All Trinitarians are Lost!!!!!!!!!!!

[Pliny]

Originally Posted by seekerman

Pure hogwash. Nothing in scripture teaches such a thing. Bunk.

Even if you believed that, and I guess you do, you have a tremendous problem with reconciling that with the idea that a person who is redeemed by the blood is going to hell because they haven't spoken in tongues. Thus your dilemma in preaching the insufficiency of the blood of the Lamb message

Your theology is a perfect example of error birthing error which births even more error. And you claim you're the head of the church

Oh great one please tell us when remission of sins happens and how it happens.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by seekerman

The Roman church teaches baptismal regeneration just as the oneness pentecostals do. Immersion or sprinkling, both result in baptismal regeneration in it's conclusion.

Close. The RCC teaches baptism confirs th Spirit to a person and are regenerated at that moment. No OP teaches this. Furthermore Oneness people usually teach its not the baptism itself that does anything.

Also not all OPs teach the sasme thing regarding baptism but that whatever happens is done by God based on our faith in Jesus when we are baptised

Lastly, all Christian groups taught baptism was essential until recently. Lutherans, methodists/weslyans etc etc.

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Pliny

Oh great one please tell us when remission of sins happens and how it happens.

The question is, however and whenever it happens, is it sufficient. You're attempting to take the focus from that issue.

And...please....I'm not THAT great.

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Close. The RCC teaches baptism confirs th Spirit to a person and are regenerated at that moment. No OP teaches this. Furthermore Oneness people usually teach its not the baptism itself that does anything.

Also not all OPs teach the sasme thing regarding baptism but that whatever happens is done by God based on our faith in Jesus when we are baptised

Lastly, all Christian groups taught baptism was essential until recently. Lutherans, methodists/weslyans etc etc.

"Baptismal regeneration is the name given to doctrines held by some Christian denominations which maintain that salvation is intimately linked to the act of baptism"

[AreYouReady?]

As a person who was raised in the RCC, I was sprinkled (called baptism) when I was an infant for the washing away of the original sin. The original sin was the sin of Adam and Eve, as explained to me by the nuns in catechism classes. Probably had Father, Son and Holy Ghost called over me during the sprinkling. I don't know...I can't remember, after all I was only an infant.

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by seekerman

You've pointed this out before and I had hoped that you'd had realized your original error by now. You still haven't learned what the MIDDLE voice "epikalesamenos" means in this passage. It means that the person who is the subject of the action is doing the action. Paul, who is being baptized in this instance, is the one calling on the name of the Lord thus "epikalesamenos" is used.

NOPE!

[Steve Epley]

Originally Posted by seekerman

Pure hogwash. Nothing in scripture teaches such a thing. Bunk.

Even if you believed that, and I guess you do, you have a tremendous problem with reconciling that with the idea that a person who is redeemed by the blood is going to hell because they haven't spoken in tongues. Thus your dilemma in preaching the insufficiency of the blood of the Lamb message

Your theology is a perfect example of error birthing error which births even more error. And you claim you're the head of the church

I never claimed I was THE Head of THE Church either you can't read or you can't tell the truth I will allow the readers to decide.

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

NOPE!

YEP!

"…calling on the name of the Lord" (epikalesamenos to onoma autou). The word "calling" (epikalesamenos) is nominative case, singular in number, masculine in gender, participle, aorist 1 in tense, and middle voice (The Analytical Greek Lexicon, pg. 157). The participle form (the "ing") shows ongoing action and a relationship to baptism and the middle voice indicates that this is something the subject (Saul or Paul) is doing to benefit himself.

Study to show yourself approved.

[seekerman]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I never claimed I was THE Head of THE Church either you can't read or you can't tell the truth I will allow the readers to decide.

There's not but ONE church, anything else is nothing but the works of men.

[ILG]

Originally Posted by Steve Epley

I never claimed I was THE Head of THE Church either you can't read or you can't tell the truth I will allow the readers to decide.

Hmm. Anyone who would claim that you claimed you were the head of the church doesn't know your theology. Here's Epley's theology 101:

Christ is the head of the church. But the saints must submit to the pastor for he watches for their souls. If they rebel it is as the sin of witchcraft. So, you see, Epley would never claim to be the head of the church. I doubt it if he would stand up and say that anyone who didn't obey him was going to hell or committing the sin of witchcraft. You see, it is up to YOU to connect those dots. That way, he doesn't have to connect them for you.