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

[pelathais]

Originally Posted by TRFrance

You're right. I do have a disparaging view of these men and what they represent. So that provides the answer to your own question. I'm not seeking to emulate them. That wouldn't make any sense now, would it?

Pelathais... calm down. It was all just tongue in cheek.
Apparently you didn't "get it".

I am confused now. BOOMM posted a pic that I think I described rather accurately. It involved people who have been literally slaughtering each other for centuries. Despite the carnage, I remained "calm," comfortable in my own home.

If you were the one who posted, perhaps you could have followed along more closely. The site that was referenced includes inflammatory rhetoric directed against people who were not "saved" in the minds of the writer. I posted an example. This is the behavior that many OP's seek to emulate.

Again, no answers to the questions. Go back and reread the first part of this thread and then ask yourself, where did all the "3 steppers" go?

[nahkoe]

I don't think you'll like my answer. Or someone sure won't.

Originally Posted by pelathais

And the questions go unanswered. This thread started off with a question which was followed by series of "I get my feelings hurt..." type of responses. Those who complained, complained further that they were the Apostolics, so why should they have to hide on a forum dedicated to Apostolic discussions?

No clue, I would think they'd be standing tall and proud. Oh, I mean I would be. lol I still hesitate to call myself Apostolic. I don't know all the history and as we'll see later on.......

Originally Posted by pelathais

I asked, why does it seem that there are so many who lay hold of the title "Apostolic" but they don't hold to the teachings of the Apostolic Fath movement that spurred the development of sites like this?

Cuz I don't know the history. I know the Bible. I don't mind learning history, if someone can make it interesting enough to not sleep through. I've picked up a bit reading here and find it fascinating in small pieces at a time.

Originally Posted by pelathais

And, why do they complain that those who still hold fast to the "old paths" are "compromisers" and belittle and condemn them?

Still no answer. We were making a little progress when a smoke screen was thrown up and I am left without having the Apostolic dialogue that I was teased into thinking I would have tonight.

Perhaps Nathan has the best idea. I did get a pretty cool Christmas present, though the editor appears to be one of those "lost trinnies." Still...

I dunno.

And what is it?! I like books.

I laughed at Nathan's post.

[simplyme]

Originally Posted by LordChocolate

Acts 2:38 to the bone. You will go to hell without it. You cannot be saved in this day and time without it. Belief in any other is another gospel. No acts 2:38, no heaven. PERIOD!! EXCLAMATION POINT!!!

I like this!
Its THE ONLY WAY., the TRUE LIGHT of the WORLD
follow that light!

[crakjak]

Originally Posted by simplyme

I like this!
Its THE ONLY WAY., the TRUE LIGHT of the WORLD
follow that light!

The OPs view of Acts 2:38 is not the light of the world, Jesus said HE is the light of the world.

[Michael The Disciple]

The full Bible plan of salvation includes belief, repenting of sin, baptism into the name of Jesus and receiving the gift of the Holy Spirit. One who has experienced this has been born of God.

[ChristopherHall]

One cannot be saved outside of Acts 2:38. Acts 2:38 is the biblical response to the gospel. Apostolic Christianity has flourished since the Upper Room.

http://www.daystart.org/apostolichistory.pdf.

[TRFrance]

Originally Posted by Felicity

Bro. France ....

Many PAJCers believe that a person baptized in the titles can/will be saved. And many, when the rubber meets the road, also believe that tongues aren't crucial to salvation.

I believe I'm closer to and have more in common with the typical PAJCer than to the typical Baptist when it comes to soteriology.

OK Felicity..
If you must get technical, let me get technical too...

You're totally missing my point here. Totally. You keep referring to what "many" PAJC-ers believe. I can find you some some stuff that "many PCI-ers" believe also, but that wouldn't be necessarily relevant.

The PAJC position I'm referring to is the "standard Oneness" position as expressed by the UPCI as a whole, which of course the PAJC morphed into after the merger.

That "standard position" is what I'm referring to, as stated in their Articles of Faith, and many UPCI publications on the topic. I'm not talking about what "many PAJCers" believe" ...that baptism in the titles is not essential, or "many PAJCers" ...believing that tongues are not essential. I think you understand what I'm talking about here. The essential differences between the standard PCI and PAJC/UPCI positions have been discussed at length on this site many many times.

So again, my contention remains:
A Baptist says you are saved and ready for heaven when you repent and accept Jesus by faith.
A PCI believer says you are saved and ready for heaven when you repent and accept Jesus by faith.
The standard PAJC/UPCI position is that repentance and "accepting Jesus" is not salvation in itself, but also requires water baptism and spirit baptism in order to complete the NT salvation plan.

Therefore... on the issue of salvation... PCI believers are closer in doctrine to Baptists than to Apostolics who hold the "3- step" plan of salvation.

That seems pretty clear in light of all the facts. But it seems like you're unwilling to acknowledge that. What's the matter? Are you just uncomfortable with the reality that you PCI's and the Baptists are so doctrinally close on such a key issue? I'm not even saying it as an indictment. It is simply a conclusion based on basic observation, and a conclusion that many PCI folks on this board would have no trouble conceding themselves.

It is what it is, Felicity. For some of your PCI brethren, it might be an uncomfortable truth, but its the truth nonetheless.

Originally Posted by Felicity

I believe I'm closer to and have more in common with the typical PAJCer than to the typical Baptist when it comes to soteriology.

You may say that, but if you believe someone is saved and ready to meet Jesus right after he "accepts Jesus" into his heart.. then you're much closer to their teachings than ours.

And finally, regarding your comment...

Originally Posted by Felicity

Bro. France ....

And many, when the rubber meets the road, also believe that tongues aren't crucial to salvation.

Well, "tongues" (as a simple outward sign) not essential to salvation. The Holy Ghost is though, and when it comes tongues are the sign that one has gotten filled with the Holy Ghost. Of course, that's also part of the standard PAJC-UPCI teaching I'm referring to. Its an important distinction, even though many who disagree with Acts2:38 salvation will often try to "muddy the waters" on this issue. I've never heard any PAJC/UPC believer say "tongues are part of salvation"... Although there is a clear link between the two, it is simply an oversimplification for people to say "they think tongues are needed for salvation". Many times I have gotten the clear impression that people who state it that way are being intellectually dishonest by glossing over the real issue in question, which is whether one needs to be filled/baptized with the Holy Ghost to be saved.


...
...Anyway, I'm beginning to get very tired of discussing this topic on this site.

[Joseph Miller]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Why would you think I would not answer this??

Peter, James, and John were the founders Apostolic Faith Movement, and I agree 100% with their teachings that one must repent of their sins, be baptized in Jesus Name for the remission of their sins, and receive the Holy Ghost.

AMEN!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Joseph Miller]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

BTW-

I used the term "3 steppers" because I wanted it to be clear that I meant those that believe that one is not born again until they have obeyed Acts 2:38 in its fullness, and not those that believe salvation occurs prior to the completion of Acts 2:38. Most of you know what I meant anyway.

That is what the Bible teaches. If someone doesn't believe this then they don't believe the Bible and if they don't believe the Bible they won't spend eternity with Jesus.

[Joseph Miller]

Originally Posted by stmatthew

Why do you demand that I accept those that did not lay the foundation of the Apostolic doctrine?? I do not ignore the fathers of the Apostolic movement. The foundation was not laid by Haywood, Goss, or Ewart. It was laid by the Apostles, Jesus Christ being the cornerstone. Why would I look elsewhere to find truth. If we compare ourselves with anything other than the Word, then we are destined to get off coarse.

The more I read this guys posts the more I like him.