ACTS 2v38 - Complete Salvation ??

Status
Not open for further replies.

mrhappy3

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2006
5,923
410
LONDON
✟8,314.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
This verse I recently listened to Derek Prince expound and basically he states that the FULL birthing occurs once this process is complete and EVERY believer in bible days went through it without exception.

Is this true ??

I know that the ONENESS movement waste no time in getting their people through this.

How important is it ??

Do ALL elements NEED to be fulfilled.

Prince reckons the CHURCH has watered the gospel down badly, whereby over 90% are not adequately birthed.

What do you guys reckon ? any people here ex-ONENESS ?

Be interested to know.

cheers:thumbsup:
 

Yekcidmij

Presbyterian, Polymath
Feb 18, 2002
10,445
1,448
East Coast
✟230,239.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
This verse I recently listened to Derek Prince expound and basically he states that the FULL birthing occurs once this process is complete and EVERY believer in bible days went through it without exception.


I don't know how someone would go about proving that EVERY believer in the first couple of centuries went through each step. It is probably fair to say a good many (possibly even most) of them did though.

Something interesting:

1 Cor 15:1 Now I want to make clear for you, brothers and sisters, the gospel that I preached to you, that you received and on which you stand, 15:2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message I preached to you – unless you believed in vain. 15:3 For I passed on to you as of first importance what I also received – that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures, 15:4 and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day according to the scriptures, 15:5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 15:6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 15:7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 15:8 Last of all, as though to one born at the wrong time, he appeared to me also. 15:9 For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me has not been in vain. In fact, I worked harder than all of them – yet not I, but the grace of God with me. 15:11 Whether then it was I or they, this is the way we preach and this is the way you believed.



Paul here appears to be repeating some sort of very early creed/some sort of very early gospel presentation. Interestingly, the idea of salvation and gospel in this creed that Paul relates to the Corinthians doesn't include baptism. (side note: it's also missing Jesus' appearance to the women).


1 Cor 1:14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 1:15 so that no one can say that you were baptized in my name! 1:16 (I also baptized the household of Stephanus. Otherwise, I do not remember whether I baptized anyone else.) 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel – and not with clever speech, so that the cross of Christ would not become useless.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

pilotbro39

Newbie
Jan 4, 2008
69
2
40
Columbus
✟7,794.00
Faith
Pentecostal
Marital Status
Married
I'm glad I came across this article because I've been hearing a lot about this lately from people I know. I have been saved for about 13 years but have never been baptized since I rededicated my life to Christ 2 years ago(college and loosing both my parents wasn't so good to me but thats another story) I never knew about the Holy spirit growing up because our church just didn't teach it or believe in it. I've recently been doing my own studying and find that for at least all of the people that I know it is important to be baptized and one other key thing that people are stating is that it has to be in Jesus name and not "the Father, the son and the Holy spirit" yes they are the same but they stress to me that I need to make sure I go to a church that says "in Jesus name". I don't really know the differences in denominations or how any of that works but they are all Apostolic and follow Acts 2:38 in what they tell me.
I want also comment and ask why is it that a lot of the churches I've visited and asked about baptisms usually state that they do baptism when you Join the church? Almost like its only done if you are becoming a member? Is that biblical?
 
Upvote 0

mrhappy3

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2006
5,923
410
LONDON
✟8,314.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
I don't know how someone would go about proving that EVERY believer in the first couple of centuries went through each step. It is probably fair to say a good many (possibly even most) of them did though.

Something interesting:

1 Cor 15:1 Now I want to make clear for you, brothers and sisters, the gospel that I preached to you, that you received and on which you stand, 15:2 and by which you are being saved, if you hold firmly to the message I preached to you – unless you believed in vain. 15:3 For I passed on to you as of first importance what I also received – that Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures, 15:4 and that he was buried, and that he was raised on the third day according to the scriptures, 15:5 and that he appeared to Cephas, then to the twelve. 15:6 Then he appeared to more than five hundred of the brothers and sisters at one time, most of whom are still alive, though some have fallen asleep. 15:7 Then he appeared to James, then to all the apostles. 15:8 Last of all, as though to one born at the wrong time, he appeared to me also. 15:9 For I am the least of the apostles, unworthy to be called an apostle, because I persecuted the church of God. 15:10 But by the grace of God I am what I am, and his grace to me has not been in vain. In fact, I worked harder than all of them – yet not I, but the grace of God with me. 15:11 Whether then it was I or they, this is the way we preach and this is the way you believed.



