No I don't see "calling on the Lord" as a rite in it'self, I was referring to the baptismal ceremony in particular.
The ceremony is sacred and should not be approached haphazardly. Baptism is for those who have already believed in, and received Christ and experienced the salvation of the Lord. I don't see baptism as the initial conversion or "calling on the Lord" yet it publicizes what has occurred internally and it makes good sense that the name be proclaimed at the event.
I think you misunderstood me. We traditionally view baptism as a "ceremony" or a "rite". I believe that in NT times it was a moment of prayer and repentance. It was while standing in the water that one called on the name of the Lord.
It is also great to see you and I pray that everything is going very well for you. Lord bless you in a great and mighty way, my Brother.
Thank you my friend.
What do you think about the Trinitarian understanding that instead of persona, or three personalities, there are three separate beings, totally separate from each other?
While they share of the essence of GOD, they don't share the abilities of one another. They all act in a unified effort, but are never one literally. They are all called GOD, yet they are not all called SON, FATHER, or HOLY GHOST. Three totally separate beings, individuals, yet all acting as a unified one.
Yet, isn't this four beings if we count the essence of GOD? In the Trinitarian triangle we have GOD in the middle and arms that connect to the father, son, and spirit. Then, on the outside of the triangle it says the father is not the son, and the son is not the father, and the father is not the spirit. Yet all together doesn't that make up four instead of three?
Where is this teaching found in the Torah, or the prophets?
I think Trinitarians simply see God through the stained glass window of church tradition. Most Trinitarians who simply read the Bible describe God in ways that don't do violence to Oneness doctrine, even if they don't see the more subtle nuances of our teaching. I don't rule out a person's salvation just because they are Trinitarian. Nor do I assume one is saved merely because they are Oneness Apostolic.
Both schools of doctrine have their strengths and weakenesses. I don't think either one is 100%, though I do think Oneness comes the closest to what the Apostles must have believed. I think that if the Apostles read some of our Oneness books they'd agree with a lot of it... and then correct us on a few of the finer points.
I don't believe I said anyone was saved over the words being uttered...Jesus name baptism is what it is...choose your language, sentence structure and adjectives but Jesus is a necessity.
I don't disagree that the name of Jesus is the central feature in baptism. My issue is that the it is the one being baptized that is to call upon the name of Jesus... not the preacher doing the baptizing (Acts 22:16).
I don't disagree that the name of Jesus is the central feature in baptism. My issue is that the it is the one being baptized that is to call upon the name of Jesus... not the preacher doing the baptizing (Acts 22:16).
I let the annointed man of God call the name of Jesus for me as he buried me in the water as not to suck water into my lungs...
I let the annointed man of God call the name of Jesus for me as he buried me in the water as not to suck water into my lungs...
Too bad that's not biblical. Notice that Paul was baptized differently...
Acts 22:16 (King James Version)
16And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
Ananias told Paul to call on the name of the Lord himself when he was baptized. Ananias didn't call the name of Jesus for Paul like our preachers do today. Sadly...we get the mindset I see here. Reverence toward the priest speaking the liturgy, not a one on one call for remission between you and the Lord. If YOU didn't call on the name of Jesus... you only got wet.
Too bad that's not biblical. Notice that Paul was baptized differently...
Acts 22:16 (King James Version)
16And now why tarriest thou? arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on the name of the Lord.
Ananias told Paul to call on the name of the Lord himself when he was baptized. Ananias didn't call the name of Jesus for Paul like our preachers do today. Sadly...we get the mindset I see here. Reverence toward the priest speaking the liturgy, not a one on one call for remission between you and the Lord. If YOU didn't call on the name of Jesus... you only got wet.
Yep. Some folks just aren't hyperliteral enough.
__________________
Hebrews 13:23 Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty
Oh well, time for the old easy-believism, greasy grace, sloppy agape, Bapticostal, PCI one-stepper to say again, "The condition of the heart of the one baptized is far more important than the words spoken or the amount of water used in the ritual."
Earlier today I remember reading about a Pentecostal (or would we call him Charismatic since he's AG?) minister who witnessed to a young man while crossing the desert in the western U.S. He witnessed to him and the man believed in Jesus and committed his life to Him. The minister used a bottle of Evian (I think that was the brand) water to "baptize" him and they went on their separate ways. Now, my Baptist and OP background had some twinges when I read about that "baptism." I thought, well, that might be all right if both the minister and the candidate went down into the water bottle for the baptism like Phillip and the Ethiopian Eunuch in Acts chapter 8, but, I calmed down afterward and figured, that's really between them and the Lord.
We can sure be just as straight and true as a gun barrel and at the same time be just as empty and cold if we are not careful.
Linear Mode
