Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 1320362)

Even then, on water baptism, only partially right.

Baptism in the NAME of JESUS is biblically and historically correct. However, their reasoning behind it is faulty.

It would be better to simply state that Christians must be baptized because it is a biblical command.

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 1320361)

... but not much else.

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple (Post 1320383)

I agree with Oneness Pentecostals:

The Oneness of God, Jesus Only.

Acts 2:38 is the full plan of salvation.

Originally Posted by Originalist (Post 1320363)

I believe that normatively baptism precedes the new birth of the spirit/salvation. It is indeed linked to repentance. Peter said ""

The word "FOR" is the Greek "EIS" which is always forward looking. It cannot mean "because of". The correct rendering therefore of this verse is..."Repent and be baptized everyone of you ON the name of the Lord Jesus Christ in order that your sins may be forgiven."

Where I feel our movement errs is when we say 'baptism washes away sins" or even saying "baptism is for the remission of sins" without clarification. First of all, Acts 2:38 links both baptism AND repentance for the remission of sins. But I also see a subtle difference is saying that repentance and baptism are for the remission of sins versus saying "in order that your sins may be forgiven". The latter phrase makes repentance and baptism the doorway or step of faith towards the forgiveness of sins, but place the forgiveness itself slightly beyond the baptism. Oneness folks seem to think that God somehow uses baptism to wash away sin, and I think this is error. I believe that what Peter in essence is saying in Acts 2 and all throughout Acts is....


Brother, forgive me for butting in, but I beg to differ on the highlighted statement. I will just post this verse. I will not get further into it here, we did that months ago. God Bless

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

I dont see another concept presented here to wash away sins, but to be baptized. If I was on the receiving end of that statement, I would have equated baptism with my sins being washed away. (you know..WATER(baptized)....WASH, (I kinda see it like that), just most folks use water to wash stuff, but what do I know?, maybe baptism is like a "waterless car wash"...LOL....respectfully




So, we repent and are baptized "FOR" (in order that) our sins might be forgiven. But who does the remitting/forgiving of the sins? God does for Christ's sake! God remits our sins by the authority of Christ The baptism or the spoken invocation of a minister does not remit the sins!.

Somehow in our zeal to make sure everyone has the right words spoken over them in baptism, we subconsciously lead them to believe that the baptism is washing away their sins or the spoken word of the baptizer, No way!! God HIMSELF does the forgiving when we submit to the authority of his risen/glorified Son by repenting and being baptized.

Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1320398)

.Brother, forgive me for butting in, but I beg to differ on the highlighted statement. I will just post this verse. I will not get further into it here, we did that months ago. God Bless

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

I dont see another concept presented here to wash away sins, but to be baptized. If I was on the receiving end of that statement, I would have equated baptism with my sins being washed away. (you know..WATER(baptized)....WASH, (I kinda see it like that), just most folks use water to wash stuff, but what do I know?, maybe baptism is like a "waterless car wash"...LOL....respectfully

Originally Posted by Originalist (Post 1320408)

Brother, do you not know figurative language when you read it? There is nothing literally washed at baptism. Peter made it clear that is not the putting away of the filth of the flesh by which baptism doth now "save" us. Even Peter used the term "like figure". This verse you quoted does not in any way contradict what I posted. Not at all. The term "remission" in Acts 2:38 literally means "forgiveness". Water is not a living person. Only a person can forgive sin. I am clearly connecting baptism as a step towards forgiveness. But a baptismal candidate needs to know why he is bring baptized. At most Oneness churches all a baptismal candidate would hear about is the "name being invoked" and that baptism literally washing away his sins. That is not Apostolic teaching. In Acts people repented and got baptized because they "believed those things preached concerning the kingdom of God and the name (authority) of Jesus Christ" (Acts 8:12) And what were those "things" that the Apostles preached concerning the kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ?
















Sean, we don't preach much of this as the apostles did. Rather, in our zeal to correct all the other churches' doctrine, we skip all of this and preach baptism in the name of Jesus as the gospel. We give the credit to releasing someone from the condemnation of sin to the preacher invoking the name in baptism instead of to Jesus himself!! Too many people in our churches even understand why they're being baptized because we do not follow the Apostolic method of preaching "things concerning the Kingdom of God and the name (authority) of the Lord Jesus Christ."