Paul here appears to be repeating some sort of very early creed/some sort of very early gospel presentation. Interestingly, the idea of salvation and gospel in this creed that Paul relates to the Corinthians doesn't include baptism. (side note: it's also missing Jesus' appearance to the women).


1 Cor 1:14 I thank God that I did not baptize any of you except Crispus and Gaius, 1:15 so that no one can say that you were baptized in my name! 1:16 (I also baptized the household of Stephanus. Otherwise, I do not remember whether I baptized anyone else.) 1:17 For Christ did not send me to baptize, but to preach the gospel – and not with clever speech, so that the cross of Christ would not become useless.


Nice one - at least you had a stab at it - but the silence is deafening.

strange:doh:
 
Upvote 0

Yekcidmij

Presbyterian, Polymath
Feb 18, 2002
10,445
1,448
East Coast
✟230,239.00
Country
United States
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Others
I rest my case - it appears watered down Christianity is all the rage:D


Are you saying my quoting of 1 Cor 15, where baptism is absent, is "watered down" christianity?

I don't quite catch your drift, hence my lack of response to you quoting me. But if I'm reading your mind correctly and you think I'm presenting some sort of "watered down christianity", I note that your lack of response to Paul's definition of gospel and salvation is "deafening". But it's tough to read minds.
 
Last edited:
Upvote 0

NacDan

Theology never comforted anyone in pain.
Oct 1, 2004
2,697
196
Port Neches, Texas
Visit site
✟11,391.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
The number of responses in a thread does not indicate the validity or non-validity of any doctrine.

That said, one cannot formulate doctrines on a single verse of scripture. I have over 10 pages of dialog between myself and someone that has dedicated his life to Acts 2:38. Talking to him you'd think that no other book in the New Testament was written. Being a Oneness Pentecostal, his stand is not only that one must be baptized in water, but the magician performing the rite must say specific words in a specific order or it's not legitimate. The way he explained it to me is that when the magician invokes the name of Jesus during the ritual, the water turns into the actual blood of Christ and washes you clean. If you don't baptize, "in the name of Jesus", then the water is just water and does nothing.

The argument is that every believer was baptized in Jesus' name, as the Apostles taught, not "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" as Jesus commanded.

The reason I refer to the person as a "magician" is because that is what this person is. That person (not Christ) has the power of salvation in his hands since if he doesn't use the correct magic words in the correct order, that person participating in the ritual is still condemned. The candidate for baptism might have 100% faith in Jesus Christ, but if the magician performing the rite doesn't do it right, well, there you go...

Too bad Scripture does not state this fact. The way the fact is established is by conjecture and "reason".


The problem with water regeneration is that it is not established in Scripture. On the day of Pentecost, Peter preached and thousands joined the Church. No mention of water baptism there. While those people more than likely were eventually baptized, the Scriptures count them as part of the Church when they believed. Another problem you have is with Peter's reaction when he took the revelation to Cornelius, a gentile. This is from one of my responses to my friend:

Okay, let's consider the example of Cornelius in Acts 10:44- 48. Peter was directed of the Lord to preach the gospel to Cornelius, a centurion. Acts 10:44 tells us that "While Peter yet spoke these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them who heard the word." Note that the Holy Spirit indwelt Cornelius and his household before water baptism (Acts 10:47-48). Rom 8:9 says, "Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Are you saying that Cornelius was not saved before he was baptized in water in the name of the Lord? Is it possible to receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit prior to being saved? Peter commanded they be baptized because that's what he did. The fact that Cornelius received salvation before baptism is confirmed by Peter's report to the Jerusalem Council in Acts 11:15-17. Peter reported that Cornelius received the baptism of the Holy Spirit just as the Apostles had received theirs at Pentecost. This was the basis on which Peter concluded that salvation was also given to the Gentiles.


My friend more or less in other parts of our discussion discounts all of Paul's writings and to a lesser degree, the Gospels if they disagreed with his doctrine. At my wit's end, I gave in and used only the book of Acts since apparently that's the only book written. ;)

So let's use the Book of the Acts of the Apostles. ACTS records many salvations with no mention water baptism.

4:4Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand.

Why didn't Luke write, "Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed, and were then baptized in the name of Jesus, and the number of men was about five thousand. This is referring to new members of the church. This doesn't mean that they weren't eventually baptized, it does, however mean, that Luke didn't think so much of water baptism that it was a requirement for them to be counted in the new church. Is Luke ignorant of the Apostle's teachings?

