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

[Apprehended]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

Exactly.

Exactly.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Dan you are correct but if you had been sitting in the pew when they preached it would have been difficult to know the difference. They(the PCI men) were as zealous baptizing Trinitarians as their counterparts were. They preached Acts 2;38 everwhere they went. Have you ever been to Corinth, Ms. there is a Oneness church on nearlye very corner and Elder Gurley is the reason. I have heard in 50 miles of Jackson, T. there are over a 100 Oneness churches of divers stripes again PCI country. Had they had the attitude of their descendants they would have just stayed in the AG and been done with it.

We preach it ... Elder ... My pastor did just last night ... but not w/ the interpretation you have.

The more things "change" ... the more they are the same.

Two ladies testified about how good they felt about being rebaptized.

There is no monopoly on Acts 2:38

[James Griffin]

For the most part I have stayed away from these topics for this very reason.

I have the utmost respect for the sincerity and salvation of parties in both "sides".

This thread has devolved into something I believe the Apostles Paul and John warned against often.

Both sides believe in Acts 2:38. Both preach it. Both believe in baptism in Jesus' name. Both believe in the indwelling spirit of God, both believe in being separated unto Him (holiness).

The disagreement comes in what this things mean, and having a deeper fuller understanding. Unfortunately, it has gone from discussion to argument and hurt feelings.

The truth is the UPCI was founded by PCI and PAJC, and they had differences in the understanding as to WHY, NOT WHETHER.

The problem comes in times like 1992 and 2007 when the mentality of "we must be in perfect unison as to understanding the WHY or we cannot walk together" comes to the foreground.

As has been pointed out by Steve Epley and others of us who were old enough to remember the preaching from our childhood. The fact of the matter is from the pulpit one could not distinguish a PCI from PAJC.

It's a New Year. It's the last few minutes of the history of mankind in this dispensation.

Let's spend a little more energy preaching Acts 2:38 than arguing the mechanizations of it.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

We preach it ... Elder ... My pastor did just last night ... but not w/ the interpretation you have.

The more things "change" ... the more they are the same.

There is no monopoly on Acts 2:38

Good for him maybe he will help you.
When the penitent goes to the altar and your pastor insists he gets baptized you might speak up and say Papist. Just funning now.

[OneAccord]

I agree. But this.... this a game. "I'm right'. "No. I'm right." And you are both wrong, because it seems there is no interest in winning anyone to Jesus. The object of this game is winning someone to "MY" side. This is nothing but the Apostolic version of "Red Rover, Red Rover".

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

For the most part I have stayed away from these topics for this very reason.

I have the utmost respect for the sincerity and salvation of parties in both "sides".

This thread has devolved into something I believe the Apostles Paul and John warned against often.

Both sides believe in Acts 2:38. Both preach it. Both believe in baptism in Jesus' name. Both believe in the indwelling spirit of God, both believe in being separated unto Him (holiness).

The disagreement comes in what this things mean, and having a deeper fuller understanding. Unfortunately, it has gone from discussion to argument and hurt feelings.

The truth is the UPCI was founded by PCI and PAJC, and they had differences in the understanding as to WHY, NOT WHETHER.

The problem comes in times like 1992 and 2007 when the mentality of "we must be in perfect unison as to understanding the WHY or we cannot walk together" comes to the foreground.

As has been pointed out by Steve Epley and others of us who were old enough to remember the preaching from our childhood. The fact of the matter is from the pulpit one could not distinguish a PCI from PAJC.

It's a New Year. It's the last few minutes of the history of mankind in this dispensation.

Let's spend a little more energy preaching Acts 2:38 than arguing the mechanizations of it.

James, we have always had posters with the PCI view. The difference is we agreed to disagree on some issues.

This is no longer the case.

Gone are the posts of MOW, Felicity and others whom we disagreed with but totally respected. In their place is a whole new breed of posters with a totally different emphasis.

[rgcraig]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

For the most part I have stayed away from these topics for this very reason.

I have the utmost respect for the sincerity and salvation of parties in both "sides".

This thread has devolved into something I believe the Apostles Paul and John warned against often.

