Click to join the conversation with over 500,000 Pentecostal believers and scholars
Click to get our FREE MOBILE APP and stay connected
| PentecostalTheology.com
Acts 2:38 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.
Varnel Watson
John David Barton you;ve mentioned this verse as a proof for your theory but it JUST does NOT say what you claim it to say We’ve discussed with Link Hudson in the original greek (OG) here http://probible.net/acts-238/
Varnel Watson
John David Barton I see you could not answer my very simple question on Acts 2:38, which you presented as one of your arguments in this group. We will discuss the rest at a later time However. since you cannot answer this one should it be understood that Acts 2:38 cannot prove oneness so we can continue with the next verse?
John David Barton
Troy Day next question?
Varnel Watson
Which question do you feel you answered?
Varnel Watson
John David Barton We will NOT have unbecoming posts in this group We will discuss the topic at hand in a Christian manner – this is a fare warning at this time
Now to the topic at hand just to start you up I posted a great discussion on the original Greek which you should consult before repeating arguments that have already been discarded as invalid prior to your arrival in the group Here it is again http://probible.net/acts-238/
The passage dispels the myth that in order to have the work of the Holy Spirit in your life, with the empowerment and gifting (what is traditionally regarded as the Baptism in the Spirit) a believer has to fulfill a series of requirements moving towards holiness in order to receive. This, again, is a holdover from Nazarene and Holiness traditions which made reception of the Baptism requisite on an almost legalistic basis.
Acts 2:38 teaches sin remission through repentance and baptism, or just repentance? I’m assuming faith is involved in either case.
Should then the clause, “eis aphesin ton hamartion hymon” be held as parenthetical because it makes a distinction between singular and plural verbs and nouns (example:
The verb for “repent” is plural and so is the pronoun “your”)?
Therefore the verb repent goes with the noun yours.
On the other hand, the imperative “be baptized” is singular, thus sets off the rest of the sentence?
Again, please discuss the OP at hand There is no need to progress in your judgmentalism toward a group that has well welcomed you while you are going through
– I am just here to learn
– I am just here to challenge your belief with the Bible
– Now I will cross posts bunch of junk from other groups to prove you wrong
– OK now you are all bad bad bad going to hell
None of this infantilism is welcomed here
Stick to the topic – look at the actual Greek text
Jevan Little you are welcome to share your popcorn 🙂
John Duncan
Walter Martin embarrassed Oneness heretics: https://youtu.be/2kbI2stxtGs
Varnel Watson
Where exactly do Oneness Pentecostals stand in relation to orthodoxy?
Are they in or out?
This difference in the matter of words used during baptisms represents something far more important: a different view of the nature of Father, Son, and Holy Spirit—what orthodox Christians refer to as the Trinity.
Beginning about 1913, certain Pentecostal ministers began to ask, “What is the correct apostolic formula for baptizing believers?” Several ministers concluded that the correct formula, the one used by the apostles themselves, was found in Acts 2:38, where Peter proclaims, “Repent, and be baptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ for the forgiveness of your sins.”
Attentive Bible readers will immediately ask, “But didn’t Jesus command the disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Spirit?” Indeed, that formula is found in Matthew 28:19. But Oneness Pentecostals just dont care WHEN asked if they believe in God the Father, Son, and Spirit, all Oneness Pentecostals would not know what to tell you and start twisting the BIBLE
Steve Losee
definitely out. I can agree to disagree about a lot of things, EXCEPT who God is and what salvation is.
John Duncan
They reject the GOSPEL. God sent NOT Himself but His ONLY Son.
Varnel Watson
John Duncan who rejects the GOSPEL ?
John Duncan
Troy Day those that reject the fact that God sent His Son but teach God came Himself. The atonement is God sending His Son which is a much greater sacrifice than God sending Himself.
John Duncan
Unitarians Reject God Sending His Son.
Steve Losee
it does NOT, because it’s not about who God is; it’s about what new believers should do.
Dale Sanger
When I click the links you post, it takes me to your webpage, but there is very little there. Are there supposed to be articles?
Dale Sanger
this is what I see.. when I click “View Original Post” it just reopens that page
Varnel Watson
at times when the author has removed the OP or facebook has enforced privacy settings the OP cannot be seen by all For this reason the website archives whatever FB rules allow – what you see is all we can get It says what it says
Varnel Watson
John Duncan who rejects the GOSPEL ?
