here ya go my man. link attached.

https://www.google.com/search?q=bible+way+to+heaven+pastor+jimenez&client=firefox-b-1-d&sca_esv=1ae73ec7be0031ba&sca_upv=1&biw=1600&bih=748&tbm=vid&ei=9iILZs2UEOCbptQPjN6QoAg&ved=0ahUKEwjN5-jx9qGFAxXgjYkEHQwvBIQQ4dUDCA0&uact=5&oq=bible+way+to+heaven+pastor+jimenez&gs_lp=Eg1nd3Mtd2l6LXZpZGVvIiJiaWJsZSB3YXkgdG8gaGVhdmVuIHBhc3RvciBqaW1lbmV6MgYQABgWGB4yCxAAGIAEGIoFGIYDMgsQABiABBiKBRiGAzILEAAYgAQYigUYhgMyCxAAGIAEGIoFGIYDSN0aUOoGWOgXcAB4AJABAJgBzQGgAf0GqgEFOC4wLjG4AQPIAQD4AQGYAgmgApAHmAMAiAYBkgcFOC4wLjGgB7ki&sclient=gws-wiz-video#fpstate=ive&vld=cid:00bbae88,vid:mIuqVjPvN6k,st:0

Sounds like you’re ready to get baptized.

Your path sounds much like mine.  I am certain I am currently where Heavenly Father wants me to be.

the book of john is one of the best places to read too. some things that help tremendously are praying for wisdom and understanding before you read. also just praying in general alone not trying to be seen by others praying but as genuinely as possible praying for guidance to be guided into all truths.

There will be a number of people who quote one bit of scripture that would indicate everyone in the entire world who has not been baptized cannot enter heaven.  

I guess the belief that follows that bit of scripture (John 3:5) is that people who have never heard of God or Jesus will not be admitted to heaven because they weren't baptized.  Everyone is entitled to their belief system, and as long as they are comfortable with their belief, that is all that matters.    So much for being saved by grace.  The old argument of whether people are saved by works or by grace continues.

And this false dichotomy continues.

The sacraments confers Grace. Grace saves. Grace is not in any way limited to the sacraments, limiting God is a naive supposition, steeped in hubris. It's almost as naive and arrogant as rejecting the means to confer God's grace promised and instituted by Christ. Grace is not limited to the sacraments, but it is promised in them. You don't demonstrate faith in the salvific nature of Christ by rejecting His teachings.

How do you avoid becoming an accuser of your brother if you have a mental list of things they must do to be saved? Could it be, If you do become an accuser then you are helping Satan reproduce, the worst form of sexual immorality?

Accusing those of us who take a plain reading of the New Testament, and the clear tradition of the very earliest Christians after Christ ascended into heaven,  to mean that baptism is a sacrament through which God chooses to confer his grace of sexual immorality with the devil is a little extreme I think.

Do you not think Our Lord and Savior intended for his followers to be baptized, via water?  If he did, and if we are to become obedient to Christ, then baptism is something we must do as Christians whether or not we agree it is critical to salvation. If you are reading the New Testament and coming away with baptism is optional, you really are reading a different Bible than some of us are.

Do you not think that God confers some grace (even if not unto salvation) to us, in celebrating his sacraments/ ordinances that he instituted for us Christians?  Perhaps for you that grace is just the renewing of our mind to better follow Christ, but if obeying Christ confers no grace, why bother living the Christian life at all? But if so,  then our positions really aren't all that far apart, baptism is something you must do in obedience to the will of Christ and it is a means of God's grace to us.

With respect, I do not follow the reasoning behind much of what you say. Ignoring the comment about helping Satan reproduce, I would like to speak to your question about being an "accuser of your brother if you have a mental list of things they must do to be saved".

We should all be watchful of anyone who claims to be a Christian. We look for the signs of obedience to the commands of Christ and the Apostles. We look for the fruit and gifts of the Spirit to be evident in their lives. If someone acknowledges they are disobedient to those commands and explains why they do not have to obey them, that person should be held in doubt. If they are not evidencing the fruit of the Holy Spirit, they have no part in Christ or His Church.

None of that says we are looking for perfect sinlessness to be the indicator of that person's walk with God, and to claim that is the case in what I am saying would be lying.

