I perceive an avoidance to deal with the issue which YOU originated, i.e., taking the event of Philip and the Ethiopian eunuch as being paradigmatic for where/how baptism is to be done. CovenantInBlood challenged your view showing that the event recorded is, in fact, unique on its face. You then respond saying, "I don't profess to know what God is teaching from such an event.", which clearly contradicts what you originally asserted. The issue isn't what the passage "means", but rather how it is to be taken, i.e., a unique event which God providentially brought to pass as part of the infant Church's expansion by the inclusion of Gentiles, OR it is to be taken typically, i.e., a paradigm event which the Church is to model perpetually.

So, let me echo CovenantInBlood's question so as to bring this back to a cogent discussion: "How 'ordinary' could the situation be?"; given the explanation offered?

Thanks! grin

[Linked Image]

simul iustus et peccator

[Linked Image]