9:33And there he found a certain man named Aeneas, which had kept his bed eight years, and was sick of the palsy. 34And Peter said unto him, Aeneas, Jesus Christ maketh thee whole: arise, and make thy bed. And he arose immediately. 35And all that dwelt at Lydda and Saron saw him, and turned to the Lord.

Again, no mention of baptism. Doesn't mean they weren't, but if it is absolutely essential why did verse 35 not say, "And all that swelt at Lydda and Saron saw him, turned to the Lord and were baptized in Jesus' name.

11:20 And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the LORD Jesus.

21And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.

Why did Luke leave out in verse 21, "And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed and were baptized in Jesus' name, and turned to the Lord.

We've already discussed Cornelius' household. When Peter reports in chapter 13 he doesn't even mention the water baptism (which Peter did AFTER they were already filled with the Holy Spirit).

14: 1And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed.

No mention of water baptism. If it's a requirement why is it not mentioned yet again?

11These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

12Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

You'll notice that again, the common thread is belief, not water regeneration. I still wonder how to reconcile those poor Gentiles that were filled with the Holy Spirit before they were baptized in water in Jesus' name.

Or how about the case in chapter 19 that you used much earlier in this discussion when Paul re-baptised the disciples that had been baptized "with John's baptism"? Paul tells them: John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

Those disciples were not saved by water, they were saved when they believed in HE whom the Father sent, Christ Jesus.

Now, take into account that all those people that seem to only know ONE verse of Scripture, Acts 2:38...that never seem to have read the verse that preceeds it:


Acts 2:37-38 (Amplified Bible)

37Now when they heard this they were stung (cut) to the heart, and they said to Peter and the rest of the apostles (special messengers), Brethren, what shall we do?
38And Peter answered them, Repent (change your views and purpose to accept the will of God in your inner selves instead of rejecting it) and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of and release from your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Being "cut to the heart" is an expression that means "they believed" Barfield, Mathew Henry, & Scofield agree with that interpretation. Others may also, I just stopped looking up commentaries after 3.

My understanding of the Scriptures would indicate that baptism is not a requirement for salvation. Here is where I get that: (emphasis mine)


And he brought them out and said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" So they said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household." (Act 16:30-31 NKJV)


that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. (Rom 10:9 NKJV)


that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. (Joh 3:15-18 NKJV)


Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent." (Joh 6:29 NKJV)


but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. (Joh 20:31 NKJV)


For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. (1Co 1:21 NKJV)


But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they." (Act 15:11 NKJV)


even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), (Eph 2:5 NKJV)


For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, (Eph 2:8 NKJV)

*******

Another problem that the water regeneration crowd cannot answer is this: where is the great epistle that describes the process of water regeneration. You got one verse. Acts 2:38.

The Bible does equate water baptism with circumcision.

Paul argued very strongly that salvation is not by works but solely by grace through faith. "Was Abraham justified by faith or works?" Paul pointed out that "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." (Rom 4:3, Gal 3:6). Paul further argued that salvation did not come because Abraham was circumcized. Abraham was saved "Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised, that righteousness might be imputed unto them also; And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised." (Rom 4:10-12). Abraham was, thus, saved before circumcision! It is important to know that the New Testament sacrament of water baptism is identified with the Old Testament rite of circumcision (Col 2:11-12). Abraham was justified by faith alone. It is the same for New Testament believers — "sola fide." Faith is the only requirement for salvation

Grace 'n Peace
Danny


 
Upvote 0

mrhappy3

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2006
5,923
410
LONDON
✟8,314.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
The number of responses in a thread does not indicate the validity or non-validity of any doctrine.

That said, one cannot formulate doctrines on a single verse of scripture. I have over 10 pages of dialog between myself and someone that has dedicated his life to Acts 2:38. Talking to him you'd think that no other book in the New Testament was written. Being a Oneness Pentecostal, his stand is not only that one must be baptized in water, but the magician performing the rite must say specific words in a specific order or it's not legitimate. The way he explained it to me is that when the magician invokes the name of Jesus during the ritual, the water turns into the actual blood of Christ and washes you clean. If you don't baptize, "in the name of Jesus", then the water is just water and does nothing.

The argument is that every believer was baptized in Jesus' name, as the Apostles taught, not "in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit" as Jesus commanded.

The reason I refer to the person as a "magician" is because that is what this person is. That person (not Christ) has the power of salvation in his hands since if he doesn't use the correct magic words in the correct order, that person participating in the ritual is still condemned. The candidate for baptism might have 100% faith in Jesus Christ, but if the magician performing the rite doesn't do it right, well, there you go...

