Apostolic 101 - Page 12

Aquila · #**111** 05-21-2012, 08:16 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Both are in the MIDDLE voice there is no such thing as SELF-baptism. Having the name invoked is the meaning here. Not invoking the name himself. See Acts 15:17, James 2:7

Many of the first Apostolics in the early 1900's baptized themselves in Jesus name.

Aquila · #**112** 05-21-2012, 08:17 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Rutledge

And he commanded the chariot to stand still: and they went down both into the water, both Philip and the eunuch; and he baptized him. (Acts 8:38 KJV)

(Philip baptized him)

Yes, but did Philip baptize him as he called upon the name of the Lord (as with Paul) or did Philip utter formula over him?

acerrak · #**113** 05-21-2012, 08:21 AM

@JamDat

the analogy works well cause after many hours floating in a preserver, you are physically exhausted. It is the preserver that is keeping you afloat until the helicopter gets there.

Also some time people panic and the diver will punch them to subdue them. cause not only will they drown but they could cause some one else to drown also

also i dont think no one in the conversation is against baptism here. we are discussing if the words spoken over you at the time of your baptism remits sin, or is it when the person calls on the name of the Lord.

Does the power lay with the vocal chords of the preacher or is it the faith of the believer.

Aquila · #**114** 05-21-2012, 08:21 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

The whole flimflam is an old Campbellite or Sowderite argument dodging the command and they don't even believe it themselves.

Oh, I believe that the convert should call upon the name of the Lord. In fact, I believe everyone present should be calling upon the name of the Lord, in prayer that their sins be remitted.

Do you deny that the convert should call upon the name of the Lord?

Here's the deal... a person could be calling upon the name of Jesus and have 10,000 Trinitarian ministers screaming the Trinitarian formula and God will honor the baptism. Or, a man can be just going through the motions and not be calling upon the name of the Lord with 10,000 Apostolic preachers screaming a Oneness formula... and God will NOT honor that baptism.

Do you disagree???

Aquila · #**115** 05-21-2012, 08:23 AM

Bro. Rutledge,

Please respond to post #86.

Thanks,

http://apostolicfriendsforum.com/sho...0&postcount=86

Aquila · #**116** 05-21-2012, 08:25 AM

Always remember, when dealing with the "voices" of the Greek language context is everything. Remember, there wasn't any disagreement among the Apostles in the first century. Therefore, there was no comparison to be made.

Tim Rutledge · #**117** 05-21-2012, 08:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aquila

Oh, I believe that the convert should call upon the name of the Lord. In fact, I believe everyone present should be calling upon the name of the Lord, in prayer that their sins be remitted.

Do you deny that the convert should call upon the name of the Lord?

Here's the deal... a person could be calling upon the name of Jesus and have 10,000 Trinitarian ministers screaming the Trinitarian formula and God will honor the baptism. Or, a man can be just going through the motions and not be calling upon the name of the Lord with 10,000 Apostolic preachers screaming a Oneness formula... and God will NOT honor that baptism.

Do you disagree???

Do they get a snorkel?

Tim Rutledge · #**118** 05-21-2012, 08:55 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Aquila

I believe that the Gospel demands that one repents of sin, is water baptized, and filled with the Holy Ghost (this is a theological process called "conversion" that follows "prevenient grace"/"effectual calling").

However, I believe that the Apostles originally baptized in Jesus' name. The Trinitarian formula came later as a Trinitarian innovation. I believe that down through the ages many have received the baptism of the Holy Ghost. Many of ancient church writings speak of those who fell into a "spiritual ecstasy" during prayer wherein there words were unintelligible, they saw visions, spoke to angels, experienced miracles, etc. I don't think they used the terms "baptism of the Holy Ghost", or "speaking in tongues" as we do today...but it was the very same experience.

God judges the heart. One need not have a theology degree and know the finer points of a theological viewpoint to be saved. All they must know is that God (and in essence salvation) is found in Jesus alone. Therefore I believe many Trinitarians down through the ages have been "saved", and no doubt discovered their theology wasn't correct on every point.

I'm a "restorationist". I believe that the church fell into Catholic apostasy and was experienced a series of "revivals" in the Reformation that brought her back in line with Scripture more and more as reform continued. Ultimately, I believe that the Apostolic movement is the advancement made to get "back to the Bible" that we've seen within the past couple generations. Here's a short break down:

Lutheran Church - AD 1517: Saw - Justification by faith...

Presbyterian Church - Ad 1536: Saw - Communion as a Memorial...

Congregational Church - AD 1580: Saw - Separation of Church and State...

Baptist Church - AD 1609: Saw - Water Baptism by Immersion...

Methodist Church - AD 1739: Saw - Personal Holiness...

Christian Church - AD 1820: Saw - Baptism for Remission of Sins...

Trinitarian Pentecostalism - AD 1900: Saw - Baptism of the Holy Ghost - Evidence: Speaking with Tongues as in Acts chapter 2 on the day of Pentecost...

Apostolic Movement - AD 1914: Saw - The revelation of God in Christ (ONENESS), and the truth of baptism in the Name of Jesus Christ was brought into full focus again.

Today, I believe a there is a more subtle "reformation" taking place wherein people are leaving instituationlized denominations and churches to fellowship in a more biblical manner in smaller bodies known as "house churches" or "simple churches". Slowly, the church is now taking the organic form like that seen in the book of Acts.

The gates of hell has never prevailed against the Church. Since the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 there has always been a One God, baptized in Jesus name tongue talking group of believers.

TGBTG · #**119** 05-21-2012, 09:04 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Rutledge

The gates of hell has never prevailed against the Church. Since the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 there has always been a One God, baptized in Jesus name tongue talking group of believers.

Oh, be honest with yourself, you know that's not true...

The whole point of "...tongues as initial evidence...", a term coined by TRINITARIAN pentecostals was to establish a restoration of the gifts in the early 20th century.

I believe FIRMLY that the Name of Our Lord Jesus Christ should be invoked in water baptism just as much we invoke his authority in casting out devils.

However, the truth is that God restored things to the church that were lost during the dark ages.

Btw, the gates of hell did not prevail against the church, people still gave their lives faithfully during those dark ages for the cause of Jesus Christ.

acerrak · #**120** 05-21-2012, 09:08 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Tim Rutledge

The gates of hell has never prevailed against the Church. Since the day of Pentecost in Acts 2 there has always been a One God, baptized in Jesus name tongue talking group of believers.

there was a Op who tried to do some kind of genoeology line with this and it failed miserably