Is Acts 2:38 Really Supported by History?

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by pelathais

No, it's just that we have no record of it. For someone to believe that such beliefs and practices have always existed is one thing, to say "I can PROVE IT!" is another. Our attempts to prove it have failed in embarassing fashion over the years.

Far better to say, "Here's the Bible, and here I am Oh Lord..." We have a Bible message, not so much an historical one. For though history is interesting, in the end we really are claiming that salvation is through the Jesus Christ revealed in the Bible.

Remember, His truth endures to all generations (Psalm 100:5). But we are a vapour, that appeareth for a little time, and then vanisheth away (James 4:14).

But even more important.....what IF there was not a continuous line of "believers"? Would that mean we are wrong? WHy do we have to insist there was a continuous line?

Nobody has a continuous unbroken line. Not even the Trinitarians, though the Trinity "line" might be longer and more prominent. At some point Arianism replaced Trinitarianism as the Doctrine of the RE, but they soon too went by the way side. There was no real foundational "Trinitarian" theology until after Nicea. Where were the baptist or methodists or any protestants all this time up until Luther? And even Luther still retained baptismal regeneration.