Question For One Step Apostolics

[KeptByTheWord]

I would like to address the issue of "believing". When someone says "I believe" something... does one simply continue on as before, with no actions to accompany that statement belief, or should there be a corresponding action to match up to that statement of belief?

This is where I see a problem with those that say "just believe". The true mark of one who has believed involves a corresponding action.

If you believe your house to be on fire, do you continue to stay in your house, doing whatever you were doing, or do you take action to leave the house, because you believe it to be on fire? If you really believe, you will leave your house. Belief + action.

So for those who say "I believe", and feel there is no action required, that is exactly where they are wrong. Truly believing in something requires action, and that action would be to follow Peter's instructions as given in Acts 2:38. While the book of Acts does not mention every step of a believing action in every account, this does not mean it did not take place.

And if it mattered enough for Jesus to be baptized by the John the Baptist before beginning his earthly ministry, along with the Spirit descending like a dove upon him, accompanied with his words in Mark "he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved", is that not enough action on the part of Jesus himself to show the necessity of water baptism and being filled with the Spirit?

You see, when you truly believe something... action is required, or you have not really believed.

[Fionn mac Cumh]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Baptism is VERY important. If someone refuses baptism there is a very good chance (line 99% IMO) that they have not truly repented and have a counterfeit faith.

Baptism is so closely linked to conversion in the NT that a very strong case can be made for the absolute necessity of water baptism (such as Church of Christ and Oneness Pentecostals believe). But I do believe that saying baptism is necessary (is the moment of salvation) is problematic and doesn't fit with the truth if justification by faith, nor the many cases where Jesus obviously forgave people based on belief (and yes I know that was before the cross, I'm more than willing to discuss), or the fact that salvation has always been by faith (As Romans 4, Gen 15:6, and Hebrews 11 demonstrate).

But scriptures such as Acts 2:38, 22:16, Mark 16:16, and 1 Peter 3:21 can be strung together to make a strong argument. I grant that...I'm just not convinced they are to be understood in the baptismal regeneration sense.

As for tongues....

awesome post

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by Pressing-On

I am going to use the Amplified for Romans 3:21-25 to begin.



The Book of Romans has Paul using 51 references from the Septuagint, not being in conflict, but taking possession of these verses to show that they bear witness to the Gospel.



For all who believe? Paul references the who – “to the Jew first and also to the Greek/Gentile”.

What are they to believe? That the Messiah has come. That is not the end of their faith. It is only the beginning.

Notice Galatians 3:14:



And notice Acts 2:33:



Romans 8:9



Romans 8:11-12




Peter testifies in Acts 2:33 that what they see and what they hear is the Holy Ghost that was promised.

Romans 3:23-25



These verses of scripture in Romans 3:21-25 are simply saying that the Law and the Prophets bear witness to the gospel, that God’s grace is upheld and that Jesus Christ is Israel’s God, the God of Abraham.

It is about foundation – belief – to the Jew first and also the Greek.

[Jito463]

And of course, the most important aspect of 'Repentance + Baptism in Jesus Name + Infilling of Holy Ghost' is that it mirrors the 'Death + Burial + Resurrection' of Jesus. One could no more deny the importance of any of those three salvational steps, than to deny Jesus was buried or that He rose again. As for speaking in tongues upon infilling of the Holy Ghost:

Acts 2:4
4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

Acts 10:44-47
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Acts 19:5-6
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

I'm sure I'm probably skipping some, but that was just from a quick search of the verses in question.

[Michael The Disciple]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

I would like to address the issue of "believing". When someone says "I believe" something... does one simply continue on as before, with no actions to accompany that statement belief, or should there be a corresponding action to match up to that statement of belief?

This is where I see a problem with those that say "just believe". The true mark of one who has believed involves a corresponding action.

If you believe your house to be on fire, do you continue to stay in your house, doing whatever you were doing, or do you take action to leave the house, because you believe it to be on fire? If you really believe, you will leave your house. Belief + action.

