are there any Oneness Pentecostal Calvinists out there?

[narnia59]

You are denying the clear print of the Catholic Encyclopedia. Besides, scripture proves you don't understand the early church position.

I haven't seen any clear print of the Catholic Encyclopedia.

Maybe you should just admit you can't provide any legitimate verification for the quote?

 

[Dave L]

I haven't seen any clear print of the Catholic Encyclopedia.

Maybe you should just admit you can't provide any legitimate verification for the quote?

You need to prove it isn't there. Have you read the entire thing? Get cracking and then get back with me.

 

[ViaCrucis]

You need to prove it isn't there. Have you read the entire thing? Get cracking and then get back with me.

Done and done. In fact, I took a picture of the photocopy of the entirety of pages 262 and 263 from the link I provided.

Here's both pages 262 and 263 for your own reading pleasure.

Where's the quote you have located here?

Click on the image for the full resolution.

Get cracking and then get back to me.

-CryptoLutheran

 

[narnia59]

You need to prove it isn't there. Have you read the entire thing? Get cracking and then get back with me.

I'm not the person who made the claim it was in there. I don't have to prove it's not, you made the claim, therefore the burden of proof by any reasonable standard is on you.

What's more, you provided the edition and page it was on.

ViaCrucis provided a scanned image of that very edition and page.

It even speaks to the specific topic at hand, baptism and what it means when Scripture says that to be baptized in the name of Jesus.

But that quote is no where. In fact, it conveys the opposite message.

You can continue to pretend and perpetuate the falsehood if you like. Aside from just looking silly though, it is against God's law to bear false witness.

 

[Gregory Thompson]

I just realized that in all my journey, I've seen many different denominations, and respectfully tried to keep mental notes to myself on why "these people" feel separate from "those people." Not at all with any judgement to say that I believe any of them to be right or wrong. Of course, I have my beliefs, just.. in this thread I'm not at all trying to start a debate.

I'm just noticing that I don't think I've come across a group that is both Calvinistic and also Oneness Pentecostal. Please tell me, if you know of a group with all the following characteristics:

1) believes in Calvinistic predestination (no human free will, all God's Sovereignty)

2) believes in Jesus Name baptism (non trinitarian formula)

3) believes that the initial indwelling of the Holy Ghost is signified by the person speaking in tongues.

I encountered a oneness apostolic congregation in the past, they had calvinists among the theologians. The main difference between them and mainline christianity was a lack of belief in the trinity, and their baptism.

So I've noticed, you might find Oneness Pentecostals who read the bible with a calvinistic point of view, but not the whole group.

 

[Dave L]

I'm not the person who made the claim it was in there. I don't have to prove it's not, you made the claim, therefore the burden of proof by any reasonable standard is on you.

What's more, you provided the edition and page it was on.

ViaCrucis provided a scanned image of that very edition and page.

It even speaks to the specific topic at hand, baptism and what it means when Scripture says that to be baptized in the name of Jesus.

But that quote is no where. In fact, it conveys the opposite message.

You can continue to pretend and perpetuate the falsehood if you like. Aside from just looking silly though, it is against God's law to bear false witness.

Have you searched for the quote I posted? It is well documented. You are up against God's word in this matter and are refusing to accept it.

 

[Dave L]

Done and done. In fact, I took a picture of the photocopy of the entirety of pages 262 and 263 from the link I provided.

Here's both pages 262 and 263 for your own reading pleasure.

Where's the quote you have located here?

View attachment 305264
Click on the image for the full resolution.

Get cracking and then get back to me.

-CryptoLutheran

Have you ever read Luther's Bondage of the will? Every copy has a different page number assigned to his quotes. Why do you resist God's word on Baptism? It doesn't matter that the Catholics changed it to suit their fancy. You swallowed it and do the same.

 

[narnia59]

Have you searched for the quote I posted? It is well documented. You are up against God's word in this matter and are refusing to accept it.

If it is so well documented you should be able to show where it's at in the text.

A quote running around on the internet is not "well documented." Being able to show where the quote actually is in the reference cited would be "well documented."

When two parties are in a discussion and one makes a claim that the other disputes, the one who makes the claim typically has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim especially when it challenges a perceived status quo.[1] This is also stated in Hitchens's razor, which declares that "what may be asserted without evidence, may be dismissed without evidence."

By all means, keep on with it though. The hole you've dug for yourself just keeps getting deeper.

 

[Dave L]

If it is so well documented you should be able to show where it's at in the text.

A quote running around on the internet is not "well documented." Being able to show where the quote actually is in the reference cited would be "well documented."

