Their actions of water baptism in this case is an act of obedience which only a person who is already born again can perform (Acts 8:36-37). In any and all cases of water baptism, salvation is established which means the Holy Spirit has been received.

That's not what it says.  Peter tells them to repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus for the forgiveness of their sins and they WILL receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.  You're saying they already received it, why would Peter be redundant?  Answer: he wasn't being redundant.

an act of obedience which only a person who is already born again can perform

That's not scriptural.  Where in the Bible do you have proof of this?  In fact, the Bible says the opposite.  Acts 5:32 says the Spirit is given to those who obey.  Not before, afterward.

If a person believes the burden of salvation is on themselves, then they are already lost.  That's clear.  Those who SUBMIT and SUBJECT themselves to being baptized BECAUSE of their faith in Christ are people who do not believe the burden of salvation is on themselves.

As for your views on Acts, I've already gone to great lengths to explain, in CONTEXT, what they're saying, using scripture to do so.

But hey, you want to hang your hat on Holy Spirit baptism even though I can guarantee that you did not experience the same thing as the Apostles at Pentecost and the Gentiles at Caesarea because you do not have any miraculous powers.  The people who did receive Spirit baptism did have miraculous powers.  Just more evidence on top of what I've already demonstrated scripturally.

in CONTEXT, what they're saying, using scripture to do so.  no you haven't. you make comments that no one is saved by faith only, yet when presented with the facts of scripture you run off. You explain nothing at all as regards context: Let's make this simple:

1. during the time of acts are jews distinct from gentiles (hint : Acts 10:45/46)  and Acts 11:15/16

2. Does it matter that the people in Acts 2 are the very same Jews responsible for the crucifixion of Christ.

3. Luke 13.3 is talking specifically to Jews. Does that matter? because this specific call for repetance is adressed to specific jews ...

Those who SUBMIT and SUBJECT themselves to being baptized BECAUSE of their faith in Christ are people who do not believe the burden of salvation is on themselves.  comments like these are irrelevent to what is in scriptures. That is your problem .... dealing with what is in scripture, who it is adressed to and its context. You talk about these things but you certainly do not adress them ... e.g. these verses are 100% contrary to what you believe about water baptism ..

Acts 10:45 - All the circumcised believers who came with Peter were amazed, because the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out on the Gentiles also. ..."Surely no one can refuse the water for these to be baptized who have received the Holy Spirit just as we did, can he?"

you make comments that no one is saved by faith only

The Bible makes this comment, not me.  Plus, the Bible never advocates a faith only approach.  Never, not once.

1. during the time of acts are jews distinct from gentiles (hint : Acts 10:45/46)  and Acts 11:15/16

2. Does it matter that the people in Acts 2 are the very same Jews responsible for the crucifixion of Christ.

3. Luke 13.3 is talking specifically to Jews. Does that matter? because this specific call for repetance is adressed to specific jews ...

Okay, so not all people are called to repent, is that what you're saying?  What exactly is your point?  That those verses are only to that specific crowd of Jews that called for Christ's crucifixion?  Are Gentiles exempt from having to repent?  I mean, make an actual argument here.

You're taking the Acts verses out of context.  Again, the Holy Spirit baptized them, evidenced by the miraculous abilities that followed, then Peter baptized them in WATER in the NAME OF JESUS just as he spoke of in Acts 2:38.  Clearly, these were 2 separate incidents and they still REQUIRED to be water baptized since Peter COMMANDED them to be water baptized.  But I guess you don't want to accept that.

who are you to tell others what the holy spirit can or cannot do. Are you God or something? this is where you turn yourself into some sort of catholic priest. You can't guarantee anything. if you are limitied in your faith in Christ, that is your problem. if you have no sense of the power of the HS then you are a pathetic Christian.

I never said what the Holy Spirit can or cannot do.  I'm talking about what I know you cannot do.  Unless of course, you prove it.  Go for it.

Communications among forum members must be with excellence and kindness. The determination of appropriate behavior is at the sole discretion of the moderator.

"This comment was removed because of your judgemental comment toward One Faith.  This is not acceptable.  "

Marco, all talk and no show again.  Big surprise.  He wants to talk about how John never mentions faith.  So what?  Maybe Marco doesn't have a complete Bible?  Here you go.

www.biblegateway.com

You're welcome.

Now, I also notice that the Apostles did miraculous works in public areas.  Why doesn't Marco?  Oh, because he believes in only the "miracles" of the Holy Spirit that suit HIM.  That's right.  Not all of the miracles, because that would be inconvenient to his theology.  Yeah, I guess the Spirit decided to stop raising dead people because it would ruin Marco's argument.  LOL!

Marco says I lie.  That's a laugh.  I'm trying to discuss the topic and marco wants to call me a "JW" and other insults.

And talk about a tangent.  Man, you own the market on creating tangents.  So the book of John never mentions faith.  Okay.  Again, who cares?  Did you know that the word "marco" is never mentioned in the Bible?  Let's talk about that!  LOL!

Face it, you don't want to discuss the actual topic so you decide to act childish instead.

I gave you the link because you apparently only have the book of John.  I thought I'd help you out and allow you to see that the Bible actually has 65 more books than just John.  Some of those books talk about faith.  Maybe you can see past your own nose to notice that, or perhaps not.  The choice, after all, is yours.

I have not once spoken to the the moderator on this forum.  I have no need to.  I handle myself like an adult, unlike you.

Why should I give you my take on the concept of the trinity?  So you can attack me again?  And after you call me a coward?  I think you've really lost it.  Go take a break, come back to reality.