Too bad Scripture does not state this fact. The way the fact is established is by conjecture and "reason".


The problem with water regeneration is that it is not established in Scripture. On the day of Pentecost, Peter preached and thousands joined the Church. No mention of water baptism there. While those people more than likely were eventually baptized, the Scriptures count them as part of the Church when they believed. Another problem you have is with Peter's reaction when he took the revelation to Cornelius, a gentile. This is from one of my responses to my friend:

Okay, let's consider the example of Cornelius in Acts 10:44- 48. Peter was directed of the Lord to preach the gospel to Cornelius, a centurion. Acts 10:44 tells us that "While Peter yet spoke these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them who heard the word." Note that the Holy Spirit indwelt Cornelius and his household before water baptism (Acts 10:47-48). Rom 8:9 says, "Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Are you saying that Cornelius was not saved before he was baptized in water in the name of the Lord? Is it possible to receive the baptism of the Holy Spirit prior to being saved? Peter commanded they be baptized because that's what he did. The fact that Cornelius received salvation before baptism is confirmed by Peter's report to the Jerusalem Council in Acts 11:15-17. Peter reported that Cornelius received the baptism of the Holy Spirit just as the Apostles had received theirs at Pentecost. This was the basis on which Peter concluded that salvation was also given to the Gentiles.


My friend more or less in other parts of our discussion discounts all of Paul's writings and to a lesser degree, the Gospels if they disagreed with his doctrine. At my wit's end, I gave in and used only the book of Acts since apparently that's the only book written. ;)

So let's use the Book of the Acts of the Apostles. ACTS records many salvations with no mention water baptism.

4:4Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed; and the number of the men was about five thousand.

Why didn't Luke write, "Howbeit many of them which heard the word believed, and were then baptized in the name of Jesus, and the number of men was about five thousand. This is referring to new members of the church. This doesn't mean that they weren't eventually baptized, it does, however mean, that Luke didn't think so much of water baptism that it was a requirement for them to be counted in the new church. Is Luke ignorant of the Apostle's teachings?

9:33And there he found a certain man named Aeneas, which had kept his bed eight years, and was sick of the palsy. 34And Peter said unto him, Aeneas, Jesus Christ maketh thee whole: arise, and make thy bed. And he arose immediately. 35And all that dwelt at Lydda and Saron saw him, and turned to the Lord.

Again, no mention of baptism. Doesn't mean they weren't, but if it is absolutely essential why did verse 35 not say, "And all that swelt at Lydda and Saron saw him, turned to the Lord and were baptized in Jesus' name.

11:20 And some of them were men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spake unto the Grecians, preaching the LORD Jesus.

21And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed, and turned unto the Lord.

Why did Luke leave out in verse 21, "And the hand of the Lord was with them: and a great number believed and were baptized in Jesus' name, and turned to the Lord.

We've already discussed Cornelius' household. When Peter reports in chapter 13 he doesn't even mention the water baptism (which Peter did AFTER they were already filled with the Holy Spirit).

14: 1And it came to pass in Iconium, that they went both together into the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude both of the Jews and also of the Greeks believed.

No mention of water baptism. If it's a requirement why is it not mentioned yet again?

11These were more noble than those in Thessalonica, in that they received the word with all readiness of mind, and searched the scriptures daily, whether those things were so.

12Therefore many of them believed; also of honourable women which were Greeks, and of men, not a few.

You'll notice that again, the common thread is belief, not water regeneration. I still wonder how to reconcile those poor Gentiles that were filled with the Holy Spirit before they were baptized in water in Jesus' name.

Or how about the case in chapter 19 that you used much earlier in this discussion when Paul re-baptised the disciples that had been baptized "with John's baptism"? Paul tells them: John verily baptized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on Christ Jesus.

Those disciples were not saved by water, they were saved when they believed in HE whom the Father sent, Christ Jesus.

Now, take into account that all those people that seem to only know ONE verse of Scripture, Acts 2:38...that never seem to have read the verse that preceeds it:


Acts 2:37-38 (Amplified Bible)

37Now when they heard this they were stung (cut) to the heart, and they said to Peter and the rest of the apostles (special messengers), Brethren, what shall we do?
38And Peter answered them, Repent (change your views and purpose to accept the will of God in your inner selves instead of rejecting it) and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of and release from your sins; and you shall receive the gift of the Holy Spirit.