Both sides believe in Acts 2:38. Both preach it. Both believe in baptism in Jesus' name. Both believe in the indwelling spirit of God, both believe in being separated unto Him (holiness).

The disagreement comes in what this things mean, and having a deeper fuller understanding. Unfortunately, it has gone from discussion to argument and hurt feelings.
The truth is the UPCI was founded by PCI and PAJC, and they had differences in the understanding as to WHY, NOT WHETHER.

The problem comes in times like 1992 and 2007 when the mentality of "we must be in perfect unison as to understanding the WHY or we cannot walk together" comes to the foreground.

As has been pointed out by Steve Epley and others of us who were old enough to remember the preaching from our childhood. The fact of the matter is from the pulpit one could not distinguish a PCI from PAJC.

It's a New Year. It's the last few minutes of the history of mankind in this dispensation.

Let's spend a little more energy preaching Acts 2:38 than arguing the mechanizations of it.

Good post!

A warning was issued last night. I hope it was read.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by James Griffin

For the most part I have stayed away from these topics for this very reason.

I have the utmost respect for the sincerity and salvation of parties in both "sides".

This thread has devolved into something I believe the Apostles Paul and John warned against often.

Both sides believe in Acts 2:38. Both preach it. Both believe in baptism in Jesus' name. Both believe in the indwelling spirit of God, both believe in being separated unto Him (holiness).

The disagreement comes in what this things mean, and having a deeper fuller understanding. Unfortunately, it has gone from discussion to argument and hurt feelings.

The truth is the UPCI was founded by PCI and PAJC, and they had differences in the understanding as to WHY, NOT WHETHER.

The problem comes in times like 1992 and 2007 when the mentality of "we must be in perfect unison as to understanding the WHY or we cannot walk together" comes to the foreground.

As has been pointed out by Steve Epley and others of us who were old enough to remember the preaching from our childhood. The fact of the matter is from the pulpit one could not distinguish a PCI from PAJC.

It's a New Year. It's the last few minutes of the history of mankind in this dispensation.

Let's spend a little more energy preaching Acts 2:38 than arguing the mechanizations of it.

Elder in some ways I agree but now Dan's camp places an emphasis their forefathers may have held somewhat but never sacrificed preaching Acts 2;38 at the expense of it. So I do NOT think it is the same. My pastor believed baptism showed sins were already remitted at repentance however he never taught that he believed that. I guarantee if you asked most folks in West Ky. if my pastor preached baptism in Jesus Name was essential to salvation they would all answer in the affirmative. But in private he held the door open for family and friends who had not obeyed. But his preaching took preeminence over his personal thoughts. He baptized maybe thousands in Jesus Name and numbers of preachers it was a drive with him. His zeal surpasses my own yet his veiw was PCI(though he would have never heard of it). So I do understand.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by OneAccord

I agree. But this.... this a game. "I'm right'. "No. I'm right." And you are both wrong, because it seems there is no interest in winning anyone to Jesus. The object of this game is winning someone to "MY" side. This is nothing but the Apostolic version of "Red Rover, Red Rover".

Both camps are doing their own winning somewhere else we are debating here! That is what this forum from Jim Yohe on has been about not soul winning. It is NOT a game to me. The loser here might be eternally lost that is not a game.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Pastor Poster

James, we have always had posters with the PCI view. The difference is we agreed to disagree on some issues.

This is no longer the case.

Gone are the posts of MOW, Felicity and others whom we disagreed with but totally respected. In their place is a whole new breed of posters with a totally different emphasis.

Your view of history is filled w/ more hyperbole and revisionism, PP.

You entered NFCF at the very tail end of it's existence ... you are as much a newbie as us all.

Your appeal to wax nostalgic seems distorted especially when one looks at this separate forum starting in early February and your being still wet behind the ears.

Some of the "new breed" posters like Ronzo have seniority ....

Others, like, myself have been w/ the forum since it's inception.

As for MOW leaving the forum for the most part ... do we want to open that can of worms???

We know where he stands ....

he was one that agreed almost w/ regularity w/ the "new breed posts" and expressed this on the forum and via private communication.

What you miss is the Posse ... perhaps, PP ... ???

Those who dogpiled those w/ divergent views?