When two parties are in a discussion and one makes a claim that the other disputes, the one who makes the claim typically has a burden of proof to justify or substantiate that claim especially when it challenges a perceived status quo.[1] This is also stated in Hitchens's razor, which declares that "what may be asserted without evidence, may be dismissed without evidence."

By all means, keep on with it though. The hole you've dug for yourself just keeps getting deeper.

Do a google search, it comes up many times. But you are dodging the issue. That is you ignore the scripture outline for Baptism and practice the Catholic man-made version.

 

[Hazelelponi]

Nevernind, it was too early! Lol..

 

[narnia59]

Do a google search, it comes up many times. But you are dodging the issue. That is you ignore the scripture outline for Baptism and practice the Catholic man-made version.

Because everything you read on the internet is true right?

Misinformation gets propagated more rapidly than truth. This is certainly a good example of that. There is a reason Satan is called the father of lies.

The quote has been proven to be false. The actual document and page cited says the exact opposite of what that quote implies. Only a fool would not recognize that. But again, burden of proof is on the person who asserts a claim to prove it's true. So show us the quote in the actual document it's supposed to be in.

I'm not dodging the issue. The Scripture that specifically outlines the way Baptism is to be conducted are from the words of Christ himself -- "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19). The word of Christ should be enough for anyone.

What the document you cite actually says about the references in the New Testament to baptize in the name of Jesus:

"The most probable opinion, however, seems to be that the terms "in the name of Jesus", "in the name of Christ", either refer to baptism in the faith taught by Christ, or are employed to distinguish Christian baptism from that of John the Precursor. It seems altogether unlikely that immediately after Christ had solemnly promulgated the trinitarian formula of baptism, the Apostles themselves would have substituted another. In fact, the words of St. Paul (Acts 19) imply quite plainly that they did not. For, when some Christians at Ephesus declared that they had never heard of the Holy Ghost, the Apostle asks: "In whom then were you baptized?" This text certainly seems to declare that St. Paul took it for granted that the Ephesians must have heard the name of the Holy Ghost when the sacramental formula of baptism was pronounced over them."

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Baptism

That's what the source says, not the fake quote running around on the internet. Yet it seems you are the perfect example of a person who becomes so entrapped in a false view the truth becomes a very elusive thing.

 

[Dave L]

Because everything you read on the internet is true right?

Misinformation gets propagated more rapidly than truth. This is certainly a good example of that. There is a reason Satan is called the father of lies.

The quote has been proven to be false. The actual document and page cited says the exact opposite of what that quote implies. Only a fool would not recognize that. But again, burden of proof is on the person who asserts a claim to prove it's true. So show us the quote in the actual document it's supposed to be in.

I'm not dodging the issue. The Scripture that specifically outlines the way Baptism is to be conducted are from the words of Christ himself -- "Go therefore and make disciples of all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Spirit" (Matthew 28:19). The word of Christ should be enough for anyone.

What the document you cite actually says about the references in the New Testament to baptize in the name of Jesus:

"The most probable opinion, however, seems to be that the terms "in the name of Jesus", "in the name of Christ", either refer to baptism in the faith taught by Christ, or are employed to distinguish Christian baptism from that of John the Precursor. It seems altogether unlikely that immediately after Christ had solemnly promulgated the trinitarian formula of baptism, the Apostles themselves would have substituted another. In fact, the words of St. Paul (Acts 19) imply quite plainly that they did not. For, when some Christians at Ephesus declared that they had never heard of the Holy Ghost, the Apostle asks: "In whom then were you baptized?" This text certainly seems to declare that St. Paul took it for granted that the Ephesians must have heard the name of the Holy Ghost when the sacramental formula of baptism was pronounced over them."

CATHOLIC ENCYCLOPEDIA: Baptism

That's what the source says, not the fake quote running around on the internet. Yet it seems you are the perfect example of a person who becomes so entrapped in a false view the truth becomes a very elusive thing.

Try to understand this.

Jesus said;

“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:” Matthew 28:19 (KJV 1900)

The Apostles knew the name of the trinity as:

“(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)” Acts 8:16 (KJV 1900)

“And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.” Acts 10:48 (KJV 1900)

“When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Acts 19:5 (KJV 1900)

“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Acts 2:38 (KJV 1900)

“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?” Romans 6:3 (KJV 1900)

 

[narnia59]

Try to understand this.

