The thief on the cross died BEFORE Acts 2:38 salvation was preached

coons786c

Regular Member
Feb 23, 2007
485
6
Port Saint Lucie
✟9,473.00
Country
United States
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Dear OP, as an anti-Trinitarian who believes in the "Oneness" heresy, this thread belongs in the Unorthodox Theology subforum. To post here you must agree with the Nicene Creed.

-CryptoLutheran

The apostles never heard of a trinity, they knew Jesus was God manifested in the flesh. The catholic religion formulated the trinity man made. Do the history on the subject.? 325 Ad it was formulated by constatine
 
Upvote 0

ViaCrucis

Confessional Lutheran
Oct 2, 2011
37,466
26,897
Pacific Northwest
✟732,574.00
Country
United States
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
In Relationship
Politics
US-Others
The apostles never heard of a trinity, they knew Jesus was God manifested in the flesh. The catholic religion formulated the trinity man made. Do the history on the subject.? 325 Ad it was formulated by constatine

Again, this isn't the place to advocate your heretical theology. People who post here have agreed to the rules of this board which say that one must be a Nicene Creed affirming Christian.

If you reject the Creed then there is a subforum for you to talk all day long about "Acts 2:38 salvation" and how the Trinity was "invented by Constantine" after he ate bad Mexican food. You can have a blast arguing your heresy and historical revisionism in the Unorthodox Theology subforum. But this isn't the place to do that.

-CryptoLutheran
 
Upvote 0

coons786c

Regular Member
Feb 23, 2007
485
6
Port Saint Lucie
✟9,473.00
Country
United States
Faith
Marital Status
Married
Again, this isn't the place to advocate your heretical theology. People who post here have agreed to the rules of this board which say that one must be a Nicene Creed affirming Christian.

If you reject the Creed then there is a subforum for you to talk all day long about "Acts 2:38 salvation" and how the Trinity was "invented by Constantine" after he ate bad Mexican food. You can have a blast arguing your heresy and historical revisionism in the Unorthodox Theology subforum. But this isn't the place to do that.

-CryptoLutheran

Of course I reject the creed. oops posted in the wrong place.
 
Upvote 0

dogs4thewin

dog lover
Christian Forums Staff
Hands-on Trainee
CF Ambassadors
Site Supporter
Apr 19, 2012
30,389
5,619
32
Georgia U.S. State
✟897,697.00
Country
United States
Faith
Christian
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Libertarian
Upvote 0

shturt678

Senior Veteran
Feb 1, 2013
5,280
103
Hawaii
✟20,928.00
Faith
Lutheran
Marital Status
Single
The apostles never heard of a trinity, they knew Jesus was God manifested in the flesh. The catholic religion formulated the trinity man made. Do the history on the subject.? 325 Ad it was formulated by constatine

I think it's more like do the math, ie, +325 -4000 to the googal plex power = Triune God waaaaaaay before Gen.1:1-3, ie, Jn.1:1, etc. construed with Gen.1:1-3.

bw the act of creation, like all the opera ad extra, is ascribed to the 3 Persons of the Godhead and thus to the Son as well as to the Father; compare the plural pronouns in Gen.1:26 of course.

The Jews never questioned the Trinity, ie, including the disciples, all aware of the Trinity.

Just ol' old Jack
 
Upvote 0

PaladinValer

Traditional Orthodox Anglican
Apr 7, 2004
23,582
1,245
42
Myrtle Beach, SC
✟30,305.00
Faith
Anglican
Marital Status
Single
Politics
US-Others
Let me asks you this, If I TRULY accept Christ and then die BEFORE I have a chance to make it public am I saved? For example, at our church we plan baptisms for a few weeks AFTER someone comes and makes it public that they have accepted Christ. If someone was to die between the time they accepted Christ and the time they had the chance to get saved what happens? OR another example, say I accepted Christ either privately at night or accepted Him and then got in the car had a fatal car wreck died BEFORE I had that chance These are situations where the person is not really able to get a baptism Keep in mind Baptism does NOT save you.

What has always been taught?
 
Upvote 0

Juelrei

Active Member
May 13, 2015
393
3
✟15,557.00
There have been several false-christians try to use the thief on the cross to justify their rejection of Jesus Name water baptism. I will try to address the defect in their doctrine here.

The thief on the cross died before the New Testament Church was born. The new testament Church was born in Acts 2:4 and the new testament plan of salvation preached in Acts 2:38, confirmed in Acts 2:39 and preached and practiced by the Apostles Acts 19-4-6.​

If water baptism has to take place before a person can have the promise of everlasting life, then Jesus would have lied to the thief on the cross. Obviously, under certain circumstances, water baptism is not strictly required.

