All Trinitarians are Lost!!!!!!!!!!! - Page 66

Originalist · #**651** 07-13-2014, 08:52 PM

Look how Holy Ghost baptism is described in Acts 15:8-9.....

Quote:

8 So God, who knows the heart, acknowledged them by giving them the Holy Ghost, just as He did to us,And put no difference between us and them, purifying their hearts by faith.

The only literal purification one receives is when they are baptized in the Holy Ghost. God does this BY (on account of) the blood of Christ. the reason God FORGIVES us in the waters of baptism is because we are making Jesus Lord and believing the gospel. While a REAL cleansing takes place in baptism, a LITERAL cleansing does not. The latter happens when the Purifier comes in.

Jason B · #**652** 07-13-2014, 08:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Originalist

Jason, I am what you refer to as a "three stepper". Do you see any difference in my approach versus other three steppers on AFF?

Yes originialist I do. I confess I haven't read all of your posts on this thread because I was using my cell phone most of yesterday.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Originalist

How is repeating Peter's command in Acts 2:38 to those seeking salvation an error in your opinion?

Its no error at all. I quote it all the time. It is the inspired Word of God and Peter made that call under the influence of the Holy Spirit. I think it is a great evangelical answer to sinners seeking to be saved. I preach it, I've also heard it quoted a surprising number of times by trinitarian preachers.

Perhaps I don't agree with your interpretation of that that means, but I certainly so no error at all in preaching Acts 2:38. I started a thread about this a while back:
http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...ad.php?t=28567

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

What is the Biblical response to Acts 2:38 & the rite of entry into the Chrisitan church, aka the body of Christ? Let us enter into a challenging and scriptural debate concerning these things. And yes, I do believe in tongues. My question is how do some force their rigid interpretation of Acts 2:38 (meaning if one hasn't spoken in tongues, they are damned, no matter what else) into the following verses? Please feel free to answer question by question, or verse by verse.

What was the BIBLICAL RESPONSE to Peter's preaching on the day of Pentecost in Acts chapter two? And what was the result of that response?

Answer, verse 41.

Then they that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls.

#1)they were baptized (an act which follows repentance in the normative New testament pattern)

#2)they were added to the church

Question, where are tongues present or even implied in this passage?

In Acts 2:37 the people ask Peter a question, "What shall WE do?"
Peter's reply:
"Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost. " Acts 2:38

Please correct me if I'm reading it wrong, did not Peter give them 2 specific commands? 1)repent 2)be baptized these are things that we choose to do, or not to do. The third thing is something that God only can do. Is it impossible that God would give the gift of the Holy Ghost to those who obey what Peter preached? Yet, as I mentioned, where are tongues present in the passage? Only as a means to preach the gospel between verses 4-11.

When they followed Peter's two commands, does not the Bible say they were added unto them (verse 41)?

Did not Luke quote Jesus in Luke 24:47 "And that repentance and remission of sins should be preached in his name among all nations, beginning at Jerusalem. "

Where does remission of sins take place, and entry into the Christian faith?
Furthermore, can your sins be forgiven and washed away, and you still be lost? On what account would you be damned, if you were to stand before God sinless?

And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord. Acts 22:16

Know ye not, that so many of us as were baptized into Jesus Christ were baptized into his death? Therefore we are buried with him by baptism into death: that like as Christ was raised up from the dead by the glory of the Father, even so we also should walk in newness of life. For if we have been planted together in the likeness of his death, we shall be also in the likeness of his resurrection: Romans 6:3-5

How can someone be baptized INTO Christ, and enter into newness of life, and still be lost (for not speaking in tonuges)? Can you be IN CHRIST, and be lost all at the same time?

For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ. Galatians 3:27

In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh by the circumcision of Christ: Buried with him in baptism, wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath raised him from the dead. And you, being dead in your sins and the uncircumcision of your flesh, hath he quickened together with him, having forgiven you all trespasses Colossians 2:11-13

Again, how can you be buried with Him, and risen with Him, and forgiven all, and be lost?

The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us (not the putting away of the filth of the flesh, but the answer of a good conscience toward God,) by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: 1 Peter 3:21

or, quoted without Paul's explaination- The like figure whereunto even baptism doth also now save us by the resurrection of Jesus Christ: 1 Peter 3:21

Now, I personally believe Paul's explaination is needed so that one doesn't teach baptismal regeneration. I am in no way promoting a view that the water does anything special in and of itself, but suggesting that it is our response to the gospel, and the command to be baptized that brings about the result. In other words faith in God and the blood of Jesus is the means upon which we recieve regeneration. And such faith is demonstrated in responding to the gospel through repentance and water baptism.

