All Trinitarians are Lost!!!!!!!!!!!

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Old Paths

You know, if the seven brethren that went with Peter, had not stopped Peter from baptizing the Gentiles FIRST, some of you really wouldn't have an augrement...

Act 10:45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

Act 10:46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

Act 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?


God's plan from the begining was faith, repentance, water baptism and the infilling of the Spirit..........

Who is denying this? That is without question. But the fact that God filled Cornelius with the Spirit before he was baptized blows away the idea that "the blood is applied at baptism". The blood was applied when "Christ entered in for us" according to the book of Hebrew. We simply embrace that work by faith through repentance/water baptism. But it is obvious here that God bent his own order out of necessity, to prove that he had shed his blood for Gentiles as well. In other words, God "saved" Cornelius before water baptism. This is a case of God "calling those things that are not as if though they were". Cornelius would not have gone to hell if he had dropped dead just before he reached the water. But again, this was the exception and not the rule. We have no right to pray for people to receive the Holy Ghost until they are baptized and the story of Cornelius is not a license to do so.

[Old Paths]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Who is denying this? That is without question. But the fact that God filled Cornelius with the Spirit before he was baptized blows away the idea that "the blood is applied at baptism". The blood was applied when "Christ entered in for us" according to the book of Hebrew. We simply embrace that work by faith through repentance/water baptism. But it is obvious here that God bent his own order out of necessity, to prove that he had shed his blood for Gentiles as well. In other words, God "saved" Cornelius before water baptism. This is a case of God "calling those things that are not as if though they were". Cornelius would not have gone to hell if he had dropped dead just before he reached the water. But again, this was the exception and not the rule. We have no right to pray for people to receive the Holy Ghost until they are baptized and the story of Cornelius is not a license to do so.

Question?

Act 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.


What would have happened had they NOT "continued" stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Old Paths

Question?

Act 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.


What would have happened had they NOT "continued" stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

Is this even in question?
What does that have to do with my comment that you quoted here?

But I have news for you...Acts 2:38 is just the tip of the ice berg of the Apostle's doctrine. Our movement is neglecting TONS of the Apostles' doctrine.

[Old Paths]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Is this even in question?
What does that have to do with my comment that you quoted here?

But I have news for you...Acts 2:38 is just the tip of the ice berg of the Apostle's doctrine. Our movement is neglecting TONS of the Apostles' doctrine.

Nice side step......

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Old Paths

Nice side step......

No side step. Man up and say what you mean. Perhaps I'm missing your point. So just spell it out and I'll dive right in. You should know by now that I don't fear controversy.

[Old Paths]

Originally Posted by Originalist

No side step. Man up and say what you mean. Perhaps I'm missing your point. So just spell it out and I'll dive right in. You should know by now that I don't fear controversy.

I really don't know anything about you.

Sorry, I'm just a simple Pentecostal.

I was just wondering if a person comes to God believing, but goes no further, is he saved and heaven bound?

Suppose he believes and repents, but doesn't get baptized is he saved?

Ok he comes believing, repents, receives the Holy Ghost, but does not "continue" will he be saved and go to heaven?

J/W

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by Old Paths

Question?

Act 2:42 And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.


What would have happened had they NOT "continued" stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers.

Titus 3:5 says...

"He saved us by washing of rebirth and renewal of the HOLY GHOST"

The blood of Jesus bought that gift.

If we are truly born again, we will bear fruit, some more than others. To "continue" means we continue to walk in our newness of life we received at Spirit baptism. But none us have arrived. ALL Apostolic, Spirit filled Christians are missing the boat on something . There is some area we are missing it. Both post-tribbers and pre-tribbers cannot be right. But being wrong on a point does not mean we are not "continuing in the Apostles' doctrine". It just means we are human.

[rdp]

Originally Posted by Originalist

Who is denying this? That is without question. But the fact that God filled Cornelius with the Spirit before he was baptized blows away the idea that "the blood is applied at baptism". The blood was applied when "Christ entered in for us" according to the book of Hebrew. We simply embrace that work by faith through repentance/water baptism. But it is obvious here that God bent his own order out of necessity, to prove that he had shed his blood for Gentiles as well. In other words, God "saved" Cornelius before water baptism. This is a case of God "calling those things that are not as if though they were". Cornelius would not have gone to hell if he had dropped dead just before he reached the water. But again, this was the exception and not the rule. We have no right to pray for people to receive the Holy Ghost until they are baptized and the story of Cornelius is not a license to do so.

So ol' legalist Peter had the audacity to order Cornelius & his house to baptized in Jesus' name immediately....But he was already "saved"? The verb translated "command(ed)" denotes, "to make special haste" as defined by Greek grammarians.

Peter was guilty of "burying the living"??

Also, I can absolutely prove to the honest in heart right here that Cornelius was NOT saved at Spirit baptism alone (see John 3:3-5)!

Ready?

The angel specifically stated that Peter would tell Cornelius "words by which you will be saved" (Ac. 11.14).


Tell us, did Peter's command to be water baptized in Jesus' Name frame part of his "words" to Cornelius, yes or no:_____________?


If yes, then according to the heavenly messenger his "words" relative to "salvation" included a command to be water baptized in Jesus' name....Or will you tell us that biblical commandments are not necessary for salvation ??

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by rdp

So ol' legalist Peter had the audacity to order Cornelius & his house to baptized in Jesus' name immediately....But he was already "saved"? The verb translated "command(ed)" denotes, "to make special haste" as defined by Greek grammarians.

Peter was guilty of "burying the living"??

Also, I can absolutely prove to the honest in heart right here that Cornelius was NOT saved at Spirit baptism alone (see John 3:3-5)!

Ready?

The angel specifically stated that Peter would tell Cornelius "words by which you will be saved" (Ac. 11.14).


Tell us, did Peter's command to be water baptized in Jesus' Name frame part of his "words" to Cornelius, yes or no:_____________?


If yes, then according to the heavenly messenger his "words" relative to "salvation" included a command to be water baptized in Jesus' name....Or will you tell us that biblical commandments are not necessary for salvation ??

The clincher!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!:s antathumb

[Originalist]

Originally Posted by rdp

So ol' legalist Peter had the audacity to order Cornelius & his house to baptized in Jesus' name immediately....But he was already "saved"? The verb translated "command(ed)" denotes, "to make special haste" as defined by Greek grammarians.

Peter was guilty of "burying the living"??

Also, I can absolutely prove to the honest in heart right here that Cornelius was NOT saved at Spirit baptism alone (see John 3:3-5)!

Ready?

The angel specifically stated that Peter would tell Cornelius "words by which you will be saved" (Ac. 11.14).


Tell us, did Peter's command to be water baptized in Jesus' Name frame part of his "words" to Cornelius, yes or no:_____________?


If yes, then according to the heavenly messenger his "words" relative to "salvation" included a command to be water baptized in Jesus' name....Or will you tell us that biblical commandments are not necessary for salvation ??

Cornelius was a special case, which I've made abundantly clear. It can not be used as proof text that people are normally saved without baptism, or that we should pray for people to receive the Holy Ghost who have not been baptized.. And I've already explained why God did that in the case of Cornelius.
But the point I'm making is that you who say that Trinitarian Pentecostals who have the Holy Ghost have not been forgiven of their sins because the man who baptized them blew it on the wording. If you truly believe that baptism is for the remission of sins, and that the normative order is to have one's sins remitted and THEN receive the Holy Ghost, then you either have to say that these people have had their sins "washed in the blood" (figuratively) or that they really did not receive the Holy Ghost. You can't have it both ways. God will not dwell in someone who has not repented, and baptism is part of repentance.