prohibiting women speaking in public. H took u the matter in a brief manner and very clearly expressed the meaning of the apostle's words. I understand it was a Campbellite who wrote the objection  and it had been well circulated before it reached the desk, but Elder Haskell made it all plain before the people."

I wonder what text prohibiting women to speaking was given...

1 Corinthians 14:34-35 ~ "34 Let your women keep silence in the churches: for it is not permitted unto them to speak;  but they are commanded to be under obedience as also saith the law. 35 And if they will learn any thing, let them ask their husbands at home: for it is a shame for women to speak in the church."

1 Timothy 2:12 ~ "But I suffer not a woman to teach, nor ursurp authority over the man, but to be in silence."

Ellen G. White received six credentials as an Ordained Minister. Her first credential was on October 1, 1883 in the Michigan Conference. The second credential was on December 6, 1885 in the General Conference which is the one particular credential where "ordained" was crossed out. The third credential was on December 27, 1887 in the General Conference. Her fourth credential was on March 7, 1899 in the General Conference. The fifth credential was on June 14, 1909 in the General Conference. The sixth credential was on June 12, 1913 in the General Conference.

It is very interesting to me that she received all of these credentials after her husband's death. As I already said, she obviously led the Seventh-Day Adventists as she had them all wrapped around her finger with respect for her spiritual "wisdom" and visions from Satan as they were not of God as there is no Biblical foundation for such, quite the contrary. So between Seventh-Day being founded by a false prophet William Miller, then overtaken by a False Prophetess Ellen G. White and her husband in all of their false doctrines, I feel it is safe to say that this is a false church. Be warned and warn those of this denomination, (Leviticus 19:17-18.)

Conclusion...

I must say this is one of the most tiresome articles I have had to write with the research and writing itself, but I am glad I have done it, as Seventh-Day Adventist insanity does need an article to expose it, all to its own, after all.

This will be my last article until the New Year as I said I will be diving into more articles directed towards women, to which, fitting with the subject touched upon in this article (female pastors/leadership) I will be exposing this doctrinal lie that has crept its way into many congregations.

So until then... May the Lord bless you spiritually, physically, emotionally and financially in this coming year of 2018. We do not know when our Lord will return (Matthew 25:13) so we must always be ready, living everyday as if He could come. With that said...

Be Blessed & Stay Sanctified, 

DATE SETTING EXPOSED......

THE GOSPEL......

The Gospel is "Euaggelion" in the Greek - G2098... Translating as, "Good tidings" or "Good news".

What is this good news? That Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again the third day.

1 Corinthians 15:3-4 ~ "For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

The Lexicon goes on in greater detail...

"The glad tidings of the kingdom of God soon to be set up, and subsequently also of Jesus the Messiah, the founder of this kingdom. After the death of Christ, the term comprises also the preaching of (concerning) Jesus Christ as having suffered death on the cross to procure eternal salvation for the men in the kingdom of God, but as restored to life and exalted to the right hand of God in heaven, thence to return in majesty to consummate the kingdom of God."

https://www.blueletterbible.org/lang/lexicon/lexicon.cfm…

"Thence to return in majesty to consummate the kingdom of God..."

Mark 1:14-15 ~ "14 Now after that John was put in prison, Jesus came into Galilee, preaching the gospel of the kingdom of God, 15 And saying, The time is fulfilled, and the kingdom of God is at hand: repent ye, and believe the gospel."

It wasn't until Mark 8, 9 and 10 that the disciples understood that Jesus would die for their sins.

2 Thessalonians 1:7-8 ~ "7 And to you who are troubled rest with us, when the Lord Jesus shall be revealed from heaven with his mighty angels, 8 In flaming fire taking vengeance on them that know not God, and that obey not the gospel of our Lord Jesus Christ:"

1 Peter 4:17 ~ "For the time is come that judgment must begin at the house of God: and if it first begin at us, what shall the end be of them that obey not the gospel of God?"

How do we obey the Gospel? How do we obey that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again the third day?

The Gospel is that Christ died for our sins, was buried and rose again the third day. How do we obey that?

I'm not adding to the Gospel... For I'm glorifying God in what He has taught me to do by grace.

By His grace He has died for me. (2 Corinthians 8:9, Romans 5:8)

By His grace He has taught me to do His will. (Matthew 6:10)

By His grace He has taught me to deny ungodliness and worldly lusts, live soberly, righteously, and godly, in this present world. (Titus 2:11-12)

By His grace I can do NOTHING. I can take no glory or credit. (Ephesians 2:8-9)

1 Corinthians 15:10 ~ "But by the grace of God I am what I am: and his grace which was bestowed upon me was not in vain; but I laboured more abundantly than they all: yet not I, but the grace of God which was with me."

