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

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Brother Price

Bro. Epley,

Thanks for your response. I do not take offense at your calling this a Baptist theology. In my time, I have been called much worse, as have my beliefs.

You made a good point in the above post, and I do not think you really realized what you said, brother. You said:



Brother Epley, the Gospel is the life, death, and resurrection of the Lord Jesus Christ. Obedience to the Gospel involves faith, not works. For God so loved the world the world that He gave His only begotten Son, that whosoever believes on Him should not perish, but have everlasting life. John 3:16 is the verse of the Gospel in which Jesus shows how much God loves us, that when we believe on Jesus, we shall not perish (the second death) but have everlasting life.

You also said in the above:



This is so true. We must come to Christ by faith, and repent of our sins. The scripture I gave speaks of the grace of God being given through our faith. It does not negate the need for repentance, but shows us that our salvation comes by the favor of God when we believe.

Brother, listen to this young man. I still believe in Jesus name baptism, even more strongly now than I ever did. But, I see the grace of God being stronger than anything else. His blood is sufficient. Man does not need to help save, for we are saved by the favor of God when we believe.

Bro. Price it is YOU that do not realize what you posted.
Yes the foundation of the Christian experience is His death-burial-resurrection and PAUL(not DAN) said we experience that through being identified with His death-burial-resurrection and the burial taught by Paul is BAPTISM. Rom.6:3-4, Col.2:12.
Our burial places us INTO Christ verse 3!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
That is FAITH not mental assent but obeying was faith demands!
Faith demands something out of all that believe read Hebrews 11!
Salvation does come WHEN we believe the proof of Bible faith is to obey the gospel.
MAN repents NOT God thus according to your theology repentance must be WORKS since man does it. If repentance is NOT works then baptism is NOT works they both stand or fall on the same premise MAN is doing it as his part of faith.
NO man is saved BY only what God has done that is what universalism is teaching the doctrine of inclusion. God has done His part perfectly it is man that must obey what grace and the blood has provided.
The lamb provided the blood but man placed it on the door post. GOD did not put one drop of blood on ONE doorpost in Egypt but He did provide the plan and the blood.
My reason for calling your doctrine Baptist is because I have been fussing with the Baptist for over 40 years and this is their doctrine. This is not meant as a personal insult. If a man doesn't want to be identified with the Baptist he should not promote Baptist doctrine.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

If a man doesn't want to be identified with the Baptist he should promote Baptist doctrine.

If a man, or woman, doesn't want to be identified as a baptismal regenerationist [a doctrine also espoused by Catholics and other extreme groups] he should not promote said doctrine.

We are buried at baptism Elder? Really just buried?

Romans 6 says baptism identifies us w/ his death, burial and resurrection.

Paul likens it to all three steps

... works that our PAJC brethren would like us to re-enact.

All fulfilled by the Work of the Lamb.

--------------------------------
3Or do you not know that all of us who have been (E)baptized into (F)Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death?
4Therefore we have been (G)buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was (H)raised from the dead through the (I)glory of the Father, so we too might walk in (J)newness of life.

Where does he make that point ... because he likens baptism to Christ's death verse 3 .... and HIS burial and resurrection in verse 4.

5For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

The blood ... the work of the Lamb destroys sin ... in this context.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

If a man, or woman, doesn't want to be identified w/ baptismal regenerationist [a doctrine also espoused by Catholics and other extreme groups] he should not promote said doctrine.

We are buried at baptism Elder? Really just buried?

Romans 6 says baptism identifies us w/ his death, burial and resurrection.

Paul likens it to all three steps

... works that our PAJC brethren would like us to re-enact.

All fulfilled by the Work of the Lamb.

--------------------------------
3Or do you not know that all of us who have been (E)baptized into (F)Christ Jesus have been baptized into His death?
4Therefore we have been (G)buried with Him through baptism into death, so that as Christ was (H)raised from the dead through the (I)glory of the Father, so we too might walk in (J)newness of life.

Where does he make that point ... because he likens baptism to Christ's death verse 3 .... and HIS burial and resurrection in verse 4.

5For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection:

6 Knowing this, that our old man is crucified with him, that the body of sin might be destroyed, that henceforth we should not serve sin.

