Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

November 30th, 2016, 4:18 am #21

No problem Donnie. My wife Lindsey and I use the same computer and she told me about your site and also told me she made a comment before. She does not like your website and I don't think she reads it anymore but now I've been reading (and commenting) almost every day. By what you were communicating I figured you were able to tell my identity. Regarding Question #6, I was not aware of this distinction some churches are making and on this matter I think your point of view on the Scriptures is accurate. I disagree with any new understanding and teaching on baptism.
[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Q1: I did not want to mention Lindsey unless you did first. Yes, it was Lindsey's post to which I was referring earlier. Hopefully, with you reading and commenting, she will do the same.

I realize that we often discuss the nature of God (via the Trinity dogma) and music in the assembly, but there are many other doctrinal topics that are not brought up at all. Perhaps, you can bring up some of these topics that we can discuss civilly.

Regarding Q6: It's pleasing to hear that there are those like you who defend the truth about putting on Christ in baptism for the remission of sons. There are change agents in the brotherhood who now advocate that the body of Christ encompasses all faiths; that "musical worship" with the aid of instruments and the "worship team" [a.k.a. "Praise Team"] should dominate the events in the assembly; that by God's grace one is saved (sins forgiven) first and then be baptized later; etc.

By the way, how deeply familiar are you with the history of the Restoration Movement?[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

November 30th, 2016, 4:28 am #22

Gal 4:16 Am I therefore become your enemy, because I tell you the truth?

alēth-euō , Id.Metaph.1062a25:—Pass., “ho logos -euetai” is in accordance with truth, Top. 132b4,




[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Stan,

Q1: I did not want to mention Lindsey unless you did first. Yes, it was Lindsey's post to which I was referring earlier. Hopefully, with you reading and commenting, she will do the same.

I realize that we often discuss the nature of God (via the Trinity dogma) and music in the assembly, but there are many other doctrinal topics that are not brought up at all. Perhaps, you can bring up some of these topics that we can discuss civilly.

Regarding Q6: It's pleasing to hear that there are those like you who defend the truth about putting on Christ in baptism for the remission of sons. There are change agents in the brotherhood who now advocate that the body of Christ encompasses all faiths; that "musical worship" with the aid of instruments and the "worship team" [a.k.a. "Praise Team"] should dominate the events in the assembly; that by God's grace one is saved (sins forgiven) first and then be baptized later; etc.

By the way, how deeply familiar are you with the history of the Restoration Movement?[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Stan
Stan

November 30th, 2016, 4:45 am #23

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Q1: I did not want to mention Lindsey unless you did first. Yes, it was Lindsey's post to which I was referring earlier. Hopefully, with you reading and commenting, she will do the same.

I realize that we often discuss the nature of God (via the Trinity dogma) and music in the assembly, but there are many other doctrinal topics that are not brought up at all. Perhaps, you can bring up some of these topics that we can discuss civilly.

Regarding Q6: It's pleasing to hear that there are those like you who defend the truth about putting on Christ in baptism for the remission of sons. There are change agents in the brotherhood who now advocate that the body of Christ encompasses all faiths; that "musical worship" with the aid of instruments and the "worship team" [a.k.a. "Praise Team"] should dominate the events in the assembly; that by God's grace one is saved (sins forgiven) first and then be baptized later; etc.

By the way, how deeply familiar are you with the history of the Restoration Movement?[/color]
In 1784 James O'Kelly (Methodist Preacher) questioned the appointment of Francis Asbury as one of two superintendents of the church, believing he held too much power, and that churches should be autonomous. In 1793 he and others broke away from Asbury's leadership and called themselves Republican Methodists. In 1794 they changed this to "Christians" and eventually adopted the six "Cardinal Principles of the Christian Church."

Then there was the Cane Ridge Revival of 1801...and by 1802 Stone decided he could not live under Presbyterian doctrine or church organization. I am Church of Christ and am familiar with Elias Smith (Calvinist Baptist), Thomas and son Alexander Campbell (Presbyterian), etc. By 1807 Elias Smith and Abner Jones had established 14 congregations of Christians in England.

Why do you ask Donnie?