So for those who say "I believe", and feel there is no action required, that is exactly where they are wrong. Truly believing in something requires action, and that action would be to follow Peter's instructions as given in Acts 2:38. While the book of Acts does not mention every step of a believing action in every account, this does not mean it did not take place.

And if it mattered enough for Jesus to be baptized by the John the Baptist before beginning his earthly ministry, along with the Spirit descending like a dove upon him, accompanied with his words in Mark "he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved", is that not enough action on the part of Jesus himself to show the necessity of water baptism and being filled with the Spirit?

You see, when you truly believe something... action is required, or you have not really believed.

Amen in the faith hall of fame in Hebrews 11 it is demonstrated perfectly. Noah built an ark by faith. Abraham left town by faith. Moses chose to forsake Egypt by faith so on and so forth.

[obriencp]

Originally Posted by Jito463

...As for speaking in tongues upon infilling of the Holy Ghost:

Acts 2:4
4 And they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance.

Acts 10:44-47
44 While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.
46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,
47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

Acts 19:5-6
5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus.
6 And when Paul had laid his hands upon them, the Holy Ghost came on them; and they spake with tongues, and prophesied.

I'm sure I'm probably skipping some, but that was just from a quick search of the verses in question.

http://www.apostolicfriendsforum.com...5&postcount=31

[Sean]

Originally Posted by Jason Badejo

Yes Sean I'm familiar with that argument, I think its weak. Perhaps another time I will explain why. I have to get ready for work now.

Ok bro., I think we must address it. Lets do it.....
The books of Romans through Revelation were written to folks that have already passed through Acts...(notice how the translators put our N.T. in a "certain" order...
Matt- John(written to sinners to spark their belief in Jesus)....
Acts(what must we(they) do after belief in Jesus)....
Romans - Revelations(how to walk in the "new life" for those that passed through Acts)...

If we "remove" Acts from the conversion process like many do these days, you then go to Romans 10:9(skip Acts and "jump" from John to Romans) and give folks the "alternate" plan.....

Here is a list of the Epistles and who they were designated for to be reading....

Romans 1:7 (the saints of Rome)
1 Cor. (the CHURCH of God in Corinth) vs 2
2 Cor. (the Church of God at Corinth and Achaia) vs 1
Galatians (the churches of Galatia)vs 2
Ephesians ( the saints at Ephesus) vs 1
Philippians (the saints at Phillipi with the bishops and deacons) vs 1
Colossians (the saints and faithful brethren at Colosse) vs 2
1 Thessalonians (The church) vs 1
2 Thessalonians (the church) vs 1
1 Tim. (to Timothy only) vs 2
2 Tim. (to timothy only) vs 2
Titus (to Titus only) vs 4
Philemon (to Philemon, Apphia, Archippus and his house CHURCH) vs 1 and 2
Hebrews ( The whole thing addressing christians) 2:1, 3:1 (holy brethren) etc.
James ( his saved Jewish BRETHREN scattered abroad) vs 1 and 2
1 Peter (the scattered saints (elect) of God) vs 1 through 4
2 Peter (all saints) vs 1 through 4
1 John (all saints or brethren) chapter 2:7
2 John (the elect lady and her children) vs 1
3 John ( to Gaius only) vs 1
Jude (to them that are sanctified by God...and called)
Revelation (the 7 churches of Asia Minor) chapters 1-3


If we take sinners to these epistles to the saints that are "already" born again. They are reading "spiritual" passages from a "carnal" perspective.

In essence, they are reading somebody elses' mail that doesnt apply to them yet.

They must pass through Acts to be "qualified" to read the epistles.

[Aquila]

As I've studied and immersed myself in prayer, the Lord has emphasized over and over to me that the doctrines of redemption must be taught and embraced. They settle nearly every question.

