[mizpeh]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

So the new fangled doctrine term is what you are holding against me Mizzy ... interesting ....

and what compounded this was ...

You sought to show that the blood was applied at baptism and I didn't answer your post ...

C'mon Mizzy .... no one said you were spreading it ... and I think in that the thread I did include Oneness theologian, David Bernard, as holding this belief ...

Did you want to have a discussion as to when the blood was applied as that thread sought to lay out the divergent thoughts throughout Apostolica (trademarked) on when we are forgiven ... and when we are washed ...

I am yet to read the verse that says this happens at baptism ...

I read a lot of prooftexts tied together ... but didn't see an Apostle or Christ say such a thing.

Dan, go back and read my posts which were direct responses to your accusations. Proof texts tied together is how Trinitarians come up with the doctrine of the Trinity. It is simply logical deduction to conclude that if sins are remitted at baptism and only the blood of Jesus Christ can take away sin, then the blood of Christ must be applied at baptism. I laid it out in a syllogism for you to make it easy.


That thread may have been a vehicle for you to lay out the divergent thoughts throughout Apostolica on when we are forgiven, but your original post was a direct condemnation of me being a heretic and according to the title of that thread, New Doctrine Emerges: NOT Forgiven at Repentance, the thread was indeed about "when the blood was applied". So, no, I dont' want to start a NEW DISCUSSION about when the blood is applied but I want to finish the OLD DISCUSSION that you started.