Practical application of Pentecostal theology in politics, economy and social issues
Repentance and Baptisim:
Do you see them as two separate events, or merely different aspects of the same event?
This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.
It is sometimes depicted that the basic argument to read “the creation story” (Genesis 1) as a non literal story are modern science and the evolution theory. But I believe that the biggest problem with a literal view is in the text itself. More specific in the differences between the “creation stories” in Genesis 1 and 2.
Vegetation created:
God said, “Let the land produce vegetation: plants yielding seeds
according to their kinds, and trees bearing fruit with seed in it
according to their kinds.” It was so. The land produced vegetation –
plants yielding seeds according to their kinds, and trees bearing
fruit with seed in it according to their kinds. God saw that it was
good. (1:11)
Human created:
Then God said, “Let us make humankind in our image, after our
likeness, so they may rule over the fish of the sea and the birds of
the air, over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over all the
creatures that move on the earth.” (1:26)
No vegetation:
Now no shrub of the field had yet grown on the earth, and no plant of
the field had yet sprouted, for the Lord God had not caused it to rain
on the earth, and there was no man to cultivate the ground. (2:5)
Human created:
The Lord God formed the man from the soil of the ground and breathed
into his nostrils the breath of life, and the man became a living
being. (2:7)
Vegetation created:
The Lord God planted an orchard in the east, in Eden; and there he
placed the man he had formed. The Lord God made all kinds of trees
grow from the soil, every tree that was pleasing to look at and good
for food. (Now the tree of life and the tree of the knowledge of good
and evil were in the middle of the orchard.) (2:8-9)
All quotes are from the NET Bible.
Is there a way to make a strong argument that both those stories are to be read literally (as if it was written by a modern historian)? How could those different accounts be merged?
Michael Hazlewood
circumcision is nothing , uncircumcision is nothing but of the heart ; Romans 2 and Colossians 2 KJB
Michael Ellis Carter Jr.
I believe they are separate events but can occur at the same time in certain settings. At our church we do not conduct a lot of spontaneous baptisms so repentance will always come first. We By we I mean I want to make sure the person honestly understands what is happening and that they are not just caught up in an emotional moment. The process of repentance at baptism is Almost an ad hoc insurance policy but more a formal time of reflection and introspection for the new believer. If I have misunderstood the point of your message sorry and feel free to redirect me. Basically I see them as two different but necessary events. I think of the believers Paul Encountered in the book of Acts where he ask have you received the Holy Spirit since you believed. They were considered believers but still need proper baptism.
Varnel Watson
Jared Which baptism specifically? There are at least 7 baptisms connected to the believer in the NT?
Street Preacherz
“the paradox is that God must destroy in us, all illusions of righteousness before he can make us righteous” – Martin Luther
Varnel Watson
Jared Water baptism and salvation – separated works. When you say the Name do you convey oneness ?
Varnel Watson
Michael Ellis Carter Jr. lets not forget entire sanctification too