Where are all the Acts 2:38 folks (3-steppers)?? - Page 21

Scott Hutchinson · #**201** 12-26-2007, 08:08 PM

I tell yall I'm just happy that Jesus is patient with me,and I'm thankful He took me in when I was lost.

Felicity · #**202** 12-26-2007, 08:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TRFrance

Granted, you may have had great fellowship with both.
My point is though, on the issue of salvation, you are closer to them than us.

If a sinner were to walk in off the street, "accept Jesus", and say the sinners prayer, the Bapticostal and a PCI person will both agree that the man is saved at that moment. The "3 stepper" is the one who'd would say the man is not saved if he didnt get baptized and filled yet. If a dispute were to arise over the issue , the Bapiticostal and PCI believer would naturally be on the same side of the argument.

One need only read thru a few threads on this site to see that many of the PCI folk here are more in agreement with Baptists on the salvation issue, than they are with PAJC/Oneness believers. In fact, they seem to spew more of their antagonism toward us, than toward the multitude of false-doctrine churches out there that don't have truth... (which is ridiculous in itself). Lord help us.

Bro. France ....

Many PAJCers believe that a person baptized in the titles can/will be saved. And many, when the rubber meets the road, also believe that tongues aren't crucial to salvation.

I believe I'm closer to and have more in common with the typical PAJCer than to the typical Baptist when it comes to soteriology.

Scott Hutchinson · #**203** 12-26-2007, 08:10 PM

Our starting point must be when the New Covenant was inagurated or began.

nahkoe · #**204** 12-26-2007, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Scott Hutchinson

I tell yall I'm just happy that Jesus is patient with me,and I'm thankful He took me in when I was lost.

Brother, you have a way of saying it how it is.

pelathais · #**205** 12-26-2007, 08:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Why would you think I would not answer this??

Peter, James, and John were the founders Apostolic Faith Movement, and I agree 100% with their teachings that one must repent of their sins, be baptized in Jesus Name for the remission of their sins, and receive the Holy Ghost.

Because of an answer like this? LOL!

Why do you ignore the history of the Apostolic movement? Even in a direct question you side step it entirely. Are you embarassed by our forebears?

I think we have a great insight on the teachings of the 1st century church, and insight that has been lost or obscured for millenia. However, how we got that is an important and fascinating story. A story which sheds a lot of light on the differences of opinion that we find within the Apostolic Faith movement today.

Why sweep it all under the rug and then pretend it never existed? Why do many decry those that still hold fast to the teachings of our forebears as unapostolic or anti-apostolic?

Scott Hutchinson · #**206** 12-26-2007, 08:12 PM

We can fuss with each all we want,but hey there is folks out who have never read the Bible or heard the good news.

Sam · #**207** 12-26-2007, 08:13 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by TRFrance

...
One need only read thru a few threads on this site to see that many of the PCI folk here are more in agreement with Baptists on the salvation issue, than they are with PAJC/Oneness believers. In fact, they seem to spew more of their antagonism toward us, than toward the multitude of false-doctrine churches out there that don't have truth... (which is ridiculous in itself). Lord help us.

Yes, I am more in agreement with Baptists on the salvation issue, but I hope I haven't been spewing antagonism toward those who do not see things the way I do.

stmatthew · #**208** 12-26-2007, 08:13 PM

BTW-

I used the term "3 steppers" because I wanted it to be clear that I meant those that believe that one is not born again until they have obeyed Acts 2:38 in its fullness, and not those that believe salvation occurs prior to the completion of Acts 2:38. Most of you know what I meant anyway.

Scott Hutchinson · #**209** 12-26-2007, 08:14 PM

BTW since I collect books I have a copy of The Azusa Street Revival By Roberts Liardon which is very interesting,but alas this book is a borrowed copy.

TRFrance · #**210** 12-26-2007, 08:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sam

It's kinda surprising that you think this forum is moving away from "what true apostolic has always been."

What are you taking for a starting point for what you consider "true apostolic"?

Your starting point can't be 1906 on Azusa Street when folks were receiving the Holy Ghost Baptism and operating in the gifts of the Spirit. They called themselves Apostolic but they were trinitarians, believed in justification/salvation/regeneration by faith without water and/or Spirit baptism and many even believed in sanctification as a second work of grace happening after salvation and before the Holy Ghost Baptism.

Your starting point can't be 1945 when the UPC was formed because that new organization was built on the premise that ministers could preach, teach, and submit articles to the Pentecostal Herald which taught both viewpoints i.e. that folks were saved prior to water and/or Spirit baptism or that folks were not saved until after water and Spirit baptism.

Your starting point can't be 1973 when the fundamental doctrine statement of the UPC was revised to add the words "for the remission of sins." The man who seconded the motion to adopt the modification was W.M. Greer who believed that "for the remission of sins" meant "because of the remission of sins" and was assured by Nathaniel Urshan that he would not have to modify his beliefs.

Um... no, Sam... I think his starting point is about 33 AD, at something they called the "Day of Pentecost".