He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved; but he that believeth not shall be damned. Mark 16:16

Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost: Matthew 28:19

One thing I notice when studying tongues in the gospel, especially the great commission, is that tongues are not mentioned in Matthew's account. Mentioned in Mark account, not with salvation, but rather as signs that will foloow believers, but not necessarily for ALL believers (unless one suggest all believers are required to cast out devils, drink poisonous things,etc). And Luke speaks of the promise of the Father, but doesn't link it to salvation (mentioned in 24:47) but in the smae manner as Mark, as more of an "empowerment" given to the church to fulfill the mission of Christ. (Luke 24:49)

That enough to get us started.

Jason B · #**653** 07-13-2014, 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Originalist

Look how Holy Ghost baptism is described in Acts 15:8-9.....

The only literal purification one receives is when they are baptized in the Holy Ghost. God does this BY (on account of) the blood of Christ. the reason God FORGIVES us in the waters of baptism is because we are making Jesus Lord and believing the gospel. While a REAL cleansing takes place in baptism, a LITERAL cleansing does not. The latter happens when the Purifier comes in.

While I don't necessarily agree with the order you put forth, I think I agree with your main point. But I'd clarify my position by saying I think we are cleansed when we are justified by faith, because God imputes Christ's righteousness to us, He then fills us with His Holy Spirit (regeneration). I don't believe that a person is "clean" without the Spirit, as Romans 8:9 says if we don't have the Spirit we are none of His. But I deny the initial evidence doctrine. I assert the Spirit baptism is a work of God, and we shouldn't judge it based on the outward response. The Kingdom of God doesn't come with observation.

Originalist · #**654** 07-13-2014, 08:59 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

It is common for oneness Pentecostals to argue in favor of the initial evidence doctrine, which simply states that anyone who truly receives the Holy Ghost will speak in tongues at the time of the baptism. It is common to link Romans 8:9 to this doctrine "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the Spirit, if so be that the Spirit of God dwell in you. Now if any man have not the Spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Thus the conclusion is that if someone does not speak in tongues they have not received the Holy Spirit, they don't belong to Christ, and as such they are lost and facing an eternity in hell if they don't repent, get baptized in the name of Jesus, and receive the Holy Ghost with this initial evidence of speaking in tongues. We're pretty much all familiar with this doctrine, I'm just restating the obvious for point of reference for this thread.

But the problem of course is that there just isn't any solid scriptural foundation for this doctrine because the Bible never says that someone has to speak in tongues to be saved, nor does it ever say that speaking in tongues is the one universal initial evidence that someone has received the Holy Ghost.

See if there were just one scripture that said "except you speak in tongues you cannot be saved" or "we know the people who are saved because they have spoken in tongues" then the argument would be considerably stronger if not altogether settled. But of course there is NO scripture that teaches such, at best the doctrine is built on stringing some scriptures together, making assumptions, and arriving at a soteriological theory at best.

None of this so far is particularly new here on AFF, but what has me pondering tonight is why do oneness Pentecostals go into full denial mode when the shoe is on the other foot? For example, if there were scriptures that plainly said that if someone does X, Y, and/or Z they are saved or can know they are saved, why are those scriptures ignored? Why is the plain language of the inspired, infallible, inerrant, authoritative, living, Word of God not good enough for some oneness Pentecostals? How can someone really defend a teaching which insists that unless someone has spoken in tongues they cannot be saved, in the face of plain and basic scriptures?

Here's where I'm going: 1 John contains some things out I'd like to share with regard to this topic. I admit freely this is not all that scholarly, and I'm not trying to impress, so if you want to knock my study feel free to do so, but my question to oneness Pentecostals who affirm speaking in tongues is necessary for salvation is: "How can the initial evidence doctrine stand in light of these scriptures?"

First, the book of 1 John was written for 5 reasons"
1)For Christian fellowship (1:3)
2)that the believers joy may be full (1:4)
3)they the believers sin not (2:1)
4)that they might believe on the name of the Son of God (5:13)
5)that they might know they have eternal life (5:13)

In first John there are a variety of "tests' given so that we can know who the true believers are and who the false teachers/false believers are. These tests are along 3 lines
Social=have to do with our relationships with others
Theological=have to do with what we believe
Moral=have to do with how we live.

