Christians and Jews are both anti Acts 2:38.

[1stCenturyLady]

I see many Christians attacking the Jewish beliefs for rejecting Christ but the reality is, that Christians that do not obey Acts 2:38 are as disobedient as the Jews that rejected Peter in the first century.

I'm a Christian finally, and it is BECAUSE OF Acts 2:38 so I don't know why you said that.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

OK, I think we had a problem with communication. No I am Pentecostal.

Really? I had no idea. So am I in a sense.

 

[Truther]

I'm a Christian finally, and it is BECAUSE OF Acts 2:38 so I don't know why you said that.

Awesome. I celebrate anyone that obeys Acts 2:38.
Your sins are officially remitted as a result of obeying it.
You have secured your name in the book of life.

 

[robert derrick]

It does not make her what God is to say that she is the Mother of the Second Person of the Trinity.

Scripture says to honor they mother and thy father.

Jesus always honored His Father God. As a boy, he honored his mother after the flesh.

As the Christ come down to provide Himself a sacrifice for sins, He never honored her as His 'Mother'.

Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

So then, according to Scripture, who is the mother of the Christ and Savior of the world?

There is always certain simple Scripture to conclude all arguments about Scripture.

Mary was the mother of the child Jesus after the flesh. She was never endued with power from on high in herself. The Holy Ghost only overshadowed her for an instant to conceive the Lord God as a baby in her womb. She has never been the 'Mother' of God, nor of the Son, nor the of Word, nor of the 2nd Person of the Godhead.

The risen God of Israel had a mother after the flesh as a child, but He had God for His Father always.

 

[robert derrick]

The Word was God… God’s word is him. Your word is you. My word is me. Trumps word is Trump. Since when does a persons word not emanate from them or become part of them?
Your word can start wars or get you put in jail or make you a success. Jesus said by your words you’ll be justified and by your words you’ll be condemned.

Don’t even attempt to tell God that your word is not you at the judgment day. He won’t buy that. It is enough to cause a person to be lost for eternity.

This means your word is definitely you and God’s word is definitely him.

That is nothing but carnal and humanistic reasoning.

As I said, quote the Scripture: God is His Word. We are our word.

What you give is Buddhist theology. A man is his word, and if he speak his word, and I receive and consume his word, I am he, and he is me.

That is not Scripture of God.

A man is as good as his word, but a man is not his word. Neither is God.

Maybe you should cut to the chase with Pentecostal Oneness, and tell me why this is so important to you, to put up humanist reasoning as Scripture of God.

I was full holiness Pentecostal. Just not Oneness.

Now, I am all Christian only.

 

[Abaxvahl]

So then, according to Scripture, who is the mother of the Christ and Savior of the world?

There is always certain simple Scripture to conclude all arguments about Scripture.

Mary was the mother of the child Jesus after the flesh. She was never endured with power from on high in herself. The Holy Ghost only overshadowed her for an instant to bring the the Lord God as a baby into her belly. She has never been the 'Mother' of God, nor of the Son, nor the of Word, nor of the 2nd Person of the Godhead.

The risen God of Israel had a mother after the flesh as a child, but He had God for His Father always.

Answering sentences in the order quoted above: According to the Scripture Mary is His mother. Matthew 1:16, 1:18, 1:25, 2:11, 2:13, 2:14, 2:20, 2:21 and onwards. Unless you would impute error to St. Matthew, St. Joseph, and St. Gabriel, the Prophet, and the angels, it is proper to say that Mary is the mother of Jesus.

Perhaps.

Define "after the flesh," people do not give birth to just bodies they give birth to individuals, now of course the Personhood of Christ is eternal but He assumed to Himself a human nature which was taken from the human nature of Mary in time. If this is what you mean then it still is proper to call her the Mother of God unless the deity of Christ is denied or Nestorianism or some other heresy is to be asserted (and Nestorianism means the Cross was of no effect and we are not saved ultimately, so I don't think you want to go there). If the Second Person of the Trinity is Incarnate then as St. Paul says He has a human mother, being "born of a woman."

The Deity is uncreated and Mary is created, so obviously she did not cause God to be if that is what you are railing against. Never was this asserted.

 

[michaelvpardo]

I see many Christians attacking the Jewish beliefs for rejecting Christ but the reality is, that Christians that do not obey Acts 2:38 are as disobedient as the Jews that rejected Peter in the first century.

There is no difference to God.

We are either part of the 1st century church via Acts 2:38 obedience or we are not via disobedience to Acts 2:38.

If we disobey it, we are not of the 3000 at Pentecost, but we are as the Sanhedrin and it's "followers of God".

There is no grey area with God. Peter provided no grey area to the murderers of Jesus, nor to us in the modern world.

I am amazed at the voluntary blindness I see towards the solution to the sinners of Acts these days.

It would be a cold day in hell when most modern Christians would get baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of their sins as Peter commanded them in Acts 2:38.

Peter has been shunned by the Christian community right before the return of Christ, in these days.

Blindness in part has not just happened to Israel as per Romans 11, but to Christians also.

Not my experience except in the RCC (as a child). How many churches have you actually attended on a regular basis?

 

[Truther]

Scripture says to honor they mother and thy father.

Jesus always honored His Father God. As a boy, he honroed his mother after thef lesh.

As the Christ come down to provide Himself a sacrifice for sins, He never honored her as His 'Mother'.

Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come.

But he answered and said unto him that told him, Who is my mother? and who are my brethren? And he stretched forth his hand toward his disciples, and said, Behold my mother and my brethren!

So then, according to Scripture, who is the mother of the Christ and Savior of the world?

There is always certain simple Scripture to conclude all arguments about Scripture.