You can have as low a threshold (or none) to qualify someone as a Christian, but the Faith does not work that way. We have to keep our eyes open in order to keep wolves out of the flock. If we are not doing so, we are failing in our duties to God and other Christians.

- In Acts 10:44-48 it clearly states that a crowd of gentiles receives the Holy Spirit and then afterwards they are baptized. By Ephesians 1:13-14 we understand that the Holy Spirit is the seal of salvation. Therefore, these people were sealed to inherit the promised salvation of Christ even before they were baptized!

While Peter was still speaking these words, the Holy Spirit fell upon all who heard his message. All the circumcised believers who had accompanied Peter were astounded that the gift of the Holy Spirit had been poured out even on the Gentiles. For they heard them speaking in tongues and exalting God. Then Peter said, "Can anyone withhold the water to baptize these people? They have received the Holy Spirit just as we have!" So he ordered that they be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ. Then they asked him to stay for a few days. (Acts 10:44-48)

And in Him, having heard and believed the word of truth the gospel of your salvation you were sealed with the promised Holy Spirit, who is the pledge of our inheritance until the redemption of those who are God's possession, to the praise of His glory. (Ephesians 1:13-14)

He forgave us all our trespasses, having canceled the debt ascribed to us in the decrees that stood against us. He took it away, nailing it to the cross! (Colossians 2:14)

- When you feel the comfort of your assurance of salvation then you have received the Holy Spirit. All decrees that stood against you were nailed to the cross, and now your only decree is to Love. You can display your Love for Christ with Baptism, this is a symbolic baptism of the One Baptism Christ completed on your behalf. This can be a part of your proclamation of his Lordship. However, if anyone dares undermine your salvation then they must think they are Christ, because his ministry is written on your heart and not with ink or upon stone, and only Christ can peer into your heart. Now Christ has this message to Churches who think they can peer into your heart and judge your salvation. Such places want to resurrect the curse of the law and empty the cross of its power by their expectations, decrees, and ordnances. If your Church has resurrected the ministry of condemnation by decrees and ordnances then run before it's too late!! For there are many churches this verse may apply

Then I will strike her children dead, and all the churches will know that I am the One who searches minds and hearts, and I will repay each of you according to your deeds. (Revelation 2:23)

With Love, Jesse

Scripture quotes in spoiler tags to keep this post as small as possible.

Water baptism is symbolic.

A significant percentage of churches hold amillennial, covenant theology, or replacement theology positions. Because of this, the role of Israel has largely been replaced with the church when interpreting scripture. In doing so, scripture no longer is allowed to define itself, but must now conform to church doctrine. Scripture verses that are outliers going against church doctrine are relegated to either divine mystery, or 'God can do anything so here's another one-off exception'. Divine mysteries I can accept. The other not so much.

Salvation is by faith alone.

Hebrews 11, the great faith chapter, highlights even in the Old Testament God imparts His righteousness to those who believe in His promises by faith. The Abrahamic covenant (Gen 12:2-3) is mentioned as one promise which Israel has yet not received: A literal kingdom on earth (Heb 11:13-14)
Click To View SpoilerThe arrival of this literal earthly kingdom was being preached by John the Baptist and Jesus. In Acts 1:6, immediately before Jesus ascended into heaven his followers are still asking about the kingdom being restored to Israel.
Click To View SpoilerSo what's with the all the baptism and repent of your sins in Matthew? The sin the Jews were supposed to be confessing/repenting of was the national refusal to enter Canaan when Moses escorted them there the first time (Numbers 13 & 14).
Click To View SpoilerJohn the Baptist and Jesus were announcing the opportunity for this kingdom promised to Israel was again at hand. Israel would be a "kingdom of priests" to the world. I can't tell you how many times I've heard a pastor preach Exodus 19:5-6 referred to the church. Sheesh.
Click To View SpoilerLevitical priests were consecrated by washing of water (baptism in New Testament speak).
Click To View SpoilerOK, OK, so what's this have to do with us? If Jesus had no sin, why did he need to get baptized? "To fulfill all righteousness" (Matthew 3:15). Priests offer sacrifices for sins. Is the picture coming into focus? John the Baptist was a Levite, authorized to baptize (read all of Luke 1). Officially passing the baton from Levitical priesthood to the order of Melchisedec (read all of Hebrews 7).
Click To View SpoilerAll our sins are blotted out when we believe the gospel. Faith plus nothing.
Click To View Spoiler

You must be baptized by the holy spirit to be saved,  as the bible says. Anyone who says otherwise is wrong.