1. Election (God's choice of a people to be saved according to His sovereign will, purpose, and foreknowledge)

2. Predestination (God's predetermined glory for His chosen Elect body)

3. Atonement (Christ's work of satisfying the law for the Elect)

4. Propitiation (Christ's satisfying God's wrath against the sins of the Elect)

5. Prevenient Grace (the drawing and illumination of the lost soul through the Holy Spirit)

6. Conversion (faith, repentance & water baptism)

7. Justification (imputed righteousness)

8. Regeneration (being born again of the Spirit)

9. Adoption (membership in God's family)

10. Sanctification (the act of taking part in the divine nature and thereby being conformed into the image and likeness of Christ)

11. Death (the intermediate state wherein the soul of the Elect saint of God is present with the Lord in Heaven awaiting resurrection & glorification)

12. Resurrection & Glorification (receiving a resurrected and transformed body in glorified form that is fashioned perfectly into the image of Christ)

[BrotherEastman]

Originally Posted by KeptByTheWord

I would like to address the issue of "believing". When someone says "I believe" something... does one simply continue on as before, with no actions to accompany that statement belief, or should there be a corresponding action to match up to that statement of belief?

This is where I see a problem with those that say "just believe". The true mark of one who has believed involves a corresponding action.

If you believe your house to be on fire, do you continue to stay in your house, doing whatever you were doing, or do you take action to leave the house, because you believe it to be on fire? If you really believe, you will leave your house. Belief + action.

So for those who say "I believe", and feel there is no action required, that is exactly where they are wrong. Truly believing in something requires action, and that action would be to follow Peter's instructions as given in Acts 2:38. While the book of Acts does not mention every step of a believing action in every account, this does not mean it did not take place.

And if it mattered enough for Jesus to be baptized by the John the Baptist before beginning his earthly ministry, along with the Spirit descending like a dove upon him, accompanied with his words in Mark "he that believeth and is baptized shall be saved", is that not enough action on the part of Jesus himself to show the necessity of water baptism and being filled with the Spirit?

You see, when you truly believe something... action is required, or you have not really believed.

Exactly,

People do not realize that the birth of the church began on the day of Pentecost (Acts 2). The birth of the church did not start at the cross (although the cross was the reason for the birth), but rather when the message of the cross was obeyed in Acts 2. The death, burial, and resurrection is demonstrated by an ACT, which includes repentance, baptism of not only the water, but by the Spirit. Not ACTING on the works of the cross is in definition not ACTING on the work of saving grace which was demonstrated at the cross!!

Jesus told Nicodemus that unless he was born again of the WATER and the SPIRIT he could not see the kingdom of God!! The BIRTH of the church is through the water and the Spirit which should be elementary not only to the Apostolic faith, but to Christianity in particular.

Being baptized by the Spirit (or the Holy Ghost) IS with the initial evidence of speaking in tongues. Peter demonstrated this by actually doing this along with the other 119 in the upper room.

[mfblume]

So-called "one strep" apostolics lack a huge factor in their exegesis. They claim that Holy Ghost baptism and water baptism are post-soteriological. They occur AFTER salvation. But we have NO CASE in the entire New Testament where that concept is laid out. They claim the people on the day of Pentecost who received the Holy Ghost and were baptized experienced the baptism simultaneously, but yet distinctly, with their salvation. But we find no explanation to this effect and no example saying someone received the Spirit and were saved before they had Holy Ghost baptism and water baptism.

There is no New Testament plain statement anywhere saying that you have the Spirit in you before Spirit baptism. One has to simply want to believe that.

On the other hand, we have plain example of Spirit baptism and water baptism at salvation. And then there is Jesus' words saying he that believes AND IS BAPTIZED shall be saved. Saying that Mark 16:16 is an interpolation is an excuse. With the Bible AS IS, baptism is part of salvation. 1 Peter 3 says it is part of salvation no matter how you slice it. It is as much part of remission of sins as is the blood of Jesus.

Jesus did not often use the phrase "for the remission of sins," but when He did it meant the same thing.

Mat 26:28 KJV For this is my blood of the new testament, which is shed for many for the remission of sins.

Act 2:38 KJV Then Peter said unto them, Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.