Yes, to be forgiven one must repent of their sins and be baptized. But it's not the repenting and baptizing that is giving the forgiveness. Only God in Christ can do that.

Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1320414)

Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1320416)

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

I dont see another concept presented here to wash away sins, but to be baptized. If I was on the receiving end of that statement, I would have equated baptism with my sins being washed away. (you know..WATER(baptized)....WASH, (I kinda see it like that), just most folks use water to wash stuff, but what do I know?, maybe baptism is like a "waterless car wash"...LOL....respectfully


Brother, look at the passage again...Arise>Baptized(water)>WASH(water) AWAY THY SINS,,,,Brother, this is clean as a whistle. How my brother, can you not see that?(now that is directly contextual)

I dare you to try to "wash" the dishes tonight without water. Or take a bath for that matter.

There is more than one reason that water baptism is COMMANDED my brother.

Originally Posted by Originalist (Post 1320395)

It's my understanding that the term "Jesus Only" was a phrase created by our detractors to describe the way be baptize (as in, "they baptize only in the name of Jesus"), not to describe our view of the Godhead. Later people began to misunderstand and apply the term to our belief in the Godhead, erroneously. They use this term to perpetuate the myth that we deny the existence of the Father and Holy Ghost. I'm curious as to why you would be a party to perpetuating a gross misrepresentation of our beliefs.

Originally Posted by Originalist (Post 1320417)

The Bible also speaks of the blood of Jesus purging our conscience of dead works. Sean, do you believe that literal blood somehow passed into your conscience and cleansed it?

We can link "washing away thy sins" in that passage to "calling on the name of the Lord" just as easily. That fits perfectly with the Apostolic message that Saul had rejected to that point that Jesus was Lord. To be forgiven Saul had to accept that message by professing Jesus as Lord and being baptized. When he did that, Jesus "washed his sins away".

And I affirm that baptism is commanded and is linked to washing away or forgiveness of our sins. Have I denied that? I just happen to believe that it is Jesus himself that does the forgiving and not the water.

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple (Post 1320424)

I don't consider "Jesus Only" a misrepresentation of Oneness. Altho it refers to water baptism it also refers to the belief that ONLY Jesus is God.

Now if modern day Oneness Pentecostals (not saying you) are ashamed of that title so be it. Personally I am honored to say I believe in Jesus Only.

Here's an example.

For unto us a child is born, unto us a son is given: and the government shall be upon his shoulder: and his name shall be called Wonderful, Counseller, The mighty God, The everlasting Father, The Prince of Peace. Isaiah 9:6

What name fits this scripture? I would say Yeshua or Jesus.

So I understand that those outside of the true faith will not like "Jesus Only" but will they accept when I say "Jesus is the Father"? No I have proved that hundreds if not thousands of times.

So my point is that no matter what we call ourselves our how we begin our presentation of Oneness we will have to say more then our opening statement. We will have to begin to present the multitude of scripture that backs up what we said.

Then we will have to explain Biblical Christology.

Ironically the new buzzword for the hyper grace Evangelical doctrine of salvation is "Christ Alone".

Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1320433)

Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1320431)

ORIGINALIST






Brother, before we start a paper chase down a rabbit hole as all of Christianity does. Imagine yourself for just a moment, living in the 1st century, you are the Paul, Ananias tells you to arise, be baptized, washing away thy sins.

Would you just say, "yes sir, I would love to be baptized and wash away my sins" ....or would you tell Ananias, "sure I will be baptized, but not to wash away my sins though, because water baptism DOES NOT WASH AWAY MY SINS".


Well that sound ridiculous, but thats what you are saying about this passage bro. Maybe you could pull out your pocket New Testament and concordance, looking up the word "blood or wash", and tell the same thing to Ananias you told me if you were the Paul.
See how complicated you have made this simple passage?

Brother, this passage is SELF INTERPRETING... just like most misinterpreted passages these days. Again, just think like Paul thought, when Ananias told him what he told him, and you cannot go wrong.