The thief on the cross did nothing of the sort. He simply believed in Jesus. And he joined Jesus in paradise, straight from His lips.

You do need to be baptized.

Christ commanded it.  So while baptism isn't salvific, it is a matter of obedience to Christ.  Jesus said that one of the halmarks of a Christian is that they will obey him (John 14:15).  A lack of desire to obey Christ is, at the very least, a spiritual red flag you need to explore.

That said, I fully understand where you're coming from.  I wasn't raised in a Christian household either and there was a 10 year gap between the time I accepted Christ and was discipled to the point where I understand the need for baptism.

Chapter & verse?

Dont need a middle-man.

Page 1 Post #7.

"Born of water" obviously referring to a physical birth as explained in the next verse.

John 3:5-6
Jesus answered, Very truly I tell you, no one can enter the kingdom of God unless they are born of water and the Spirit. Flesh gives birth to flesh, but the Spirit gives birth to spirit.

Matthew 28.  Its literally a component of the Great Commission.

Well said!  I agree.  Not even sure why this is even a discussion.   What is the upside to avoiding baptism?  What could possibly be the benefit of avoiding it?

You are misquoting or misunderstanding John 3:3-6. Jesus is the water (the living water), the Word is also referred to as water also in the Word of GOD, Jesus is the Word who became flesh. This is spiritual that was being spoken to Nicodemus. Think about it, why would Jesus have to explain to a grown man teacher that you first have to be born by your mother by having her water break? This has been understood since Adam and Eve. Jesus would not even be explaining this to Nicodemus had he not been born. This is a spiritual application meaning to Nicodemus and to us all. You must be born again, a spiritual rebirth as Jesus explained, otherwise one remains in the flesh. A spiritual fallen flesh. Just as the flesh wars against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh. A flesh that has not been re-born does not war against the Holy Spirit that would be in one who has been born again.
 As far as the original poster asked, why would a born again believer not want to follow Jesus and the Word in baptism? Are we in Jesus Christ and HE in us?

The Great Commission. Can anyone believe something God says before He speaks it? I can't and I doubt the disciples could either. The redemption by Christ Jesus through faith in His shed blood was not revealed until Jesus chose Paul to be a messenger of the gospel of grace to both Jews and Gentiles.

Luke 18:31-34 states immediately before the crucifixion, after nearly 3.5 years of His earthly ministry with the disciples, Jesus explained what was about to happen to him and the disciples understood none of it.


Christians bristle at the notion there are multiple gospels in the New Testament. Gospel just means good news. It's not a proper noun. That Jesus was the promised Messiah to fulfill the Abrahamic kingdom promises (gospel) is what Israel rejected which led to the crucifixion and made the gospel of grace possible for all.

Since the Great Commission predates Paul's ministry, the 'good news' mentioned at that time Jesus wanted spread to all nations was His resurrection from the dead. Mark 16:14-15 even highlights Jesus' displeasure in His own disciples unbelief in those who had said He had risen.

John the Baptist preaching kingdom gospel in Matthew 3 and Jesus in Matthew 4:17 before He had chosen any disciples was for Jews only. Folks posting here saying how we must obey Christ seemingly missed the first command Jesus ordered his disciples to obey in Matthew 10:5-7. 'Repent and be baptized' was not for gentiles:



Jesus preaching baptism after his resurrection in the Matthew 28 account of the Great Commission to the remaining eleven disciples is still 100% kingdom gospel. Jesus was the Son of God, now resurrected, and the window was still open to Israel to fulfill the covenant made with Abraham. That window would begin to close with the stoning of Stephen and by pure coincidence (not really) those who killed Stephen laid their cloaks at the feet of Saul of Tarsus (Paul) who would eventually receive the gospel of grace Acts 7:58 and write most of the New Testament.