Being "cut to the heart" is an expression that means "they believed" Barfield, Mathew Henry, & Scofield agree with that interpretation. Others may also, I just stopped looking up commentaries after 3.

My understanding of the Scriptures would indicate that baptism is not a requirement for salvation. Here is where I get that: (emphasis mine)


And he brought them out and said, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" So they said, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and you will be saved, you and your household." (Act 16:30-31 NKJV)


that if you confess with your mouth the Lord Jesus and believe in your heart that God has raised Him from the dead, you will be saved. (Rom 10:9 NKJV)


that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have eternal life. For God so loved the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whoever believes in Him should not perish but have everlasting life. For God did not send His Son into the world to condemn the world, but that the world through Him might be saved. "He who believes in Him is not condemned; but he who does not believe is condemned already, because he has not believed in the name of the only begotten Son of God. (Joh 3:15-18 NKJV)


Jesus answered and said to them, "This is the work of God, that you believe in Him whom He sent." (Joh 6:29 NKJV)


but these are written that you may believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God, and that believing you may have life in His name. (Joh 20:31 NKJV)


For since, in the wisdom of God, the world through wisdom did not know God, it pleased God through the foolishness of the message preached to save those who believe. (1Co 1:21 NKJV)


But we believe that through the grace of the Lord Jesus Christ we shall be saved in the same manner as they." (Act 15:11 NKJV)


even when we were dead in trespasses, made us alive together with Christ (by grace you have been saved), (Eph 2:5 NKJV)


For by grace you have been saved through faith, and that not of yourselves; it is the gift of God, (Eph 2:8 NKJV)

*******

Another problem that the water regeneration crowd cannot answer is this: where is the great epistle that describes the process of water regeneration. You got one verse. Acts 2:38.

The Bible does equate water baptism with circumcision.

Paul argued very strongly that salvation is not by works but solely by grace through faith. "Was Abraham justified by faith or works?" Paul pointed out that "Abraham believed God, and it was counted unto him for righteousness." (Rom 4:3, Gal 3:6). Paul further argued that salvation did not come because Abraham was circumcized. Abraham was saved "Not in circumcision, but in uncircumcision. And he received the sign of circumcision, a seal of the righteousness of the faith which he had yet being uncircumcised: that he might be the father of all them that believe, though they be not circumcised, that righteousness might be imputed unto them also; And the father of circumcision to them who are not of the circumcision only, but who also walk in the steps of that faith of our father Abraham, which he had being yet uncircumcised." (Rom 4:10-12). Abraham was, thus, saved before circumcision! It is important to know that the New Testament sacrament of water baptism is identified with the Old Testament rite of circumcision (Col 2:11-12). Abraham was justified by faith alone. It is the same for New Testament believers — "sola fide." Faith is the only requirement for salvation

Grace 'n Peace
Danny



Thank you for that Danny - very well put:thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mrhappy3

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2006
5,923
410
LONDON
✟8,314.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Are you saying my quoting of 1 Cor 15, where baptism is absent, is "watered down" christianity?

I don't quite catch your drift, hence my lack of response to you quoting me. But if I'm reading your mind correctly and you think I'm presenting some sort of "watered down christianity", I note that your lack of response to Paul's definition of gospel and salvation is "deafening". But it's tough to read minds.


Thank you also brother - no slight on your part whatsoever:thumbsup:
 
Upvote 0

Izdaari Eristikon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2007
6,174
447
69
Post Falls, Idaho
✟32,831.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Married
... one other key thing that people are stating is that it has to be in Jesus name and not "the Father, the son and the Holy spirit" yes they are the same but they stress to me that I need to make sure I go to a church that says "in Jesus name".
I'm not really sure why that would matter, unless they're not trinitarian. If you say "In the name of the Father, the Son and the Holy Spirit", God understands that by "the Son" you mean Jesus, and so does everyone else, so why wouldn't that be the same as saying "In Jesus' name" + also "In the name of the Father and the Holy Spirit"? But if they mean that the Father and the Holy Spirit are not divine, or are somehow less divine than Jesus, than they're not orthodox Christians? Right?
 