Leading us right back to 1 Corinthians 15... The same chapter the Gospel is told...

1 Corinthians 15:3-4 ~ "For I delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures; And that he was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the scriptures:"

Christ died for us so we could live... His grace teaches us to die with Him.

Romans 6:3-4 ~ "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."

John 3:3 ~ "Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God."

I am obeying the Gospel by being crucified with Christ by His grace. He led by example! We are made to glorify Him. (Isaiah 43:7).

Revelation 14:6-7 ~ "6 And I saw another angel fly in the midst of heaven, having the everlasting gospel to preach unto them that dwell on the earth, and to every nation, and kindred, and tongue, and people, 7 Saying with a loud voice, Fear God, and give glory to him; for the hour of his judgment is come: and worship him that made heaven, and earth, and the sea, and the fountains of waters."

God was glorified in Jesus when the time had come for Jesus to be crucified...

John 13:31 ~ "Therefore, when he was gone out, Jesus said, Now is the Son of man glorified, and God is glorified in him."

Luke 9:23 ~ "And he said to them all, If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross daily, and follow me."

2 Corinthians 5:17 ~ "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."

Galatians 2:20 ~ "I am crucified with Christ: nevertheless I live; yet not I, but Christ liveth in me: and the life which I now live in the flesh I live by the faith of the Son of God, who loved me, and gave himself for me."

Galatians 5:24 ~ "And they that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with the affections and lusts."

Galatians 6:14 ~ "But God forbid that I should glory, save in the cross of our Lord Jesus Christ, by whom the world is crucified unto me, and I unto the world."

Ephesians 4:24 ~ "And that ye put on the new man, which after God is created in righteousness and true holiness."

Colossians 2:12 ~ "Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead."

2 Timothy 2:8-11 ~ "8 Remember that Jesus Christ of the seed of David was raised from the dead according to my gospel: 9 Wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil doer, even unto bonds; but the word of God is not bound. 10 Therefore I endure all things for the elect's sakes, that they may also obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory. 11 It is a faithful saying: For if we be dead with him, we shall also live with him:"

Are you obeying the Gospel? Jesus died for a purpose.

1 Peter 2:24 ~ "Who his own self bare our sins in his own body on the tree, that we, being dead to sins, should live unto righteousness: by whose stripes ye were healed."

Hebrews 10:26 ~ "For if we sin wilfully after that we have received the knowledge of the truth, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sins,"

Jude 1:4 ~ "For there are certain men crept in unawares, who were before of old ordained to this condemnation, ungodly men, turning the grace of our God into lasciviousness, and denying the only Lord God, and our Lord Jesus Christ."

Be blessed & stay sanctified, 

WATER BAPTISM......

There's many views on water baptism... So for those of you who may have many questions such as "Are we to baptize as infants or adults?", "Is water baptism a salvation issue?", "Are we filled with the Holy Ghost after water baptism?", "What does Baptism signify?", "Why is Baptism only in the New Testament?"

I bring you this article to shine a light with God's Word so let us get started with something already discussed in my Catholicism Exposed article, but since it is the easiest doctrine to disprove I thought we would start here.

Are we to baptize as infants or adults?

There is no Biblical reference for a baby ever being baptized in the Bible. In the Bible, only believers who had placed their faith in Christ were baptized - as a public testimony of their faith and identification with Him. Acts 2:38, Romans 6:1-4. Water baptism by immersion is a step of obedience after faith in Christ. It is a proclamation of faith in Christ, a statement of submission to Him, and an identification with His death, burial, and resurrection.
A baby cannot place his or her faith in Christ, an infant cannot make a free will conscious decision to obey Christ. An infant cannot understand what water baptism symbolizes. The Bible does not record any infants being baptized. Infant baptism is sprinkling water over the babies head, this method of infant baptism fails to agree with the Bible.
Baptism is being immersed backwards in water and being brought back up out of the water which is symbolism for Christ's death, going down into the grave and rising again. How does pouring or sprinkling illustrate the death, burial, and resurrection of Jesus Christ? It doesn't, but it is highly unsafe to immerse a baby in water, thus why baptism is for adults when someone reaches the age of accountability.

Catholic, Orthodox, Anglican, etc. believe in infant baptism for multiple reasons. First, that infant baptism is the New Testament equivalent to infant circumcision in the Old Testament. We'll discuss this point in depth later on in this article.

Second, it is to baptize a child into the Christian faith (whatever church the child's parents belong). Of course, every parent never wants to see their child depart from the faith so infant baptism has become a tradition in bringing the grace of God upon the child and into the Christian community.

Third, going back to God's grace upon the child, to which I have an in-depth study on Sin Nature here. Those of who believe in infant baptism believe in Original Sin in the more extreme sense. I look at the Catholic Church when discussing this doctrine as the RCC has the largest congregation of these denominations and my husband was baptized as a baby into the Catholic Church.