Jesus said;

“Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost:” Matthew 28:19 (KJV 1900)

The Apostles knew the name of the trinity as:

“(For as yet he was fallen upon none of them: only they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.)” Acts 8:16 (KJV 1900)

“And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.” Acts 10:48 (KJV 1900)

“When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.” Acts 19:5 (KJV 1900)

“Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.” Acts 2:38 (KJV 1900)

“Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?” Romans 6:3 (KJV 1900)

Try to understand this:

The term being baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus is a term used in the New Testament to differentiate the baptism of Christ from the baptism of John. Many of the early converts to Christianity had been baptized by John. There was confusion that the baptism of Christ was necessary and different from the baptism of John.

The reference you cite from Acts 19, if you read the full reference supports this understanding. It also is clear that when someone is validly baptized as a Christian, it is using the words Christ gave us.

"While Apol′los was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. 2 And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” 3 And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” They said, “Into John’s baptism.” 4 And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." (Acts 19:1-5)

Paul immediately knows when they tell him they haven't heard of the Holy Spirit that they weren't baptized as Christians, because if so they would have heard of the Holy Spirit when the words Christ gave us were recited.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion on this, as others are welcome to tell you that they disagree with your interpretation of these events.

What you are not welcome to do is to continue to post and perpetuate a known to be false quote that tries to claim that the Catholic Church says we changed the Baptismal formula in the second century to use the words of Christ.

 

[Dave L]

Try to understand this:

The term being baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus is a term used in the New Testament to differentiate the baptism of Christ from the baptism of John. Many of the early converts to Christianity had been baptized by John. There was confusion that the baptism of Christ was necessary and different from the baptism of John.

The reference you cite from Acts 19, if you read the full reference supports this understanding. It also is clear that when someone is validly baptized as a Christian, it is using the words Christ gave us.

"While Apol′los was at Corinth, Paul passed through the upper country and came to Ephesus. There he found some disciples. 2 And he said to them, “Did you receive the Holy Spirit when you believed?” And they said, “No, we have never even heard that there is a Holy Spirit.” 3 And he said, “Into what then were you baptized?” They said, “Into John’s baptism.” 4 And Paul said, “John baptized with the baptism of repentance, telling the people to believe in the one who was to come after him, that is, Jesus.” 5 On hearing this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus." (Acts 19:1-5)

Paul immediately knows when they tell him they haven't heard of the Holy Spirit that they weren't baptized as Christians, because if so they would have heard of the Holy Spirit when the words Christ gave us were recited.

You are certainly welcome to your opinion on this, as others are welcome to tell you that they disagree with your interpretation of these events.

What you are not welcome to do is to continue to post and perpetuate a known to be false quote that tries to claim that the Catholic Church says we changed the Baptismal formula in the second century to use the words of Christ.

How did the Apostles interpret Christ? Are you rejecting God's word if you ignore them and do it your way? What happened to Aaron's two sons for doing this? Can you expect any better?

 

[narnia59]

How did the Apostles interpret Christ? Are you rejecting God's word if you ignore them and do it your way? What happened to Aaron's two sons for doing this? Can you expect any better?

Again you are entitled to your opinion, and I am entitled to view you're wrong. There's not really much more to be said about that.

Simply quit using the fake quote to support your view.

 

[Dave L]

Again you are entitled to your opinion, and I am entitled to view you're wrong. There's not really much more to be said about that.

Simply quit using the fake quote to support your view.

You have no defense for your position. It demerits Christ by removing his name from the rite of baptism. It borders on denying His Divinity and more.

 

[narnia59]

You have no defense for your position. It demerits Christ by removing his name from the rite of baptism. It borders on denying His Divinity and more.

Again you are entitled to your opinion about that, I am sure you think you are sincerely correct. When left without the authority of the Church, there will always be a multitude of opinions about what Scriptuure means. You're not going to change my view, and I don't have any illusions I will change yours.

I have simply requested that you cease to use a fake quote about Catholicism to support your view. Aside from the deception involved with that, if you're Scripture alone, then stand or fall on that.

 

[Dave L]

Again you are entitled to your opinion about that, I am sure you think you are sincerely correct. When left without the authority of the Church, there will always be a multitude of opinions about what Scriptuure means. You're not going to change my view, and I don't have any illusions I will change yours.

I have simply requested that you cease to use a fake quote about Catholicism to support your view. Aside from the deception involved with that, if you're Scripture alone, then stand or fall on that.

Scripture alone condemns your position. It is God you are saying is wrong. Along with all the Apostles.

 

[narnia59]

Scripture alone condemns your position. It is God you are saying is wrong. Along with all the Apostles.

You are entitled to your opinion about that.

 

[Dave L]

You are entitled to your opinion about that.

It's far more serious than you are aware of.