GOD ALSO sent the Holy Spirit and JESUS said
that GOD is a spirit – yes God sent His Spirit
Michael Hazlewood
Careful All blasphemers will find their place in the lake of fire and You are blaspheming Scripture to push a religious narrative for a non-Biblical organization
Gerardo de Dominicis
Emmanuel Swedenborg and modalism. Interesting research.
Brian Roden
Peter was preaching to a multitude of Jews, who were used to ritual purifications/ablutions before entering the Temple, and some of whom may have been baptized by John in the Jordan some three years prior as a sign of repentance. They also knew about the proselyte baptism people converting to Judaism underwent.
So when Peter says “in the name of Jesus Christ,” he is not talking about a word formula to be spoken over the one being baptized, but about the basis of this baptism — repentance and faith in Jesus — as opposed to the other forms of baptism they knew about.
Michael Hazlewood
THAT is the most blatantly ignorant statement against Christ Jesus and his doctrine I have ever read
Brian Roden
Michael Hazlewood Care to explain why and back up your assertion?
Michael Hazlewood
Brian Roden You are intentionally misrepresenting the doctrine of Jesus Christ and I think you have been trained professionally to do this using good words and fair speeches to deceive the simple
Brian Roden
Michael Hazlewood Again, you make an assertion but no argument. Please explain, using the scriptural support, how and where I am misrepresenting the gospel.
Michael Hazlewood
I gave all the scriptures yall need to clear this up in your heads and you choose to stay with blaspheming
Michael Hazlewood
Brian Roden Luke 24:47 KJB
Brian Roden
Michael Hazlewood I’m sorry, your comment citing Luke 24:47 is the only biblical citation I see from you in this thread. And can you explain HOW that verse supports Oneness theology? Simply throwing out a Bible verse does not an argument make.
Varnel Watson
Michael Hazlewood from what you wrote seems you dont know what this verse even means
Miller Isaac
Been a week of this propaganda. 1 God. Got it never called a person. Case closed ?
Varnel Watson
Miller Isaac I would understand if you are unable to give a straight Biblical answer this time again
Miller Isaac
Troy Day you don’t listen to Bible. You made up your mind.
Varnel Watson
The water and blood of 1Jn. 5:8 could not be accepted as accredited personal witness in themselves. The Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit are the only persnal witnesses of this passage. If we consider these to be only one person, then there are not the required number of witnesses to establish the truth of the Sonship of Jesus Christ. We are forced by facts to admit all of 1Jn. 5:7-8 as inspired Scripture and therefore, the fact that the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost are three separate and personal witnesses instead of being only one person or witness. Indeed, many scriptures confirm these three witnesses:
(1) The Father (Jer. 29:23; Mal. 3:5; Jn. 5:31-37, notes; Rom. 1:9; Heb. 1:1-2; 2:3-4)
(2) The Son (Isa. 55:4; Jn. 18:37; 1Tim. 6:13; Rev. 1:5)
(3) The Holy Spirit (Rom. 8:16; Jn. 15:26; Heb. 10:15; 1Jn. 3:6) If all three are witnesses, then they must be separate Persons. The water and the blood simply confirm the intelligent testimonies of the three Persons of the Godhead and give additional weight to the Sonship of Jesus.
Miller Isaac
Troy Day see we replied to that like 5 times. All you do is cut and paste. Never read.
Varnel Watson
Paul L. King You’ve said to have done research on oneness What is your take on this Bible verse as a proof or disproof ?
Miller Isaac
Troy Day all you can do is cut and paste catholic propaganda
Paul L. King
No, Acts 2:38 does not prove oneness. Both oneness and Trinitarians affirm Acts 2:38 but mean different things by the verse. One has to look at the Bible as a whole, and not pick a verse out of context. One must balance what Jesus said in Matthew 28:19 (which was spoken and written earlier) with Acts 2:38. Jesus speaks of a triune baptism of which Acts 2:38 is a part.
Paul L. King
Miller Isaac This is not Catholic propaganda. You have your history wrong. The Roman Catholic Church was established long after the “Trinity” was coined, and the concept of the Trinity, as it has been amply shown, is implied throughout the Bible.
Miller Isaac
Paul L. King #groupthink
Miller Isaac
Troy Day all anyone learns here is that Christians are cut and paste happy haters of each other.