Catechism of the Catholic Church, Part 2, Section 2, Chapter 1, Article 1...

"1250 Born with a fallen human nature and tainted by original sin, children also have need of the new birth in Baptism to be freed from the power of darkness and brought into the realm of the freedom of the children of God, to which all men are called.⁵⁰ The sheer gratuitousness of the grace of salvation is particularly manifest in infant Baptism. The Church and the parents would deny a child the priceless grace of becoming a child of God were they not to confer Baptism shortly after birth.⁵¹

1251 Christian parents will recognize that this practice also accords with their role as nurturers of the life that God has entrusted to them.⁵²

1252 The practice of infant Baptism is an immemorial tradition of the Church. There is explicit testimony to this practice from the second century on, and it is quite possible that, from the beginning of the apostolic preaching, when whole "households" received baptism, infants may also have been baptized.⁵³

1257 The Lord himself affirms that Baptism is necessary for salvation.^60"

Is water baptism a salvation issue? 

As we just read, according to the Catholic Church, it is. What matters is what The Bibles says, not what the Catechism of the Catholic Church says. So what about infants who die before being baptized? Well, The RCC has no official doctrinal statement of where non-baptized babies go when they die. Many Catholic theologians believe the doctrinal theory of, "Limbo of Infants - Imbus Infantium" that teaches that un-baptized infants go to neither Heaven nor Hell because they were not cleansed of Original Sin nor did they commit personal sin deserving of Hell. Again, this is a theory and no where stated in The Catechism. What The Catechism does say is just this...

"1261 As regards children who have died without Baptism, the Church can only entrust them to the mercy of God, as she does in her funeral rites for them. Indeed, the great mercy of God who desires that all men should be saved, and Jesus' tenderness toward children which caused him to say: "Let the children come to me, do not hinder them,"⁶⁴ allow us to hope that there is a way of salvation for children who have died without Baptism. All the more urgent is the Church's call not to prevent little children coming to Christ through the gift of holy Baptism."

Water Baptism does not save a person. It does not matter if you were baptized by immersion, pouring, or sprinkling - if you have not first trusted in Christ for salvation, water baptism is meaningless because the individual has not done what water baptism represents: Dying to sin. Water baptism is the symbolism that we will forsake our sins and be obedient to God, born again, a new creature.

John 3:1-7 ~ "1 There was a man of the Pharisees, named Nicodemus, a ruler of the Jews: 2 The same came to Jesus by night, and said unto him, Rabbi, we know that thou art a teacher come from God: for no man can do these miracles that thou doest, except God be with him. 3 Jesus answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God. 4 Nicodemus saith unto him, How can a man be born when he is old? can he enter the second time into his mother's womb, and be born? 5 Jesus answered, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God. 6 That which is born of the flesh is flesh; and that which is born of the Spirit is spirit. 7 Marvel not that I said unto thee, Ye must be born again."

Romans 6:1-8 ~ "1 What shall we say then? Shall we continue in sin, that grace may abound? 2 God forbid. How shall we, that are dead to sin, live any longer therein? 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. 8 Now if we be dead with Christ, we believe that we shall also live with him:"

2 Corinthians 5:17 ~ "Therefore if any man be in Christ, he is a new creature: old things are passed away; behold, all things are become new."
Galatians 3:27 ~

Colossians 2:12 ~

Was the thief on the cross baptized? I don't like using this argument for those of the lukewarm, "It's by faith alone" crowd who use this same point out, but what is failed to mention is that the thief couldn't get off the cross to do God-ordained works or be baptized, he had a "deathbed" repentance that no one should strive for as it's very dangerous to gamble with your eternal destination like that. Nonetheless, he repented with all of his heart and humbled himself.

Matthew 27:41-44 ~ "41 Likewise also the chief priests mocking him, with the scribes and elders, said, 42 He saved others; himself he cannot save. If he be the King of Israel, let him now come down from the cross, and we will believe him. 43 He trusted in God; let him deliver him now, if he will have him: for he said, I am the Son of God. 44 The thieves also, which were crucified with him, cast the same in his teeth."

Luke 23:39-43 ~ "39 And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself and us. 40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation? 41 And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss. 42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou comest into thy kingdom. 43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, Today shalt thou be with me in paradise."
God cares about sin more than symbolism.

Mark 1:4

Mark 16:16

Acts 22:16

1 Corinthians 6:11

1 Corinthians 1:14-17

1 Peter 3:21

Revelation 1:5

Revelation 7:14

Are we filled with the Holy Ghost after water baptism?
K

What does Baptism signify? 

K

Why is Baptism only in the New Testament?

Noah, Red Sea, Circumcission