What is the kingdom gospel? Genesis 12:2-3, Hebrews 11:13-14, Luke 1:67-75 touches on it. Nobody reads it though.



Failing to rightly divide the scriptures here forces kingdom 'repent & be baptized' to wrestle with Pauline 'faith alone' leading to several erroneous conclusions, the worst being: The Bible is full of contradictions and can't be trusted.

Way, I have never known one, not one, Christian who "bristled at the notion there are multiple gospels in the New Testament". They are some of the favorite books of most Christians that I know. It's also pretty, I'll just say silly so I don't use a word that may be deemed offensive, of you to say that no one ever reads Genesis, Luke, or Hebrews.

I would like to hear more about this distinction between kingdom gospel you have made. Jesus says you won't be able to see this kingdom, therefore it requires faith.

20When asked by the Pharisees when the kingdom of God would come, Jesus replied, "The kingdom of God will not come with observable signs. 21Nor will people say, 'Look, here it is,' or 'There it is.' For you see, the kingdom of God is in your midst." (Luke 17:20-21)

OK.  Well, this is kind of a word salad of false assumptions.  Lets see if I can untangle it a bit.

1 - You may note that Matthew 28 isnt the only time Jesus commanded baptism.  In fact in John 4 we see Jesus' disciples already baptizing before the crucifixion.  Not to mention Matthew 28's parallel passage in Mark 16.  It’s a shame that has to be pointed out, I mean how many times does Jesus need to say something before it counts?

B - The bifurcation you’re making with “kingdom gospel” is really weird and not supported by the text at all.  I mean, if you’re worried about people thinking there are contradictions in the Bible perhaps you should try rightly dividing the Scriptures and appreciating how God’s plan of redemption through Jesus Christ has been revealed to us consistently in the Bible since creation, instead of creating a lot of ad hoc false categories to prop up whatever weird ideology you’ve hooked into.

Iii – Regardless, even if your false categories were true they’re irrelevant to the thread at hand.  OP is asking if he should be baptized today, in 2024.  Jesus commanded his followers to be baptized.  People who have been truly changed by God’s grace will strive to obey Christ.  As such, you should be baptized.

Now, just so I don’t put words in your mouth & we get an accurate representation of what you believe;

Do you believe that people were saved before Paul’s ministry?

Do you believe that Christ’s command to baptize in Matthew 28 is only for Jews?  Meaning that only Jews need to be baptized?

The reason why Jesus referred to physical birth is because Nicodemus asked about it first.  Context is a key component to a proper hermeneutic.  

There’s really no reason to allegorize this passage, the natural reading is very straightforward here.

It's a really puzzlingly theology he seems to be presenting, as the first discussion of converting non-Jews (Acts 10) references Baptizing them and, if you really want to get technical. there is even distinction made between types of baptism. The idea of Baptism, or a ritual cleaning, was well-established in the era. The purpose was the distinction later made in Acts 19. The Baptism offered by John the Baptist was effectively clearly replaced by the Baptism in the name of Christ. I thinks its also worth noting that with all the Acts 15 deliberation over the need the be circumcised, you see no similar questioning of the baptism ritual, it was part and parcel to joining the Church.

This thread is a prime example of why Christ left an authority in His stead.

This and many other arguments are nothing new.

Just a thought.

Why can't both be true?

If you believe and can be baptized youd better get it done.

If you believe and don't have a chance to get it done (premature death, whatever) then you're not held to that.

Jesus asked me to do it. So I must.

But if I die before then I have faith that the Lord will still take care of me.

That's what I said on the first page about baptism of "Intent". I can't be baptized into the Catholic Church until next Easter Vigil. But since I intend on getting baptized then, and going thru the motions to do so, if I die before I will be considered baptized.

Who, or what, are you referring to here?

I agree with your sentiment. I suspect we'll not be referring to the same answer though.

There are two different Kingdoms being discussed. One is a physical kingdom another is a spiritual kingdom.


Romans 14:17
For the kingdom of God is not meat and drink; but righteousness, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost.

Meat and drink are physical things. Righteousness, peace and joy are spiritual.

12 And from the days of John the Baptist until now the kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take it by force.

