A Confusing Message of Salvation?

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

How about

"When someone says "I'm sorry my repetition frustrated you and ruffled your feathers " it's good to ask "Was that supposed to be an apology?"

Well, he did frustrate you and ruffle your feathers. But maybe the new AFF rule should state, "When someone grovels to your complete satisfaction, kisses your feet, and eats humble pie for a couple of days, THEN you should accept their apology."

Sounds good.

[Sam]

Originally Posted by notofworks

Well, he did frustrate you and ruffle your feathers. But maybe the new AFF rule should state, "When someone grovels to your complete satisfaction, kisses your feet, and eats humble pie for a couple of days, THEN you should accept their apology."

Sounds good.

Nah,
they need to be "set down" for an appropriate time period to "prove" themselves.

[Praxeas]

Originally Posted by notofworks

Well, he did frustrate you and ruffle your feathers. But maybe the new AFF rule should state, "When someone grovels to your complete satisfaction, kisses your feet, and eats humble pie for a couple of days, THEN you should accept their apology."

Sounds good.

Or how about just a simple "Im sorry"? Is that so hard to do? It must certainly be easier than groveling, kissing someone's feet and eating humble pie for days.

[notofworks]

Originally Posted by Praxeas

Or how about just a simple "Im sorry"? Is that so hard to do? It must certainly be easier than groveling, kissing someone's feet and eating humble pie for days.

I concede, you're right. When people apologize to me, I always make sure they do it exactly the way I want them to!

[Chateau d'If]

Someone's soul is on the line, and instead of Peter repeating the "formula" of Acts 2:38, he tells them to repent? Where's the rest of the formula? It's not as if they had ever heard the formula before. Why did Peter exclude the other two steps?

Where did the concept of a salvation formula originate?

When I think of a formula, I think of a mixture of ingredients which comprise a new concoction. How can we view the procurement of salvation valid only when the ingredients within Acts 2:38 are preached and obeyed? Especially when we realize Peter only preached the formula to one group of people, and there is no record that Paul ever preached it?