In the order they appear in the book, here are scriptures which tell us HOW WE CAN KNOW WE ARE SAVED:

Assurance of Salvation:
1 John 1:71 John 1:7,9
1 John 2:31 John 2:3,5-6
1 John 2:10
1 John 2:17
1 John 2:23b
1 John 2:29
1 John 3:6,7
1 John 3:9
1 John 3:14
1 John 3:17-23
1 John 3:24
1 John 4:2
1 John 4:41 John 4:4,6-7
1 John 4:11-161 John 4:11-16,21
1 John 5:1-5
1 John 5:10
1 John 5:11-13
1 John 5:18-19

Evidence we are not saved:
1 John 1:6
1 John 1:81 John 1:8,10
1 John 2:4
1 John 2:91 John 2:9,11
1 John 2:15-17a
1 John 2:22-23a
1 John 3:61 John 3:6,8
1 John 3:10
1 John 3:14b-15
1 John 4:3
1 John 4:5,61 John 4:5,6,8
1 John 4:20
1 John 5:10
1 John 5:12b

1)We can know that we are saved if we believe that Jesus is the Son of God, the Messiah/Christ, that He came in the flesh, made atonement for our sins, and is God. These are the theological tests.
2)We can know that we are saved if we have love for fellow Christians (in the modern sense this would mean not only those of our own organization, that is in fact the opposite, a party spirit), love for all people, and genuine concern and compassion for those who are in need. In a word-if our lives are defined by love for others, it is a strong evidence that we belong to God. These are the social tests.
3)We can know that we are saved if we are trying to live Christ like lives, defined by holiness, godliness, righteousness, and a keeping of God's commandments. If our lives reflect Christ we can know that we are saved. These are the moral tests.

No where in 1 John does he specify (or even mention) speaking in tongues. It is not even a factor. But we are told very specifically:

1 John 5:13 These things have I written unto you that believe on the name of the Son of God; that ye may know that ye have eternal life, and that ye may believe on the name of the Son of God.

A couple of things.

Most one stepper Pentecostals affirm the initial evidence teaching, though they say it is subsequent to the new birth.

Secondly, even if the initial evidence doctrine is not true in all cases, this does not change the fact that those in Acts did not receive the Spirit automatically upon conversion, with the exception of Cornelius. There was a delay of moments to possibly days. How can there be a new birth of the Spirit without the Spirit? While the Apostles did affirm salvation by faith, they never equated that to "instantaneous salvation" occurring the moment someone made a profession of faith. There are no records of the Apostles saying things like "just repeat this prayer" or "just ask Jesus into your heart" etc.

Sean · #**655** 07-13-2014, 09:01 PM

[QUOTE=Originalist;1324641]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Sean

[COLOR="Red"]The Holy Ghost falls on people to lead them to water baptism and get their sins remitted. QUOTE]

Love ya man, but that is simply downplaying the significance of Spirit baptism.

God gives people his spirit for the following reasons........

New birth (John 3:5)

The rest I'll just repeat my previous comments....

Furthermore, God credits those who have the Spirit as having met all the righteous requirements of the Law through Christ's death. ...

Those Trinitarians who have the Holy Ghost are not in the flesh, and belong to Christ in spite of their imperfect doctrine of God and in spite of the fact that the man who baptized them messed it up......

Again, in romans 8 Paul is not contrasting "weak Christians" who are "in the flesh" with those stronger Christians who are "walking in the Spirit". He is contrasting to dominions, the flesh and the Spirit. he makes it clear that one who has the Spirit dwelling in them is NOT IN THE FLESH. Sean, you contradict Paul by saying that those Christians with the Holy Ghost who had an imperfect baptism are still in their sins. Here Paul clearly contradicts any such notion.

Furthermore, those same Holy Ghost filled Trinitarians have life because of the imputed righteousness of Christ that is in them.....

Is Christ in them or not, Sean?

Continuing, those Holy Ghost filled Trinitarians will one day have their mortal bodies quickened just like those Holy Ghost filled Oneness folk...

Finally, those very imperfect Holy Ghost filled Trinitarians who though they have imperfect doctrine, are spirit led and Spirit adopted children of God, heirs of God, and joint heirs with Christ......

The Apostle Peter declared in Acts 5 this concerning Holy Ghost baptism....

When God gives someone the Holy Ghost, he is declaring that that person has "obeyed" the gospel according to Peter. What gospel? The gospel Peter mentioned in verses 29-31....

Acts 5:32 blows any idea out of the water that the Holy Ghost falls on people just to lead them to be rebaptized so they won't still be in their sins.

Holy Ghost filled Trinitarians believe that God raised Jesus, exalted him, and he alone can forgive sins. When they submit to that message, God fills them with his Spirit just like us.