Galatians 4:16
Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth?
Quote
Share

Stan
Stan

November 30th, 2016, 4:53 am #24

Not sure of your identity Stan, but please be careful here. You either agree with everything that they teach, or they will edit and delete your message so you can't communicate your opinion. They don't mind telling who pays the bills here at concernedmembers and therefore they get in the first and last word on everything. They make light of the Scriptures that don't fit their opinion or traditions.
Sounds like what you are describing is a den of vipers so I appreciate the heads up Dave.
Quote
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

November 30th, 2016, 5:33 am #25

Not sure of your identity Stan, but please be careful here. You either agree with everything that they teach, or they will edit and delete your message so you can't communicate your opinion. They don't mind telling who pays the bills here at concernedmembers and therefore they get in the first and last word on everything. They make light of the Scriptures that don't fit their opinion or traditions.
[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]A typical message from Dave when the cerebral cortex is irate and gets emotional. Thanks, Dave.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

November 30th, 2016, 5:55 am #26

In 1784 James O'Kelly (Methodist Preacher) questioned the appointment of Francis Asbury as one of two superintendents of the church, believing he held too much power, and that churches should be autonomous. In 1793 he and others broke away from Asbury's leadership and called themselves Republican Methodists. In 1794 they changed this to "Christians" and eventually adopted the six "Cardinal Principles of the Christian Church."

Then there was the Cane Ridge Revival of 1801...and by 1802 Stone decided he could not live under Presbyterian doctrine or church organization. I am Church of Christ and am familiar with Elias Smith (Calvinist Baptist), Thomas and son Alexander Campbell (Presbyterian), etc. By 1807 Elias Smith and Abner Jones had established 14 congregations of Christians in England.

Why do you ask Donnie?

Galatians 4:16
Am I therefore become your enemy because I tell you the truth?
[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Thanks for the statements you made in regard to the early leaders of the Movement.

I ask to find out if you're aware of "change agents" operating in the brotherhood -- how that they have transitioned mega churches of Christ into Community Churches by promoting culture-driven approaches and methodologies to "grow the church." They intend to "rewrite" the RM history "in their own way."

In addition to the common teachings about the New Testament church of Jesus Christ, baptism, non-denominationalism, I'm also interested in what you know about their stances on music, premillennialism, the Trinity, etc.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share

Dave
Dave

November 30th, 2016, 8:50 pm #27

[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Stan,

Q1: I did not want to mention Lindsey unless you did first. Yes, it was Lindsey's post to which I was referring earlier. Hopefully, with you reading and commenting, she will do the same.

I realize that we often discuss the nature of God (via the Trinity dogma) and music in the assembly, but there are many other doctrinal topics that are not brought up at all. Perhaps, you can bring up some of these topics that we can discuss civilly.

Regarding Q6: It's pleasing to hear that there are those like you who defend the truth about putting on Christ in baptism for the remission of sons. There are change agents in the brotherhood who now advocate that the body of Christ encompasses all faiths; that "musical worship" with the aid of instruments and the "worship team" [a.k.a. "Praise Team"] should dominate the events in the assembly; that by God's grace one is saved (sins forgiven) first and then be baptized later; etc.

By the way, how deeply familiar are you with the history of the Restoration Movement?[/color]
Donnie said "...that by God's grace one is saved (sins forgiven) first and then be baptized later; etc."

Acts 10
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

If these BELIEVERS weren't saved before being baptized, then why would the gift of the Holy Ghost be poured out among filthy souls?
Quote
Share

Joined: July 29th, 2010, 2:32 pm

November 30th, 2016, 9:55 pm #28

Peter was sent to tell Cornelius HOW TO BE saved. The only thing Peter commanded was that they be baptized.

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.

When believers are baptized they receive the gift of A holy spirit which is simply removing UNholiness which is never done other than by request by obeying the command to be baptized. This is what Peter was was commanded to teach. God commanded Peter to preach to Cornelius who was a Godfearer and was honored by God. It would be silly to send Peter to command baptism if Cornelius was already a godly man.

The Account in Acts to was to prove to the doubters that God sent salvation to the Gentiles without obeying the Law. Peter concluded that no one could forbit baptism, He COMMANDED the to be baptized.

Acts 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
Acts 10:48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

When rehearsing the Event, the Spirit (Jesus is Holy Spirit) commanded Peter to go preach and Cornelius notes that:

Acts 11:13 And he shewed us how he had seen an angel in his house, which stood and said unto him, Send men to Joppa, and call for Simon, whose surname is Peter;
Acts 11:14 Who shall tell thee words, whereby thou and all thy house shall be saved.