Remember this...the foundational interpretation of every passage is the passage itself. If there is absolutely no way to understand it, then hit the concordance.



That is the safest and best way to interpret scripture

Originally Posted by Jermyn Davidson (Post 1320362)

Even then, on water baptism, only partially right.

Baptism in the NAME of JESUS is biblically and historically correct. However, their reasoning behind it is faulty.

It would be better to simply state that Christians must be baptized because it is a biblical command.

Originally Posted by Originalist (Post 1320467)

I understand your stance because you are one of the few Apostolics I've met that believes n baptismal regeneration. I do not. Peter declared in Acts 2:38 to repent and be baptized...in order that your sins may be forgiven. Sean, do repentance and baptism have the ability to forgive sins? Are they self aware beings?[/QUOTE]






Of course not.

Repentance and baptism are simply our requirements to receive forgiveness and remission of sins bro.

The very acts themselves cause a response from God towards us for salvation.


Brother, dont you think it is kinda strange, you are working this hard to make a verse like the one we are talking about mean something else? Just think about this for a minute. Are there alterior motives, bias? It is obviously "bucking" your theology. It may be part of a root system of faulty beliefs. I have noticed that stuff on me in the past and had to deal with it. There have been some big weeds in my theology in the past, that when I noticed a root, I found it attached to a weed and pulled out the whole thing.

Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1320502)

Sean I do not know how old you are or how long you've had the Holy Ghost. I am 48 and have had the Holy Ghost since 1981. I have lived for God since that time. Certainly I know what it is like to have God stand your beliefs on their head. I was once licensed with the AoG. In 1993 I joined the UPCI. That should tell you something. But just because I joined the Apostolics does not mean I've arrived and can't keep learning. but this close mindedness to any new truth of scripture is a problem in our movement. I sense this in you now, respectfully. You've been led to believe that the sins are remitted BY baptism. I feel the scriptures teach they are remitted IN repentance and baptism BY God for Christ's sake. You've been led to believe that orally invoking the name of Jesus in baptism somehow magically takes away sins. I feel the scripture teaches that baptism is a response to the message preached by the Apostles concerning the risen and glorified Christ and is an act of submission to that message and the One preached. When we submit to him in baptism, HE forgives us. There is not some salvation power to wash sin flowing from the baptizers lips , into the water that somehow magically cures your sin ailment. That's what you seem to believe.

Originally Posted by Originalist (Post 1320504)

Brother, right here shows your bias, the name that is among every name(Jesus) is not "magic".(that is a derision of the greatest name ever spoken to mankind) I have heard debates when the trinitarians commonly called the name of Jesus during baptism, our little "magical" formula.

Could this statement have its roots in you A of G days?

They are the ones that say this.





BTW, I am 52 and was saved in 1979. I was debating trinitarians within 6 months...LOL

Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1320511)

I know brother, I, have only seen the phrase "magic' referring to the name of Jesus, come from trinitarians arguing against us and trying to "predudice" the audience. When Oscar Hill tried that on Marvin Hicks, hill was publicly destroyed by Hicks on that statement.

It just "triggered" my response, the way I did to get to the root of the statement. I have never in my life ever heard a oneness believer use that term the way you just did. I was "taken back" by that from you.

I was just trying to get you to eliminate it from your vocabulary, old habits die hard...LOL

Originally Posted by Sean (Post 1320514)

Amen, you know bro., as a side note, I am actually getting fellowship from our discussions, and for that matter, all of the debates and discussions we all deal with. I was thinking, if I started going back to church and got busy in the work of God, I would likely fall off the radar here. This has been my "crutch", during these times. This AFF site has been a blessing to me, not just challenging my beliefs, but for the most part, the interaction with my fellow saints. (that dont exactly see it my way). I have had to but my prejudices aside and call anyone baptized in Jesus' name my brother, regardless of their point of view.
It has enhanced my perspective of the saints immensely.....

Originally Posted by Michael The Disciple (Post 1320383)

I agree with Oneness Pentecostals:

The Oneness of God, Jesus Only.

Acts 2:38 is the full plan of salvation.