Search results

Yes, my friend. Absolutely. …Jesus inherited his name from the father, meaning that the name of the father is Jesus. …the name of the son is obviously Jesus. …And he said that the Holy Ghost shall be sent in my name. And we all know scripture says that the Holy Ghost is Christ in us. That’s...

Kind of. There are millions of what we know as oneness believers etc, that understand that the name of the father, the name of the son and the name of the Holy Ghost is the name of Jesus. That’s why they all baptize in Jesus name. Even Peter understood this.

If water is not mentioned per baptism in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of sins, then are you guys reading it like this? Then Peter said unto them repent and be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ by the Holy Ghost for the remission of sins and you shall receive the gift of the...

That is an awesome post you just made. May I ask you a question, do you guys in your church celebrate and obey Acts 2:38 as the plan of salvation?

The parable is showing that the church is not ready. All 10 asleep. However, half of them have the oil which is represent the Holy Ghost. Those that have the Holy Ghost and per Acts 2:38 will be taken. That is why you must obey Acts 2:38 and… Walk in the Spirit.

No, as a matter of fact, Matthew 25 also depicts the rapture. It defines the entire church as being asleep. That doesn’t look like they’re crying crying out for mercy. Nobody is going to sleep through the tribulation.

Amen, in Jesus name.

You’re welcome, my friend.

Millions believe that the name of the father is Jesus, millions believe that the name of the son is Jesus and millions of believe that the name of the Holy Ghost is Jesus.

No, Peter knew the name of the Father is Jesus, the name of the son is Jesus, and the name of the Holy Ghost is Jesus. You didn't know that??? Peter did not have a written NT and you do, yet you don't know that? What are they teaching folks these days, anyway? I know...they teach the name of...

Yes, Jesus blew it according to you guys for choosing Peter, handing him the keys, then Peter not baptizing in the titles but in Jesus name only. When you say you would rather obey Jesus than Peter, you implicate Jesus for not forseeing that the disciples in Acts would louse it up and baptize...

Whatever you Catholics tried to add to our 27 books got debunked and thwarted. Though the ancients debunked them, you can read them all you want. I won't stop you from reading extra Biblical literature that was rejected. It's a free country.

Let's see... Verse 7... 7 Let us be glad and rejoice, and give honour to him: for the marriage of the Lamb is come, and his wife hath made herself ready. 8 And to her was granted that she should be arrayed in fine linen, clean and white: for the fine linen is the righteousness of saints. 9...

I was baptized like you as an infant. I saw this... 3 And he said unto them, Unto what then were ye baptized? And they said, Unto John's baptism.... 5 When they heard this, they were baptized in the name of the Lord Jesus. ...rebaptized, which you have not done.

When he commanded to baptize in the name of the son, he meant his name is "son"?

Jesus gave Peter the keys to the kingdom in Matthew 16. Blame Jesus not Peter.

Jesus is the name. My titles are father, son and husband

The catching away is well before the plagues. The saints are already in heaven in Rev 19 at the supper. They return to earth later. If you’re still here, yikes.

No, he actually obeyed the command in Matthew chapter 28. To the letter. He knew the name of the father son and Holy Ghost is Jesus… Lesson 6- Pages 4-5 I made this video to explain it

I was once a Catholic and somebody showed me Acts 2:38. I owe it to my fellow man to let them know what somebody showed me.