Revising Pentecostal history: 1908-1912

[Jason B]

Originally Posted by GISG

If baptism in His Name isn't essential then why was it ever mentioned, never mind practiced by Jesus, then the Apostles in the Book of Acts.

I'm not saying it is wrong to believe in baptism invoking the name of Jesus. I was baptized in like manner, baptize in like manner, and do believe it is the more correct way to baptize from a New Testament and early church history perspective. However just because something is mentioned and practiced, doesn't mean it is essential for salvation (examples, fellowship meals, prayer meetings, observing the Lord's Supper, selling goods and distributing to the poor, etc). There is value in all of these things, some of greater spiritual degree than others, but I these things are post salvational. Things that characterize believers and are part of any healthy church body (with the exception of selling goods/land), but not essential to salvation. Else salvation is something we are continually working toward, never sure when we have done enough to be saved, or stay saved.

Originally Posted by GISG

Repentance seems to be a given in being necessary,

Yes. Essentially every gospel call to salvation (old & new testaments) either explicitly calls one to repentance or strongly implies it. There is no salvation without repentance. That much is very plain. And this issue of repentance is what will separate the sheep from the goats (not baptismal formula, not tongues, not standards).

Originally Posted by GISG

but following the example of the water and Spirit birth in the Book of Acts isn't? That doesn't make sense. Jesus said we would have to be born of the water and Spirit.

There are 21 conversions in Acts, 18 of them do not mention or imply tongues at all. Even just going to Acts 2, we see the call in v.38 and the response in v.41. How many people spoke in tongues? The Bible is absolutely silent about it. They repented and were baptized, just as Peter preached to them. Acts 2:38 contains two commands and a promise, not 3 commands. Beyond that, there is more to soteriology than the book of Acts. That's not to discount Acts (as I mentioned there are 18 conversions in Acts where tongues are not mentioned), but salvation is spoken about in the gospels by Jesus himself, and explained in the epistles, especially by Paul (and especially in Romans and Galatians) and by the apostle John (especially in 1 John). To look only at the book of Acts and attempt to make Acts 8,10, and 19 normative for all Christians of all time not only fails to match up to what we see in all of recorded church history (2nd-21st century) but also does not agree with the New Testament witness. The idea that repentance, baptism, and speaking in tongues is what it took to be saved isn't consistent with the whole of New Testament teaching.

And yes, in John 3 Jesus said we must be born again, there is serious question whether the water refers to baptism or natural birth in John 3. I'm not sure that it matters what one's interpretation is on that because the real point is that except someone is born of the Spirit they can't be saved. Even if we say John 3:5 is referring to baptism, I think we can all agree that the real emphasis is on the birth of the Spirit, new birth from above/regeneration.

What I find interesting is that OPs will hang on the water/spirit doctrine based on this (perhaps faulty) interpretation of John 3:5 and totally ignore that the entire theme both of the gospel of John, and the Epistles of John is BELIEVE. Right from the start we see this in John 1:12 and he closes his book with it in John 20:31. Jesus Christ himself strongly emphasized believing unto salvation many many times, most of which tends to be minimized by those who adhere to the water/spirit doctrine. John 1:12, 2:11, 3:15-18, 4:39,41,53; 5:24, John 6:28-29, 37-47, etc (you know we could keep going for a long time on this). Point being, Jesus talked an awful lot about believing unto salvation, but 3 steppers don't seem to care. Its all just swept under the rug. And let's not assume he wasn't aware of false converts who "believed" but didn't really. John clearly makes the distinction between those who "believed" with a false, shallow belief (see John 2:23-25; 6 {the entire chapter}, and 12:42-43 for example).

Thus any soteriological system that demands a man must do more than repent and trust in Christ (i.e which adds baptism, and especially tongues to salvation) has the burden of proof laid upon it to harmonize, not only the gospels and the various teachings of Jesus himself, but also everything that follows Acts (Romans, Galatians, Ephesians, 1 John, etc).

Originally Posted by GISG

It's what follows after that is what has always stumped me. Some say it's the outward appearance and the inward some say outward isn't necessary, but we need to keep the commandments and now I hear "doing the will of God", what does that mean exactly?

Some concentrate too much on the outward. The fact is if the Holy Spirit dwells within, the Spirit will take care of the outward. It will come together, because God is working, not because man is demanding. Sadly the scripture "man looks on the outward appearance, but God looks on the heart" is used for so-called Christians to mutilate their body, which is supposed to be the Temple of the Holy Ghost. However just because something is abused by people who really don't desire holiness in the inward parts anyway, doesn't mean we need to judge all who don't abide by our standards as infidels. If the Holy Spirit dwells in a woman, she will cover up her body. If he dwells in a man, he will try to be careful what he looks at and what he exposes himself too. To be born again is to live a Spirit led life, and if someone truly has the Spirit dwelling within, they don't need a pastor/church to give them a long list of do's and don'ts. Why can't we trust the Spirit to produce fruit in His own?

Originally Posted by GISG

I once went to the Lord with these questions, not that they were a surprise to Him, however I voiced my thoughts all the same.
I felt that defeat I spoke of earlier, so much so I was actually planning on telling the Lord good-bye. I did say to Him, thank you for trying, but I'm not getting this and I know I can't possibly be doing things correctly, post obeying Acts 2:38.

That's what legalism does. It beats you down, because NO ONE actually keeps ALL the rules/standards. We all sin (though as we grow in Christ we should certainly be seeing sin be purged out of our life and conforming more and more like Christ).

The greatest truth one can ever understand is that the righteousness of Christ is imputed to us who believe. We don't have to perform "post Acts 2:38", we don't have to keep ourselves saved, nor live a righteous enough life to be accepted of God. We are accepted of God based on our belief in and submission to Christ as our Lord and Savior, and it is His blood that cleanses us from ALL iniquity (prior to conversion and also after). Salvation isn't just being forgiven at water baptism and then living a godly life to "stay saved". Salvation is the act whereby God declares us right in His sight and adopts us into the family. We are not hired as if we are working during a probationary period and may be let go if we fail to perform, we are adopted, we are His children, and can have supreme confidence in that.

Originally Posted by GISG

I felt He spoke to me and said, "Love Me, love others and I'll take care of the rest". It's the sole reason I keep at this walk.

Amen, and He will.

"Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal, The Lord knoweth them that are his. And, Let every one that nameth the name of Christ depart from iniquity." ~2 Timothy 2:19