That’s a physical kingdom. You can’t take a spiritual kingdom by force. You need to discern which kingdom is being talked about when the the kingdom of heaven and kingdom of God are being used.



God had everything so worked out that all the prophecy could have been fulfilled when he came if the Jews chose to accept it.


13 For all the prophets and the law prophesied until John.

14 And if ye will receive it, this is Elias, which was for to come.

15 He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

You ever notice that when they stone Stephen and he says he sees the heavens opened that Jesus is standing at the right hand? Whereas in other places it says Jesus is seated. Had they repented and accepted him as the Messiah he would have returned.

Further, proof that the apostles understood the great commission to be Jew specific is the fact Peter and the Jews with him were astonished that Cornelius and those in his house received the Holy Spirit by believing. Pay attention to it the believed them they received the Holy Spirit and began speaking in tongues as a sign of God coming to the gentiles for Peter and the other Jews with him. It’s only after they received the Holy Spirit that a bewildered Peter commanded them to be baptized. Previously they had been laying hands on people or baptizing them so they could receive the Holy Spirit.

Do you believe His Kingdom came? Did it bring our salvation? Was Satan kicked out of Heaven?

I'm trying to understand if you are saying this is the different Kingdom than the one Jesus promised they would see before they tasted death, the one he promised would come within one-generation.

And I heard a loud voice in heaven saying: "Now have come the salvation and the power and the kingdom of our God, and the authority of His Christ. For the accuser of our brothers has been thrown down he who accuses them day and night before our God. (Revelation 12:10)

First you need to understand physical death doesn’t necessarily mean that you will taste death for the believer.

51 Verily, verily, I say unto you, If a man keep my saying, he shall never see death.

52 Then said the Jews unto him, Now we know that thou hast a devil. Abraham is dead, and the prophets; and thou sayest, If a man keep my saying, he shall never taste of death.

Never seeing or tasting death doesn’t mean you’ll physically live forever.

25 Jesus said unto her, I am the resurrection, and the life: he that believeth in me, though he were dead, yet shall he live:

26 And whosoever liveth and believeth in me shall never die. Believest thou this?


Either Jesus is liar or not tasting of death doesn’t only mean that those people would physically live until they physically saw something.

31 But as touching the resurrection of the dead, have ye not read that which was spoken unto you by God, saying,

32 I am the God of Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob? God is not the God of the dead, but of the living.


The events you’re quoting from Revelation are after the resurrection/rapture. Why? Because our salvation isn’t complete. We haven’t physically conquered death yet. But when we are physically resurrected into perfect sinlessness the accuser won’t be able to accuse. Continue reading past what you quoted.

11 And they overcame him by the blood of the Lamb, and by the word of their testimony; and they loved not their lives unto the death.

My understanding of the Word works out without Satan still being in Heaven. I don't know why anyone's hearts would conclude there is any place left in Heaven for the Accuser who holds the power over death (The Law). Hard to believe your view is God, Jesus, and Satan are still up there hanging out. Jesus took his witnesses (dead in Christ) within 1-generation as he promised, and their testimony and his blood kicked Satan and the power he held out of Heaven, also his Angels who were eyes/watchers across the veil were no longer needed when it was torn. I don't want to side track the baptism discussion anymore.

Scripture? Your understanding is meaningless to me  without some sort of scriptural proofs.

If you’re trying to say the Kingdom has already come you’re holding an opinion contrary to scripture.


8 Thou hast put all things in subjection under his feet. For in that he put all in subjection under him, he left nothing that is not put under him. But now we see not yet all things put under him.

9 But we see Jesus, who was made a little lower than the angels for the suffering of death, crowned with glory and honour; that he by the grace of God should taste death for every man.

Here is a place to continue the discussion so we don't distract the OP
https://www.ar15.com/forums/General/If-you-Believe-in-the-modern-Rapture-then-/135-2711659/

And people continue to argue whether salvation is granted by faith, works, baptism, or grace.  At least Christianity has been consistent for the past 2000 years...folks still can't agree how salvation is granted/received.  

I feel badly for the folks who ask questions like the one posed by OP and the result is a thread like this one.  OP is looking for help, and gets disagreement, discord, and confusion.   I guess like all the rest of us, OP will eventually have to make up his own mind because there is little consensus among people of faith.