Acts 11:17 Forasmuch then as God gave them the like gift as he did unto us, who believed on the Lord Jesus Christ; what was I, that I could withstand God?

If the gift was salvation they why would Peter be withstanding God.

THE PURPOSE WAS TO CONVINCE BUT NOT TO CONVERT:

Acts 11:18 When they heard these things, they held their peace, and glorified God, saying, Then hath God also to the Gentiles granted REPENTENCE unto life.

If Cornelius was saved by a direct act of a Spirit person before Peter told Him what to do to be saved, then Cornelius was saved without repentance or turning TOWARD God.

Again from chapter 10 the only COMMAND Peter spoke
Acts 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?
Acts 10:48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days. And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

Jesus as Holy Spirit returned as promised and "poured out what ye see and hear." This happened only once and the sign was wind or BREATH.

John 20:22 And when he had said this, he BREATHED on them, and saith unto them, Receive ye the Holy Ghost:

That was finished in the upper room. Many years later Peter has to return to the upper room to see anything similar. This was to prove that Gentiles could not be REFUSED baptism.

The Spirit or Breath HAD BEEN poured out at Pentecost: the result of God breathing into you is that you SPEAK. When Cornellius spoke in HEBREW the enemies of baptizing Gentiles were silenced and COULD NOT FORBID baptism. What would be the purpose of WASHING if their sins had been washed away.

Cornelius was not SAVED by speaking in tongues.



There is never any remission of sins or being translated into a heavenly kingdom without baptism.
Last edited by Ken.Sublett on December 1st, 2016, 1:06 am, edited 1 time in total.
Quote
Like
Share

Dave
Dave

December 1st, 2016, 5:07 am #29

Which happened first in Acts 10? The gift of the Holy Spirit or baptism? Baptism wasn't first. Acts 10:47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we? The baptism came AFTER receinvg the gift.

Ken, one minute you say, being a vicar, "...the gift of A holy spirit which is simply removing UNholiness..." then you say differently by saying this gift is "The Spirit or Breath HAD BEEN poured out at Pentecost: the result of God breathing into you is that you SPEAK."

Instead of ASSUMING that you THINK you know what this gift is, put on some pants, be a man, and admit you just don't know.

One minute the gift is removing unholiness, the next it is speaking. YOU JUST DON'T KNOW.


You asked "What would be the purpose of WASHING if their sins had been washed away." BECAUSE IT HAPPENED. Acts 10 confirms such.

Why would the thief on the cross be with Jesus in paradise if he had been a sinner all of his life? This thief had not been giving any time on earth to show a godly life after Jesus found his heart to be right.

WHY? Because JESUS and GOD can do ANYTHING They want.

How about that for your pattern???

ALSO, does Acts 10:47 say the GIFT of the Holy Ghost, or THE Holy Ghost? Don't tell me what Acts 2:38 says. I KNOW what it says. Does Acts 10:47 give the same story as does Acts 2:48? NO!!! Scripture DOES NOT support your theory that is JUST a gift of the Holy Spirit. Again, you flounder like Hillary because you don't know when to say that you just don't know.

Get out your eubius, your book of Enoch, the DRB, the original letters, and show us that you know more than the rest of us and show us what you are made of...AGAIN!!!

Help him out here Donnie.....AGAIN!!! Show me that grand bit of sarcastic humor that you need to keep yourself and Ken proving beyond a shadow of a doubt...that neither of you have a heart for God.....AGAIN!!!



Quote
Share

Joined: January 2nd, 2005, 6:45 am

December 1st, 2016, 7:02 am #30

Donnie said "...that by God's grace one is saved (sins forgiven) first and then be baptized later; etc."

Acts 10
45 And they of the circumcision which believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost.

46 For they heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then answered Peter,

47 Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as we?

48 And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of the Lord. Then prayed they him to tarry certain days.

If these BELIEVERS weren't saved before being baptized, then why would the gift of the Holy Ghost be poured out among filthy souls?
==========================

Donnie said "...that by God's grace one is saved (sins forgiven) first and then be baptized later; etc."

==========================


[color=#0000FF" size="4" face="times]Dave,

You misquoted me in the 1st paragraph of your earlier post above.

That's not what I said. Instead, that's what many of "the change agents" in the brotherhood believe -- similar to the Baptist teaching of: Be saved FIRST; be baptized LATER.[/color]
Quote
Like
Share