Is there doctrine perfect? No. Should the preacher have invoked the name of Jesus when he baptized them? Yes. Should we try to lead them into more truth? Yes. But we should admonish them as BROTHERS, for all the reasons I mentioned in this post.

These points are irrefutable despite the efforts of some to twist the clear wording and context of Romans 7 and 8. It would be better to claim these people really don't have the Holy Ghost than to come up with a ridiculous soteriology that makes Oneness Pentecostals look like a bunch of buffoons.

Again bro.....you completely missed what I was saying....You keep quoting Romans to the UNSAVED(here on AFF that have not been baptized in the Name of Jesus)...It is really a "spiritual blindness" that you guys are under.

Originalist · #**656** 07-13-2014, 09:05 PM

[QUOTE=Sean;1324664]

Quote:

Originally Posted by Originalist

Again bro.....you completely missed what I was saying....You keep quoting Romans to the UNSAVED(here on AFF that have not been baptized in the Name of Jesus)...It is really a "spiritual blindness" that you guys are under.

I am NOT quoting Romans to the unsaved. I'm showing you through Romans that there are some people God says are saved you say are not.

Sean · #**657** 07-13-2014, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Hardly. The only reason that you can come to such a conclusion is because you do not want to truthfully weigh what I have to say. Since you are assuming that I "skip Acts" let me ask you, why do you skip the gospels and go straight to Acts? Did nothing Jesus say matter? Or do you only pick and choose what you want, like for example you'll take John 3:3-8 but reject what follows later in the chapter, not even finishing the dialogue, glossing over 3:15-16, and 36, or the tons of scriptures in the gospel of John, the words of Jesus himself, which explicitly teach that genuine faith in Him is sufficient to save:

John begins by noting that "as many as received him, to them gave he power to become the sons of God, even to them that believe on his name." (John 1:12) and ends his book by stating that his intent was to write so that the reader "might believe that Jesus is the Christ, the Son of God; and that believing ye might have life through his name." (John 20:31)

(* for scriptures that reflect a direct link between belief and salvation/eternal life)

*1:12-13

John 1:49-50

John 2:11

John 2:23-25

*3:15-18

*3:36

John 4:39-42

*5:24

John 6:29

John 6:35

*6:40

*6:47

John 6:68-69

John 7:37-39

John 8:30-32

John 9:35-38

John 10:26-28

*11:25-27 (cf. John 4:41-42 & John 6:68-69)

John 11:42,45

John 12:11

John 12:42-46

John 13:19

John 14:10-12

John 14:29

John 17:3

John 17:21

John 19:35

John 20:29

*20:31

What's your point? Was ACTS written to lost people? Scripture interprets scripture, we should see what scripture says as a whole on any given subject. All scripture is profitable for doctrine. The oneness pentecostal way of overemphasizing one book is the sure way to come to a faulty conclusion, and what do you know, they arrived at a conclusion that no one in Christianity has arrived at prior to the early 1900's. That should be a red flag right there.

Jason, here is how your Bible was actually put together by the translators for your reading. It is in 3 categories....#1, the Gospels(to teach folks about Jesus)...#2, Acts(to teach us how to be saved)...#3 Epistles (to teach us(born again saints only) how to STAY saved). Reading it out of order causes false doctrine as your guys are experiencing in your "alternative" plan of salvation.

I challenge your assertion that conversion in Acts was not faith and repentance. Oneness Pentecostals who hold to the 3 step salvation error typically pick and choose what they want out of Acts. It is a very inconsistent hermenutic and does not all reflect the truth of the matter:

Conversions in the Book of Acts

There are roughly 21 accounts of conversions to the Christian faith in the book of Acts. Some of these are direct reactions to a message preached, others are statements made in passing by the writer of Acts. Here is a list of the conversions in Acts, if they were in response to a preached message the text of that message will appear in parenthesis.

Conversions

Acts 2:41 (Acts 2:14-40)

Acts 4:4 (Acts 3:12-26)

Acts 8:12

Acts 8:36-38 (Acts 8:35)

Acts 9:6,17-18

Acts 10:44-48 (Acts 10:34-43)

Acts 11:20-21

Acts 13:12

Acts 13:48

Acts 14:1

Acts 16:14-15

Acts 16:30-34

Acts 17:4 (Acts 17:3)

Acts 17:12

Acts 17:34 (Acts 17:22-31)

Acts 18:8

Acts 18:24-28

Acts 19:18-19

Acts 19:1-7

Acts 28:24

Conviction as a result of Apostolic Preaching in the Book of Acts

Acts 2:37

Acts 5:33

Acts 7:54

Acts 24:24-25

What Must We (I) Do?