The blood ... the work of the Lamb destroys sin ... in this context.

Dan you know baptismal regeneration does NOT require faith are you intentionally misrepresenting us or you don't care.
That is why they baptize babies like their reform descendants.
Again Dan you will have to resurrect the great Apostle Paul and debate him. I just quote and believe what he said.
Buried WITH Him in baptism.
Baptized INTO His death.
Planted TOGETHER in the likeness of His death.

Dan who does NOT believe the blood destroys sin???? Not I.
ONLY the blood saves-redeems-sanctifies-forgives-remits-pardons sins.
That is NOT the argument the argument is when and how. NOT whether the blood does the work or not and YOU know that as well as I.
You create strawmen then debate them. But I am NOT your strawman and I will refute your every misrepresentation of the Apostolic message.
Was your father a Papist?

[Brother Price]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

Was your father a Papist?

OK, I was lurking for a moment before I needed to start getting ready, but when I said this, I logged back on and decided to throw this in.

Bro. Epley, that was so far below the belt, it was not funny. You know better than to do this, my dear brother. This is just uncalled for.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Brother Price

OK, I was lurking for a moment before I needed to start getting ready, but when I said this, I logged back on and decided to throw this in.

Bro. Epley, that was so far below the belt, it was not funny. You know better than to do this, my dear brother. This is just uncalled for.

I would answer him but then we would have to put the views of his father on the stand.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by Brother Price

OK, I was lurking for a moment before I needed to start getting ready, but when I said this, I logged back on and decided to throw this in.

Bro. Epley, that was so far below the belt, it was not funny. You know better than to do this, my dear brother. This is just uncalled for.

No Bro. Price that is NOT below the belt Dan's father preached Acts 2:38 as salvation so if I am a Papist then his father was a Papist. My father believes somewhat like Dan I am not offended if someone calls him a Baptist. I did not mean offense I am appealing to Dan's reasoning above his prejudice against truth.

[SDG]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

No Bro. Price that is NOT below the belt Dan's father preached Acts 2:38 as salvation so if I am a Papist then he father was a Papist. My father believes somewhat like Dan I am not offended if someone calls him a Baptist. I did not mean offense I am appealing to Dan's reasoning above his prejudice against truth.

I will not enter this debate against anther's father's soteriological views ... or his views on the Godhead ... or make declarations of whose truth puts them in peril of hell fire ...

My reasoning is simple ... we are given facets of truth ... and it's our job to continue to study the Word ...

My father taught salvation as a life stepper ... all about relationship.

He also, towards the end of his life, believed baptism was symbolic of an inward work.

I also have seen a video of him likening baptism to a symbolic work in a wedding over 20 years ago. Thought it was interesting.

[Nahum]

Originally Posted by Daniel Alicea

I will not enter this debate against father's soteriological views ... or his views on the Godhead ... or make declarations of whose truth puts them in peril of hell fire ...

My reasoning is simple ... we are given facets of truth ... and it's our job to continue to study the Word ...

My father taught salvation as a life stepper ... all about relationship.

He also, towards the end of his life, believed baptism was symbolic of an inward work.

I also have seen a video of him likening baptism to a symbolic work in a wedding over 20 years ago. Thought it was interesting.

But it's fine to impugn the views of our fathers?

Classic.

Your daddy is off-limits, everyone else's is fair game.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Brother Price

OK, I was lurking for a moment before I needed to start getting ready, but when I said this, I logged back on and decided to throw this in.

Bro. Epley, that was so far below the belt, it was not funny. You know better than to do this, my dear brother. This is just uncalled for.

Interjection here. BP why complain about SE doing this but not when others do it? Your complaints are one sided.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by Brother Price

OK, I was lurking for a moment before I needed to start getting ready, but when I said this, I logged back on and decided to throw this in.

Bro. Epley, that was so far below the belt, it was not funny. You know better than to do this, my dear brother. This is just uncalled for.

You know, I was gonna push for some action on this but after reading what he posted and later posts I can see his intent was not to insult.

DA insists such a viewpoint is "paptist, sacramentalist, baptismal regenerationalist" in nature and if DAs father held such a view it would be fair then to ask DA if his own father was a such in DAs estimation.

In any case the Admins are looking at this.