One of the tricks that many false preachers use in their deception is that they use the "thief on the cross" as "proof" that baptism in Jesus name is not required for salvation. They use that one account of the "thief on the cross" to deceive people into flat ignoring *bunches* of verses about baptism, even a verse where the Lord Himself declares baptism as ESSENTIAL, they will ignore ALL these verses:

I would agree that water baptism has it's place, and should be done by those who accept Jesus Christ as their Savior. I have many times been water baptized with every time that I had recommitted myself unto God. Each time, it was my own decision and not a requirement of the church that I attended. I understand that there are churches who require every new member to undergo water baptism as more of an acceptance into their church fold.

Mark 16:16 He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned.

* Jesus said,"... AND is baptized" *

That reference is in accordance with circumstances at that time of desire of conversion while not hanging on a cross and about to breath their last, or in a fox hole during war, or inside a building that is about to collapse.

Obviously it is at one's earliest convenience that one should after salvation be water baptized.

Acts 22:16 And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.

* Sins washed away THROUGH baptism *

You have omitted scripture that states that the blood washes away all sin. Mere water baptism can't wash away sin, since water is superficial and can only wash dirt from the body.

Acts 8:12 But when they believed Philip preaching the things
concerning the kingdom of God, and the name of Jesus Christ, they were baptized, both men and women.

* Believers were always baptized. *

It didn't say water baptism. If one removes the commas that were not in use in the original text, it reads that the baptism was accomplished in confession of the name of Jesus Christ.

Acts 19:5 When they heard [this], they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.

This scripture confirms my statement. They heard and were baptized. Not in water baptism, but in the name.

Romans 6:3 Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death?

This scripture must assume the past tense procedure of conversion and at one's earliest convenience a water baptism, as mentioned in Colossians 2:12 (implying submersion under water).

Galatians 3:27 For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ.

* Just look at those verses about Jesus name baptism!
As pointed out, there is a difference between baptism in his name, and water baptism that would follow after conversion.

As is seen in many cases in Acts.

But the false preachers will still proclaim "thief on the cross" and those so deceived will go "amen brother"... BUT!! What the false preachers and those so deceived are overlooking is: The thief DIED BEFORE Baptism in Jesus name was even instituted and preached by the apostle Peter!!

I repeat.. thus making Jesus having lied to the thief.

When the thief on the cross died, the new testament church had not been born; Jesus had not yet risen from the dead!!! The thief on the cross was dead for over a month BEFORE Acts 2:38 was even preached. *

The thief on the cross was not even in the "church" dispensation, the commandment to be baptised had not been given.

So Jesus lied to the thief and he went to hell.

Your argument is faulty.

Acts 2:38 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 2:39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, [even] as many as the Lord our God shall call.
Acts 2:40 And with many other words did he testify and exhort, saying, Save yourselves from this untoward generation.
Acts 2:41 Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added [unto them] about three thousand souls.

I really hope that you can see the deception in the "thief on the cross" argument against baptism.

It is not a deception, or an argument against water baptism. It is meant to indicate that people in desperate circumstances being about to die anyway, can get saved without being water baptized.

Unfortunately, people have misunderstood.

But I hope that if your preacher told you that lie, that you will realize that he has lied to you about other things as well, and is not really a man of God at all.

Your pastor has been grossly mistaken in coming to such conclusions and preaching that mistake to his congregation.

The Bible warns so many times, in so many places that there will be MANY false preachers leading people to hell. People who are being led into hell by false preachers BELIEVE THAT THEY ARE SAVED; that is the job of the false preacher to keep them feeling "secure".

As mentioned in scriptures, there is salvation without any mention of water baptism in order to accomplish it. One need only call upon the name of the Lord, making confession with the mouth, for salvation to take place. Water baptism occurs afterward at the saved person's earliest convenience.

Tell me that your church operation doesn't follow that method.

Does your preacher teach the "thief on the cross" as an excuse to
undermine the essentiality of baptism?

No. That would be an error of teaching. It is also an error for any pastor to believe that is what any other preacher teaches.

If so, are you going to follow him/her/it into the pits of hell, anyway?

No more so than any person in circumstances of inconvenience to a body of water. To require water baptism for everyone regardless of their circumstances or go to hell is not the teaching of Jesus Christ himself.

Matthew 15:14 Let them alone: they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch.

Your blind pastor has dug the ditch and you've become blind and fallen into it.

Romans 16:17 Now I beseech you, brethren, mark them which cause
divisions and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned; and avoid them.
Romans 16:18 For they that are such serve not our Lord Jesus Christ, but their own belly; and by good words and fair speeches deceive the hearts of the simple.

Good advice concerning those who teach a faulty doctrine like water baptism requirement regardless of circumstances is the only way to be saved.

Acts 2:38 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 2:39 For the promise is unto you, and to your children, and to all that are afar off, [even] as many as the Lord our God shall call.

Of course, none of them were hanging on a cross, or in a fox hole during war, or inside a collapsing building.
 
Upvote 0