Upvote 0

BillynJennifer

Veteran
Sep 16, 2005
1,374
90
47
KY
✟9,613.00
Faith
Presbyterian
Marital Status
Married
Coming from a oneness Pentecostal background, I can tell you that they believe that when Jesus said for them to go out baptizing in the Name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost that these were titles. This logic run this way: I am a father, I am also a son, and I am Spirit-filled, yet no one knows who I am. They say that Acts 2:38 not only confirms Jesus Name baptism, but also confirms oneness doctrine, since they say that (here is where their doctrine gets squirelly) Jesus is the Father, Jesus is the Son, and Jesus is the Holy Ghost. They've been making it sound believable with a lot of loud "wind" with nothing left behind to stand on...
 
Upvote 0

NacDan

Theology never comforted anyone in pain.
Oct 1, 2004
2,697
196
Port Neches, Texas
Visit site
✟11,391.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
My friend also explained to me how baptizing in Jesus' name is the fulfillment of Jesus' command to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of Holy Ghost. It's the Name that has the power, that's why you have to say the magic words in order for it to work.

I wonder which version of the name of Jesus you have to use? His Hebrew name, His Greek name? His English name? His Spanish name? Jesus was never actually called "Jesus" while He was in his pre-resurrected body. What about all the names of Jesus in the Bible? Can you use one of those? Can you be baptized in the name of Wonderful Councilor? Lamb of God?

Danny
 
Upvote 0

Izdaari Eristikon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2007
6,174
447
69
Post Falls, Idaho
✟32,831.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Married
My friend also explained to me how baptizing in Jesus' name is the fulfillment of Jesus' command to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of Holy Ghost. It's the Name that has the power, that's why you have to say the magic words in order for it to work.

I wonder which version of the name of Jesus you have to use? His Hebrew name, His Greek name? His English name? His Spanish name? Jesus was never actually called "Jesus" while He was in his pre-resurrected body. What about all the names of Jesus in the Bible? Can you use one of those? Can you be baptized in the name of Wonderful Councilor? Lamb of God?

Danny
If it's a matter of using the right magic words, wouldn't that be sorcery instead of faith? :doh:
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

mrhappy3

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2006
5,923
410
LONDON
✟8,314.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
My friend also explained to me how baptizing in Jesus' name is the fulfillment of Jesus' command to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of Holy Ghost. It's the Name that has the power, that's why you have to say the magic words in order for it to work.

I wonder which version of the name of Jesus you have to use? His Hebrew name, His Greek name? His English name? His Spanish name? Jesus was never actually called "Jesus" while He was in his pre-resurrected body. What about all the names of Jesus in the Bible? Can you use one of those? Can you be baptized in the name of Wonderful Councilor? Lamb of God?

Danny


LOL !

But getting off the name bit, do you think the 3 pronged repentance, baptism and receiving the Holy Spirit (penty style) is the way to go.

Should we encourage all 3.

cause if it ain't neccesary, who's gonna bother ?
 
Upvote 0

Izdaari Eristikon

Well-Known Member
Mar 12, 2007
6,174
447
69
Post Falls, Idaho
✟32,831.00
Country
United States
Faith
Episcopalian
Marital Status
Married
LOL !

But getting off the name bit, do you think the 3 pronged repentance, baptism and receiving the Holy Spirit (penty style) is the way to go.

Should we encourage all 3.

cause if it ain't neccesary, who's gonna bother ?
Not going to debate it, but...

IMO, repentance is necessary for salvation.
IMO, water baptism is not, but we should do it because we're commanded to, and I know of no valid reason for questioning that commandment.
IMO, receiving the Holy Spirit (penty style) isn't related to salvation, but is highly recommended for empowerment.
 
Upvote 0

mrhappy3

Well-Known Member
May 9, 2006
5,923
410
LONDON
✟8,314.00
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Married
Politics
CA-Others
Not going to debate it, but...

IMO, repentance is necessary for salvation.
IMO, water baptism is not, but we should do it because we're commanded to, and I know of no valid reason for questioning that commandment.
IMO, receiving the Holy Spirit (penty style) isn't related to salvation, but is highly recommended for empowerment.


Nice answers - thank you:)
 
Upvote 0
This site stays free and accessible to all because of donations from people like you.
Consider making a one-time or monthly donation. We appreciate your support!
- Dan Doughty and Team Christian Forums

NacDan

Theology never comforted anyone in pain.
Oct 1, 2004
2,697
196
Port Neches, Texas
Visit site
✟11,391.00
Faith
Charismatic
Marital Status
Married
Politics
US-Republican
If it's a matter of using the right magic words, wouldn't that be sorcery instead of faith? :doh:


Which is why I use the words "magic" and "magician" in my description.

Danny
 
Upvote 0
Status
Not open for further replies.