Is Acts 2:38 Really Supported by History?

[TRFrance]

Pelathais...I'm not sure it was necessary to make an entirely new post out of this. But anyway...

1- You're really stuck on Arnold's book for some reason. My conversations on the topic included him and then moved on to other historical references regarding elements of Acts 2:38/water-spirit doctrine...but you're stuck on him and his book like a dog to a bone. Quite puzzling.

2- As I've said on another post "I don’t claim that his book is proof that Acts 2:38 salvation 'exists in an unbroken line throughout history'. I do contend say that the historical information out there, (both in his book and outside of it), lends credence to the contention that Acts 2:38 salvation always existed somewhere, even though there is not a solid paper trail to prove it definitively.

3- I have never claimed that it was important to contend that there was an unbroken line throughout history. That is a false argument. You've set up this "straw man" argument and then torn it down quite impressively. I get the feeling you're quite proud of your rhetorical prowess. But again, arguing forcefully against something I've never even said is really not all that impressive in the end, is it?

4- Your post could easily give one the false impression that I was trying to "prove" my religion by an demonstrating an unbroken line of adherents throughout the centuries. It appears that some of those who've posted on this thread so far may have already gotten that impression. But that (whether intentional or not) would be an unfortunate misrepresentation of what I expressed to you in several posts on that previous thread.

My original point (back on that other thread) simply had to do with the fact that one particular aspect of water/spirit doctrine ,i.e. the idea of baptism for remission of sins, was a common idea in Christendom through many centuries (even though it wasn't always applied in Jesus' name.) It was a simple historical reference as part of a larger point being made, a point you've apparently missed by now. I'm surprised you've taken that small molehill and turn it into Mount Everest.

I don't know why you have such a fixation with this topic.

Is that somewhat related to your comment on that previous thread ?:

Originally Posted by pelathais

I'm not at this position through wishy-washiness, either. It's been a long battle, but for me a very important battle.

As for me, there's nothing for me to "battle" about. The Acts 2:38 salvation plan is the only valid biblical plan of salvation. Now if there were historical references to prove that others held the same beliefs throughout the centuries, then fine; that would be interesting to know. But even if there is no such proof to be found, it's irrelevant. Acts.2:38 was the plan of salvation on the day of Pentecost, and its still the plan of salvation today in 2007.

.