"And people continue to argue whether salvation is granted by faith, works, baptism, or grace."  This is for the most part a protestant / protestant argument, the Catholic Church has been confident in her understanding of salvation for the entirety of her existence.

Christianity has absolutely been consistent for 2000 years, but many reject these truths.  The Church was tested by heresies early on and only strengthened her resolve in the fullness of truth by fighting them, there weren't widespread rejections and certainly not confusion about the faith.  There was the Eastern falling away and then the protestant falling away, which results in endless division as is plainly seen in this thread.  But through it all, the Church still stands, sure there have been bad popes, bad bishops, bad priests, just as there was Judas; but none of that IS the faith, just members of it, of which we are all sinful members.  There is an immense peace to be gained by joining the Catholic Church, all of these anxieties and arguments, misunderstandings and prideful false gospels just fall away; they did with me and with all of the converts that I know.  

@rmdye

Baltimore Catechism regarding Baptism

Q. 621. What is Baptism?

A. Baptism is a Sacrament which cleanses us from original sin, makes us Christians, children of God, and heirs of heaven.

Q. 623. What persons are called heirs?

A. All persons who inherit or come lawfully into the possession of property or goods at the death of another, are called heirs.

Q. 624. Why, then, are we the heirs of Christ?

A. We are the heirs of Christ because at His death we came into the possession of God's friendship, of grace, and of the right to enter heaven, provided we comply with the conditions Our Lord has laid down for the gaining of this inheritance.

Q. 631. Is Baptism necessary to salvation?

A. Baptism is necessary to salvation, because without it we cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven.

Q. 644. How many kinds of Baptism are there?

A. There are three kinds of Baptism: 1.Baptism of water, of desire, and of blood.

Q. 645. What is Baptism of water?

A. Baptism of water is that which is given by pouring water on the head of the person to be baptized, and saying at the same time, "I baptize thee in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost."

Q. 650. What is Baptism of desire?

A. Baptism of desire is an ardent wish to receive Baptism, and to do all that God has ordained for our salvation.

Q. 651. What is Baptism of blood?

A. Baptism of blood is the shedding of one's blood for the faith of Christ.

Q. 652. What is the baptism of blood most commonly called?

A. The baptism of blood is most commonly called martyrdom, and those who receive it are called martyrs. It is the death one patiently suffers from the enemies of our religion, rather than give up Catholic faith or virtue. We must not seek martyrdom, though we must endure it when it comes.

Q. 653. Is Baptism of desire or of blood sufficient to produce the effects of Baptism of water?

A. Baptism of desire or of blood is sufficient to produce the effects of the Baptism of water, if it is impossible to receive the Baptism of water.

Q. 654. How do we know that the baptism of desire or of blood will save us when it is impossible to receive the baptism of water?

A. We know that baptism of desire or of blood will save us when it is impossible to receive the baptism of water, from Holy Scripture, which teaches that love of God and perfect contrition can secure the remission of sins ; and also that Our Lord promises salvation to those who lay down their life for His sake or for His teaching.

Why did the Catholic Church feel the need to identify themselves as the Holy Roman Catholic Church if they were the original monopoly? Seems they chose to make themselves distinctive by distancing themselves from something just like the other groups you mentioned. Rivalries, Divisions, and Factions oppose the Spirit and are of the flesh. Therefore that name alone is of the flesh. I pray that the truth of God is written on the original posters heart regardless of the expectations, decrees, laws, and ordnances that some use to stand against us, as I was under the impression they were all nailed to the cross.

In short and for the purpose of not derailing any further:  The prophecy of Daniel (amongst others), Rome was the sponge to the water of Christianity; Christ chose the time and place for a reason, Rome was the supreme patriarchate as the see of the prince of the apostles, and lastly; Christ didn’t lie when He founded one unified Church.  The Roman patriarchate didn’t distance themselves, they were very unified.  That’s why it was called the “Catholic” Church.  Take Rome off of the pedestal, put Christ on it, and it makes more sense.  It’s not that Rome was the Church, it’s that the Church conquered Rome.


It’s not a monopoly, it’s a monarchy, with Christ as it’s King.