Acts 2:37

Acts 9:6

Acts 10:6

Acts 16:30

Sermons in the Book of Acts

Acts 2:12-40 (Peter) Resurrection- Acts 2:24,32 Repentance- Acts 2:38

Acts 3:12-26 (Peter) Resurrection- Acts 3:14-15 Repentance-Acts 3:19

Acts 4:8-12 (Peter) Resurrection-Acts 4:10 Repentance (by implication) Acts 4:12

Acts 5:29-32 (Peter) Resurrection-Acts 5:30 Repentance-Acts 5:31

Acts 7:2-53 (Stephen) Resurrection (by implication) Acts 7:52,55 Repentance (by implication) Acts 7:51

Acts 8:5,12 (Phillip)

Acts 10:34-43 (Peter) Resurrection-Acts 10:39-41 Repentance (by implication) Acts 10:43 cross reference w/Acts 11:18

Acts 13:16-41 (Paul) Resurrection-Acts 13:30,37 Repentance (by implication) Acts 10:38-39

Acts 14:15* (Paul) Repentance-Acts 14:15

Acts 14:22 (Paul)

Acts 17:3 (Paul) Resurrection-Acts 17:3

Acts 17:22-31* (Paul) Resurrection-Acts 17:31 Repentance-Acts 17:30

Acts 20:18-35 (Paul) Repentance-Acts 20:21

Acts 24 (Paul before Felix)

Acts 26 (Paul before Agrippa) Resurrection-Acts 26:23, Repentance-Acts 26:20

*When preaching to pagans the common method was to preach about God as Creator and Judge. When preaching to Jews the common method was to prove from the scriptures that Jesus was the promised Messiah.

Scriptures in Acts that Support Salvation by Faith:

Acts 2:21

Acts 10:43

Acts 11:17-18

Acts 15:11

Acts 16:31

Jason, here are some things you kinda passed up...

Acts 2:38..."repent and be baptized for the (remission of sins)"

2:41....3000 souls were added(baptized) (no Spirit indicated yet)

8:12....both men and women baptized in Samaria (no Spirit yet)

8:13....Simon baptized (no Spirit indicated yet)

8:16....Samaritans baptized only, (no Spirit yet)

8:38....Ethiopian eunuch baptized (no Spirit indicated yet)

9:18....Saul(Paul) baptized

10:48....Gentiles baptized

16:15....Lydia and her household baptized (no Spirit indicated yet)

16:33....Philippian jailer and his household baptized (no Spirit indicated yet)

18:18....Crispus, all his house and many Corinthians baptized (no spirit indicated yet)

19:5....Disciples of John rebaptized

19:16....the statement is made "ARISE, BE BAPTIZED, WASHING AWAY THY SINS".

Jason B · #**658** 07-13-2014, 09:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Originalist

A couple of things.

Most one stepper Pentecostals affirm the initial evidence teaching, though they say it is subsequent to the new birth.

Secondly, even if the initial evidence doctrine is not true in all cases, this does not change the fact that those in Acts did not receive the Spirit automatically upon conversion, with the exception of Cornelius. There was a delay of moments to possibly days. How can there be a new birth of the Spirit without the Spirit? While the Apostles did affirm salvation by faith, they never equated that to "instantaneous salvation" occurring the moment someone made a profession of faith.

Let me respond to your last line first.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Originalist

There are no records of the Apostles saying things like "just repeat this prayer" or "just ask Jesus into your heart" etc.

Agreed. Neither do I say that. Nor do a large minority of conservative evangelical Christian preachers. Just like charismatic/pentecostals get a bad name because of phony faith healers, the false prophets who preach the prosperity gospel, and the whacko snake handlers, so then there is a misconception that anyone who preaches justification by faith is teaching easy believism, that is not the case. For example consider some of these books The Gospel According to Jesus, The Gospel According to the Apostles, Hard To Believe, Ashamed of the Gospel (all by John MacArthur, all on the subject of true saving faith verses the phony evangelism and unbibilical methods so common in mainstream American Christianity, all these books deal with the problem of false conversion in our era), consider Radical by David Platt, The Cost of Discipleship by Deitrich Bonhoeffer, or the preaching and books of Leonard Ravenhill. Phil Johnson, Steven Lawson, and a ton of others that strongly emphasize the need to repent of sins and life which is characterized by the fruit of the Spirit, a desire to walk in holiness, and to Glorify God in all we say, think, and do.

Or simply consider a short 5 minute video such as this:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dc5lY9YP_bE