Mary was the mother of the child Jesus after the flesh. She was never endured with power from on high in herself. The Holy Ghost only overshadowed her for an instant to bring the the Lord God as a baby into her belly. She has never been the 'Mother' of God, nor of the Son, nor the of Word, nor of the 2nd Person of the Godhead.

The risen God of Israel had a mother after the flesh as a child, but He had God for His Father always.

Mary, a sinner, gave birth to God?

 

[Truther]

Not my experience except in the RCC (as a child). How many churches have you actually attended on a regular basis?

Not my experience except in the RCC (as a child). How many churches have you actually attended on a regular basis?

In 42 years as a Pentecostal?
Several.

 

[Truther]

That is nothing but carnal and humanistic reasoning.

As I said, quote the Scripture: God is His Word. We are our word.

What you give is Buddhist theology. A man is his word, and if he speak his word, and I receive and consume his word, I am he, and he is me.

That is not Scripture of God.

A man is as good as his word, but a man is not his word. Neither is God.

Maybe you should cut to the chase with Pentecostal Oneness, and tell me why this is so important to you, to put up humanist reasoning as Scripture of God.

I was full holiness Pentecostal. Just not Oneness.

Now, I am all Christian only.

Question. In Gen 1, did God speak his word and create all things by his word?

Was his word him or someone else?

 

[Truther]

Really? I had no idea. So am I in a sense.

Great.
Our call is to preach Acts 2:38.

 

[Curtis]

I see many Christians attacking the Jewish beliefs for rejecting Christ but the reality is, that Christians that do not obey Acts 2:38 are as disobedient as the Jews that rejected Peter in the first century.

There is no difference to God.

We are either part of the 1st century church via Acts 2:38 obedience or we are not via disobedience to Acts 2:38.

If we disobey it, we are not of the 3000 at Pentecost, but we are as the Sanhedrin and it's "followers of God".

There is no grey area with God. Peter provided no grey area to the murderers of Jesus, nor to us in the modern world.

I am amazed at the voluntary blindness I see towards the solution to the sinners of Acts these days.

It would be a cold day in hell when most modern Christians would get baptized in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission of their sins as Peter commanded them in Acts 2:38.

Peter has been shunned by the Christian community right before the return of Christ, in these days.

Blindness in part has not just happened to Israel as per Romans 11, but to Christians also.

Unlike what the UPC and the CoC churches seem to think, there is much more to the Christian Faith, and doctrines, than just water baptism.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

Awesome. I celebrate anyone that obeys Acts 2:38.
Your sins are officially remitted as a result of obeying it.
You have secured your name in the book of life.

The problem with Acts 2:38 is most people don't know what true repentance is. They also believe they have the Holy Spirit because Scripture says that is what will happen, but they've never had any experience to go along with it.

 

[1stCenturyLady]

Great.
Our call is to preach Acts 2:38.

I totally agree. It certainly has been my mission in life. We must be born again of the Spirit; otherwise, we do not belong to Christ. Romans 8:9

 

[robert derrick]

Question. In Gen 1, did God speak his word and create all things by his word?

Was his word him or someone else?

As I said. You make a mental leap from one to the other without any Scripture to support it. It may sound ok to the human mind, but it is not Scripture, nor does it sound right to the mind of the Spirit:

1. God said let there be light, and there was light and it was good.

No Scripture says God was what He said.

2. And God is Light and in him is no darkness at all. And Christ is that Light, the true light which lighteneth every man...

The light of Genesis 1 is natural light of the earth, the Light that God is, is that of the Spirit.

And the darkness is not that of nature, but of the carnal mind that does not comprehend, acknowledge the true Light of Christ.

And so, why are you trying to have God be His words in the world, which created all things?

The plain statement of 'God being His words', must include that which rules nature, as well as that which pierces to the hearts of men, which would thus make him the sun and moon and stars and trees, which are produced by His words ruling nature.

If God were His words of the Spirit, then when we speak His words of Scripture, we would be speaking God into the air.

And so, why is it so important in the contexts of Acts 2:38, and Pentecostal Oneness baptism?

 

[robert derrick]

The problem with Acts 2:38 is most people don't know what true repentance is. They also believe they have the Holy Spirit because Scripture says that is what will happen, but they've never had any experience to go along with it.

There is no 'true' repentance, but only repentance. To repent of sin and of dead works. To change accordingly by eschewing evil and doing good.

I was not baptized according to a 2:38 formula of exact words spoken. I am born of the Spirit, baptized with the Holy Ghost and speaking of tongues, and pray in the Holy Ghost daily to keep myself in His love and mind of the Spirit.

Going back to do it the '2:38 way' is unnecessary nor profitable.

 

[robert derrick]

Mary, a sinner, gave birth to God?

You are not responding to my points made, but only continuing down a line of a Catholic teaching by carnal questions.

Do you have a point.

 

[robert derrick]

Our call is to preach Acts 2:38.

And the JW call is to preach Jehovah as God, not Jesus.

And the Mormon call is to preach another testament of Joseph Smith.

And the Catholic call is to preach Mary, Mother of God.

What do all these have in common? No such call is ever mentioned in Scripture.

 

[Truther]

Unlike what the UPC and the CoC churches seem to think, there is much more to the Christian Faith, and doctrines, than just water baptism.

Yes, but water baptism(Acts 2:38) is he prerequisite to salvation and afterwards, applying the Epistles to one's life.

 

[Truther]

The problem with Acts 2:38 is most people don't know what true repentance is. They also believe they have the Holy Spirit because Scripture says that is what will happen, but they've never had any experience to go along with it.

Yes, repentance is turning away from former sins(which is a result of truly believing).

This is the qualifier for Acts 2:38 baptism.

A person should make a decision to depart from their worldly lifestyle and vices if they want to be baptized in the sacred name of Jesus Christ.

The Holy Ghost will help them too.